Richard Durbin

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. Schatz), the Senator from Minnesota (Ms. Smith), and the Senator from Montana (Mr. Tester) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, Monday, President Trump stood in the Rose Garden and called for the use of military force against individuals who have been gathering across the country protesting racism and police brutality against Black Americans. This historic call for empowering the Commander in Chief to militarize law enforcement in our Nation pushes this President's reach for new Executive authority to the most extreme level. This follows the President's tweets since last week, threatening to turn ``vicious dogs''--his words--on protesters outside the White House and quoting the racist phrase from the 1967 Miami police chief, stating: ``When the looting starts, the shooting starts,'' bringing to mind, sadly, for many, shameful moments in our Nation's struggle for civil rights. President Trump said nothing to address the anguish felt by many in this country, particularly people of color, and instead called on Governors to ``dominate the streets,'' as though the Americans, who peacefully exercise their right to protest, are an enemy force. Initially, Defense Secretary Esper went even further when he referred to cities as a ``battlespace.'' I am heartened by the fact that he has made it clear that he does not support the President's suggestion of militarizing the police forces and police across America. These calls by the President to militarize cities across America ignore that for far too long he urged law enforcement to ``dominate,'' as the President often says, rather than to protect and serve, which is exactly what is contributing to the challenge we face today. The other night, minutes before Mayor Bowser's 7 p.m. curfew came into effect, the President used law enforcement personnel to use tear gas and rubber bullets on peaceful demonstrators in LaFayette Square across the street from the White House. They even beat these peaceful demonstrators with batons and shields. There are conflicting reports as to whether the National Guard participated in the violence. I have made a direct inquiry to the Department of Defense, and they have denied it. According to press reports, the assault began with law enforcement kneeling, not to express any solidarity with any racism efforts as we have seen some police officers do across the country; instead, they were kneeling to put on gas masks to protect themselves from the weapons they were readying to fire. As soon as this gathering was dispersed, the President marched across LaFayette Square to St. John's Episcopal Church. The Attorney General, the Secretary of Defense, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff all followed--only the battle that they were witnessing was against Americans using their voices to stop racism who got in the way of a Presidential photo opportunity. I simply cannot understand what the President and each of these senior officials were thinking, if they were consciously deciding to be part of this by taking a stroll in the aftermath of the violence in Lafayette Square and whether they approved of that treatment of their fellow Americans. The Rt. Rev. Mariann Budde, the Episcopal bishop of Washington, DC, said she was not even given a courtesy call by the White House ahead of the President's action. In fact, the bishop was outraged by the use of physical force and tear gas in the shadow of her church to remove peaceful protesters so that the church and the Bible could be used for some photo opportunity. President Trump has ``not acknowledged the agony of our country right now,'' she said in an interview. ``Everything he has said and done is to inflame violence.'' President Trump's actions violate the sanctity of our First Amendment freedoms and represent an abuse of his authority. We know this President well after more than 3 years. As shocking as Monday night's events were, they represent through and through who this President really is. It is wrong. The American people will have the last word in November, but I am encouraged to see that in my home State of Illinois officials have rejected the use of military force and are committed to American's right to protest. Governor Pritzker said the President's call to send troops to Illinois is ``illegal'' and ``ridiculous.'' Chicago Mayor Lightfoot has called to ``turn our pain into purpose'' and to ``learn from this moment and move forward together.'' In my hometown of Springfield, IL, on Tuesday, three high school students, young African-American women, sponsored a Black Lives Matter rally, and 1,000 people in Springfield, IL, gathered peacefully to demonstrate against racism in law enforcement. No windows were broken. No one was arrested. They exercised their constitutional rights, and I am damn proud of them. They speak for me and for America; that we still have the right to stand up and express ourselves, and they did so effectively. Right now those around the President should look themselves in the mirror and ask whose agenda they are serving and whether it is the right agenda for America. The collective leadership of our military, civilian and uniformed alike, needs to decide what kind of leaders they want to be for the men and women in uniform they command and what legacy they want to be associated with. Monday night was not the legacy this country deserves. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Washington Post article and the statements of the Episcopal bishop of Washington be printed in the Record.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Mexico (Mr. Heinrich), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Leahy), the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. Schatz), the Senator from Michigan (Ms. Stabenow), the Senator from Montana (Mr. Tester), and the Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. Whitehouse) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Mexico (Mr. Heinrich), the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. Schatz), the Senator from Michigan (Ms. Stabenow), the Senator from Montana (Mr. Tester), and the Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. Whitehouse) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. Schatz), the Senator from Michigan (Ms. Stabenow), the Senator from Montana (Mr. Tester), and the Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. Whitehouse) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. Schatz), the Senator from Michigan (Ms. Stabenow), the Senator from Montana (Mr. Tester), and the Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. Whitehouse) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, his name was George Floyd, and 7 days ago he was killed on the streets of Minneapolis. He was not the first African American to be the victim of racism and criminal misconduct by the police. This has happened in our history many times, but this was different. This was a killing which we watched in realtime. In fewer than 9 minutes, a Minneapolis police officer, with his knee on the neck of George Floyd, took his life away. Despite Mr. Floyd's begging over and over again, his pleas that he couldn't breathe, even invoking the name of his mother, it didn't stop what happened. That photo is still emblazoned in my mind, as I am sure it is for all of those who have seen it. The look in that policeman's eyes, in the videotape that was being taken of that incident, was cold, hard, distant and unmoved by George Floyd's plea and the plea of those around him. What a tragic moment for our country. What a tragic moment for that family. What does it say about who we are in the United States of America that in the year 2020 this sort of thing can happen with such frequency? The heartbreaking killing of George Floyd follows years of similar tragedies and needless loss. In 2012, 17-year-old Trayvon Martin was shot and killed by a vigilante as he walked home with a bag of Skittles that he just bought from the local 7-Eleven. His crime? Black in America. In 2014, the words ``I can't breathe'' were seared into our minds when we saw the video of Eric Garner struggling for his life and dying as a police officer held him in a choke hold. His crime? Black in America. Weeks later, Michael Brown was shot and killed by a police officer in Ferguson, MO, despite being unarmed. A couple of months later, on the streets of Chicago, IL, Laquan McDonald was shot and killed by a police officer. The next month, after he was killed, Tamir Rice was shot and killed by a police officer while playing with a toy gun in a Cleveland park. The tragic list of Black individuals whom we have mourned and marched for continues to grow: Walter Scott, Freddie Gray, Philando Castile, Botham Jean, Atatiana Jefferson, and many more, including Sandra Bland, another resident of Illinois whose life was taken when she drove down to Texas to interview for a new job. I attended her funeral ceremony. The loss of such a wonderful young woman is still unexplained. Now we come together to mourn the lives of two Black men and a Black woman--lives that were cut far too short in incidents of inexplicable and inexcusable violence: Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd. Once again, those gut-wrenching words--``I can't breathe''--have us to tears. As activist Brittany Packnett Cunningham has pointed out, justice for George, Breonna, and Ahmaud would mean that they would each still be alive and breathing today. What we must now seek is accountability. The arrest of former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin is a first step in that direction, but there is so much more that must follow. Too often, police officers have crossed the line from lawful protection of our communities to baseless targeting, harming, and killing of unarmed Americans of color. Perhaps an arrest of the officer will be made, but our system of justice rarely leads to real consequences that follow. How many more names of Black men and women and children will be crying out in protest before America finally acknowledges the obvious? We cannot call ourselves a land of justice until we address those fundamental issues of racial injustice. That will require an honest, candid conversation with leaders in the law enforcement community about training, inherent bias, the use of force, and the consequences for their unjust action. It will require prosecutors in courts to commit to pursuing true accountability when injustice occurs, and it will require legislators like myself and those I serve with in the Senate and in the House and in State legislatures around this country to continue to undo the damage of a criminal justice system fraught with racial disparities. Most importantly, it will require those of us with privilege and power to step back and listen to Black Americans as they tell us about what a life affected by pervasive and systemic racism is like. If we truly want to reach a new day in America, impacted communities must lead the conversation, and allies must play an active and supporting role in confronting and dismantling racism. We know there are several steps the Federal Government can take right now to begin the process of moving forward. A good place to start is President Barack Obama's Task Force on 21st Century Policing. In 2015, President Obama's Task Force released a report outlining crucial reforms to strengthen community policing and to restore trust between law enforcement and the communities they serve. Under President Obama's leadership, the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division investigated civil rights abuses in multiple police departments across the country--Baltimore; Ferguson, MO; Cleveland; and, yes, Chicago, IL. Unfortunately, the current President dismantled these efforts as soon as he took control of the Department of Justice in 2017. In this heartbreaking moment of crisis, America is pleading with us for leadership. President Trump and Attorney General Barr could demonstrate that leadership by implementing the recommendations of the Task Force on 21st Century Policing and permitting the Civil Rights Division to do its job and vigorously investigate police departments accused of engaging in a pattern of practice of misconduct. We have a role to play here too. We must immediately hold hearings on systemic racism and police misconduct so we can discuss and pursue solutions, including accountability and training. Chairman Graham of the Senate Judiciary Committee has announced that the committee will hold a hearing on police misconduct. I am glad that he made that statement. I hope it is more than just one token hearing. When I chaired the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Human Rights, I held several hearings on race in America, including my last hearing as chairman in December of 2014, on the state of civil and human rights in the United States. I said then, and I repeat it today, that it is important to recognize and say clearly that there is still a problem with racism in America and we still have so much more to do. We have got to acknowledge the obvious. As one sign said in the demonstration yesterday, ``All Black people are not criminals. All White people are not racists. All policemen are not bad.'' We have to find the problems and solve them, but we cannot ignore the obvious. Since the Republicans took Senate majority control on January 2015, the Senate Judiciary Committee rarely, if ever, addressed these issues of systemic racism in America. In fact, the last hearing on policing was almost 5 years ago. In November of 2015, the junior Senator from Texas held a hearing entitled: ``The War on Police: How the Federal Government Undermines State and Local Law Enforcement.'' It was a thinly veiled attack on the efforts of the Obama administration's Civil Rights Division to improve police integrity, and 4\1/2\ years after that hearing, we still have so much work to do. I am committed to joining with my colleagues to listen to civil rights leaders, activists, and affected communities to work with them to improve life in my State and across the Nation. I hope we can honor George, Breonna, Ahmaud, and all of the Black and Brown lives that have been lost in brutal acts of racial injustice. We need to do this by reforming the system that has permitted these atrocities to occur and dedicate ourselves to bringing about justice and accountability. It was many years ago when I was a law student in this city. The year was 1968. I remember it well. It was a historic year, and much of history was painful. I was sitting in the student library of Georgetown Law School, and a professor opened the door and asked that all students in their second and third year come out in the hallway. I went out in the hallway, and he said: We need your help. As you know, the city of Washington is ablaze with demonstrations in anger over the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King. The system of justice has broken down in the city. They have run out of attorneys to even stand with the accused defendants before the court. We are preparing to empower you, even as law students, to walk across the street to the DC court and play that role. We need you. I did it, nervous as could be, uncertain of what I was actually doing but realizing that the system of justice in this city had all but broken down. I think we have learned the hard way that to maintain order in a democracy, you need a consensus--a consensus on what is the common good and the belief that we all must stand together to make certain that it is protected. There will always be enemies and outliers, but ultimately, if we are to move together as a democratic nation, we have to understand and work together toward the common good and a common goal, and shouldn't the beginning of that common good and common goal be the end of racism in America? I read so much history about the Civil War and the role of another Illinoian, Abraham Lincoln, in bringing that war to a successful conclusion. The constitutional amendments that followed and the promises that followed as we emancipated slaves across the United States--those promises, sadly, were not kept. The Reconstruction, Jim Crow laws, and the discrimination that followed are still with us today. There was one moment--one shining moment in my political life--when I stood just a few feet away from a new President of the United States by the name of Barack Obama, an African American. I thought to myself, finally, finally, Durbin, maybe we have reached that turning point in America when it comes to race. If we can accept an African American as the leader of our Nation, maybe, just maybe, we are moving toward the day we all dreamed of. I am afraid he moved us forward but not far enough, and he would be the first to acknowledge it. We have work to do. It used to be a bipartisan effort when it came to making certain that minorities--especially African Americans--were not denied the right to vote. That used to be bipartisan when I first came to Congress. Now it has become another sad, divisive, partisan issue, and the efforts to restore the Voting Rights Act failed because the Republicans no longer joined the Democrats in that quest. There are so many other areas that lie ahead that we have to address beyond criminal justice. We have to address economic justice. We know from the COVID-19 pandemic that those who are minorities in this country--the Black and Brown--are dying at a much greater rate than others. There are gross disparities--racial disparities and poverty disparities--when it comes to healthcare in America, and the same is true for education and housing and so many other aspects of what being an American is all about. That agenda is before us. If we think coming to the floor and making a speech, having a hearing, and moving on will solve the problem, it will not. It will not. We have to envision, moving forward, rethinking America, and we have to acknowledge that the process will be far from perfect. Just the last two nights in the city of Chicago and across the United States, we have seen incidents occur that I thought I would never see again. They harken back to that 1968 reaction to the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King--burnings, looting, confrontations, things that sadly look exactly like they did some 50 years ago. The reality is this: In America, we are given a constitutional right to express our feelings, our free speech, and our free assembly. Those rights are important and should be valued and respected, but those rights to march and demonstrate, as people are doing right outside this building at this very moment, cannot be taken to the point where they have reached an extreme and become destructive. Speaking, assembling, exercising your constitutional right does not include looting. It doesn't include arson, vandalism, or violence. In fact, those actions detract from the underlying message that calls for positive change in America. I am glad that leaders like John Lewis, my dear friend and former colleague from the House of Representatives, has made that point. His voice on the subject is much more articulate and more convincing. He has reminded us that if we are to move America to the place where it must be, then we must do it in a nonviolent fashion within the law, not breaking the law. His name was George Floyd, a 46-year-old African American. He died in the streets of Minneapolis with the knee of a police officer on his neck for almost 9 minutes. He cannot be forgotten. And all the others I have mentioned must also be remembered. It is time for us and it is time for our generation to say: Enough. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Maryland (Mr. Cardin), the Senator from New Mexico (Mr. Heinrich), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Leahy), the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey), the Senator from Michigan (Ms. Stabenow), the Senator from Oregon (Mr. Merkley), the Senator from Washington (Mrs. Murray), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. Schatz), the Senator from Montana (Mr. Tester), the Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. Whitehouse), the Senator from New Mexico (Mr. Udall), and the Senator from Connecticut (Mr. Murphy) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, we will adjourn today and be gone next week for the Memorial Day recess and then return the following week. The Senate, at the request and call of the Senate Republican leader, Senator McConnell from Kentucky, has been in session for 3 weeks. Senator McConnell has said that we are here because we need to be at our ``duty stations.'' He has used that term over and over again--a military responsibility to stay where you are assigned and to be prepared to fight. Well, those that take a look at what we have done over the last 3 weeks have to ask: Where is the battle? Where is the fight when it comes to COVID-19? The simple fact is this: The United States Senate, in the last 3 weeks, has not considered one piece of legislation on this floor relative to COVID-19, not one. It has reached the point where the press told me this morning that two Republican Senators are now complaining publicly that we have done nothing on COVID-19 and shouldn't leave for the Memorial Day recess until we do. Well, I think they ought to take their appeal not to the American public but to their Republican leader because he decides what comes to the floor of the Senate, and he has decided, over the last 3 weeks, that nothing will come to the floor of the Senate relative to the biggest issue in the modern history of America: the national emergency, the public health crisis over COVID-19. I listened to my friend from South Dakota talk about the amount of money that has been spent. It is an amazing amount--I will be the first to concede it--almost $3 trillion so far. It is the largest ever I can remember--well, I will just flatout say ever when it comes to a rescue package or a relief package. Of course, it comes at a time when we are facing the worst economic crisis in America for almost 100 years, going back to the Great Depression. There are 38 million uninsured Americans. There are 1.5 million Americans so far infected by this virus. The United States, sadly, leads the world--leads the world--when it comes to these infections. I would say, when the President calls that a badge of honor, I do not. We could have done much better. We should do much better in the future. Now, in just a matter of days--not sure when--we will reach the tragic milestone of 100,000 Americans who have died from the coronavirus--100,000 Americans will have died. I join with the Democratic leader in saying that we should mark that tragic milestone with grief for the families and their loss and standing as Americans in honor of the sacrifice they have made. More than that, we need to do what needs to be done, and to argue that we have done enough now and let's sit back and see what happens is to ignore the obvious. Jerome Powell is the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, and he went on ``60 Minutes'' last Sunday and said to Congress, to the Senate, to the House, and to the President: Don't stop doing your part. The Federal Reserve is trying to loan money to create opportunities to rebuild this economy, but we need to do our part. He didn't say the $3 trillion is all in. He basically said we need to do more. We had a briefing from Mark Zandi, an economist, in the last day or two. He is well respected. He has been an economist advising both Democrats and Republicans, and he said the same. If we don't move and move quickly and decisively and boldly to restore this economy, what is now a recession, could be much, much worse. That means, of course, helping those families who have already been hurt. Last Friday, the House of Representatives did pass another measure for relief, another effort to deal with the COVID virus. So while we have been here for 3 weeks and haven't brought one single bill to the floor on the COVID virus--not one--they moved forward last Friday and passed, without the cooperation of any Republicans--they passed a measure to deal with the continuing crisis in America. Let me say at the outset, I don't agree with every provision in that bill. I know that negotiations are likely to follow, and the compromise is likely to produce a work product that is somewhat different, but let's look at what that bill did. The Senator from South Dakota came to the floor and said that bill did crazy stuff. He repeated it--crazy stuff. Well, let's talk about what the bill did. What the bill did was to restore the President's cash payment to families. You remember that well, I am sure, supported by both political parties. It was $1,200 for each adult and $500 for each child. It was absolutely necessary for families who are struggling to get by. In the House version that passed last Friday, there was a renewed cash payment of $1,200 for adults and $1,200 for children. The amount of money we initially allocated for this has been all but spent at this point, so this is an area where we believe, as Democrats, families still need a helping hand. Why do the Republicans in the Senate insist on not bringing this measure to the floor of the U.S. Senate or at least into meaningful negotiation? Do they believe that families across America have received all the money they need to receive to get through this crisis? I don't. If they do, they are out of touch. The second thing this bill did was to extend the unemployment compensation. Remember, there are 38 million and counting unemployed Americans. We created, in the CARES Act, a Federal boost for unemployment benefits. So if you qualified for unemployment benefits from your State, you would receive an additional $600 a week. I think that was necessary and good for the economy, and for the families affected, it was a lifeline they desperately needed. But that program, the $600 a week, expires on July 31--expires. Is there anyone who believes we will be through this economic crisis by July 31 when everyone will be back to work? Of course not. We need to continue to help those families. The bill that passed the House of Representatives, which the Republican Senator calls crazy stuff--what the bill did was to extend that Federal unemployment benefit of $600 a week until the end of this year. I think that is sensible and reasonable. I might tell you that we expanded the categories of those eligible for employment too. Many independent contractors finally get the chance to get some help at this point in time. So to call that crazy stuff and to not even consider it on the floor of the Senate makes no sense at all. What about the Payroll Protection Program? That was one for small business loans that could be forgiven if the money was loaned and spent for specific purposes. There is a reason we had to revisit that. The money had to be spent by the businesses by the end of June--June 30. I can tell you, having spoken to many small businesses across the State of Illinois, that some of them will not even be open for business by June 30. Requiring them to spend money before they can open their doors doesn't give them an opportunity to use this money to really get back in business. There were revisions made in the measure the House passed last Friday, revisions in terms of the period of time that the business had to spend the money. Under the current setup, it is 8 weeks. We think that should be extended to a longer period of time. Is that crazy stuff? I think, from where I am standing, it just makes common sense that we would do something that basic. Yet the Senate Republican leader has refused to bring that matter to the floor of the Senate in the weeks since it was passed, and there is obviously no meaningful negotiation underway, and we are leaving to be gone for another week. But the largest measure in the bill that passed the House of Representatives included a provision to help State and local governments. My friend and colleague from South Dakota talked about the $150 billion that has been given to State and local governments, which, in the end, could be even larger. I would say to him: Don't listen to me. Listen to the National Governors Association. Ask Governor Hogan, a Republican from Maryland, if we are all in and have done enough for State and local governments? We are not even close. We are not even close, and we know it. Lost revenue by my State and many others is dramatic. So what happens if these States don't have the money to pay their bills? Well, Senator McConnell, in an interview, said: Bankruptcy--bankruptcy is an option. Really? Does he believe we are going to restore this economy by watching State and local governments go bankrupt? What will be the net result of the McConnell's suggestion of bankruptcy for these State and local governments? It will mean laying off, perhaps firing, policemen, firefighters, EMTs, paramedics, and teachers. At a time when we need to restore our educational calendar, bring students back to school, the Senator from Kentucky suggested bankruptcy, laying off teachers, and firing teachers. It makes no sense whatsoever. The bill that passed the House of Representatives has roughly $1 trillion for State and local governments. So I can tell you, across my State and I am sure across this Nation, Governors and mayors will step forward and tell you that is exactly what they need now to get back in business. Remember, as Senator Murray said in response to another suggestion, building a bridge halfway across a river is not of much value. We need to build a bridge in this economy from where we are today to where we want to be, with small businesses opening and people back at work, and the notion that we can shortchange parts of this economy and survive is just wrong. There is a provision in that bill in the House, too, that I introduced in the Senate. It is not an original idea, but others have thought of it too. A third of the people who lose their jobs lose their health insurance because that is where their health insurance came from. Their employer used to pay a share, and they paid a share, and they were covered with good policies. But when they lost their job, the next day, they lost their insurance. What were their options? Sign up for the Affordable Care Act, which covers about 20 million Americans; perhaps qualifying for Medicaid if their family income is low enough; or using what is known as the COBRA Program? The COBRA Program says you can keep that policy you had at your place of employment; however, you now are personally responsible for both ends of the premium payment, the employer and the employee. Well, that comes out to about $1,700 a month. Imagine that for an unemployed person--$1,700 a month in premium. They can't do it. So what I proposed, and what was included in the bill that passed the House of Representatives, was 100-percent coverage for that premium payment under COBRA so that these families would have the peace of mind that they would continue to have health insurance during the course of this crisis. I have given you some highlights of what this bill did. I would just suggest and challenge those who call this crazy stuff to come to the floor and be more specific. What part of what I just described is crazy stuff--extended COBRA protection for more health insurance for those who are unemployed, extending unemployment benefits for the remainder of the year, extending the period of payback for small business loans, making sure, as well, that there is more money for hospitals? I will just state that I have been on the telephone for the last several weeks with the administrators of hospitals all over the State of Illinois, large and small, and I have joined them with my Republican Members of the House and Democratic Members. We have called and opened the lines and said: What are you finding? Many of these hospitals in the inner cities, as well as those in rural and smalltown areas in States across the Midwest are struggling to survive. Yesterday I read a list of six hospitals in Kentucky that were furloughing hundreds of employees. In most of the communities downstate where we have hospitals in Illinois, they are the major employer, and these hospitals are hanging on by a thread. What is wrong? A lot of COVID virus cases? No, just a fear of COVID virus. One hospital administrator said: We have four elective surgeries scheduled for money, and, Senator, that is where our revenue comes in to keep this hospital going. Three of the four patients canceled at the last minute. They were afraid of the COVID virus. The bill that passed the House of Representatives last week had another $100 million for hospitals. I will tell you flatout that there is a sense of urgency there because if you lose--if you lose that community hospital, it is a grievous loss in many parts of our State, in the rural areas and small towns in particular. Yet we have not even brought that issue up on the floor of the Senate over the last 3 weeks. We have a lot of work that needs to be done. We didn't do it in the last 3 weeks. We considered two circuit court nominees before the Senate Judiciary Committee. One from the State of Kentucky is a fellow who has 6 months' experience on the Federal bench. He is being proposed by Senator McConnell for a lifetime appointment in the second highest court in the land. Really? That is the best Republican nominee for the second highest court in the land, a man with 6 months' experience as a trial judge? He does have one thing in his favor, from Senator McConnell's point of view: He is completely opposed to the Affordable Care Act They came up with another nominee from Mississippi yesterday with the same thing. So they have two nominees in the midst of a public health crisis in America who are asking for lifetime appointments to the court who are opposed to the Affordable Care Act, a measure that extended health insurance coverage to 20 million Americans and provides protections for over 100 million Americans in terms of their own personal policies, really making sure that those with preexisting conditions have coverage they can afford. At this moment in time, the Republican Party came up with two lifetime nominees who are opposed to the extension of health insurance in America. The timing is perfect. If you look up the whole question of relevance, and you ask: What is the most irrelevant thing that has occurred in the midst of this crisis? It is the last 3 weeks of the U.S. Senate. We have been here and put at risk 10,000 employees, which is the scale of our workforce in the U.S. Capitol. We have put them at risk. To come here and never mention the words ``COVID virus'' or ``coronavirus'' or ``pandemic'' in legislation on the floor of the Senate is disgraceful. We were elected to serve. We were elected to respond to America's needs. For the last 3 weeks on the floor the Senate, we have not. The random committee hearing--good. That is what we are supposed to do. That is normal. But you would think that Senator McConnell would have decided, as the House decided last week, that this is still the No. 1 priority in America. It should be. Perhaps after we return from the Memorial Day recess, there will be a sense of urgency, which, sadly, does not exist on the Republican side of the aisle of the Senate. I yield the floor.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey), the Senator from Washington (Mrs. Murray), and the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey), the Senator from Washington (Mrs. Murray), and the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

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

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, we are going to complete 3 weeks of Senate activity, called together by Senator McConnell at a time when the House of Representatives, under the guidance of Dr. Monahan, who was just praised--and I join in that praise--was not in session when the Senate came to session. I said at the time that it was our responsibility to be here. That is why we ran for office. Important things need to be decided, and we need to be part of it for the good of the Nation. We are about to complete 3 straight weeks without one measure on the floor of the Senate relating to the national public health emergency-- not one. There have been hearings in some committees, yes, but activity on the floor of the Senate, no. No bill was brought to the floor. In fact, there was an attempt yesterday to bring a resolution that said the United States should be involved in the global international effort to find a vaccine. It was objected to on the Republican side. The reason the Senator objected to it--the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee--is that he wants to take up the measure in his committee at some later date. I encourage that Senator to do it quickly. I think there is a sense of urgency across America in terms of this national health emergency that we face. Yet there is not a sense of urgency on the Republican side of the aisle, despite the fact that for 3 weeks we have not considered one measure on the floor related to this COVID-19 virus, which is unexplainable and indefensible. Senator McConnell, of Kentucky, has told us that he doesn't sense the urgency for us to take up the measure passed last week by the House of Representatives. This was a bipartisan measure that was brought to the floor of the House of Representatives, which attempted to move us forward from the original CARES Act, the $3 trillion of cumulative spending that we have focused on the economy and the public health challenge facing our Nation. Is there any urgency to it? Well, I sense that urgency every time I pick up the phone or read the newspaper in my State of Illinois. I am on conference call after conference call with groups across our State that are concerned about economic issues, as well as public health issues. There is truly a sense of urgency where I live. I cannot believe that Senator McConnell doesn't sense it in his own State of Kentucky. Kentucky hospitals and healthcare providers have received $900 million in CARES Act funding. I don't question whether they were deserving or needed it; we received funds, as well, in the State of Illinois. But the Kentucky Hospital Association tells us that the hospitals in Kentucky are expected to lose $1.3 billion in March and April alone. You know, we are next door to Kentucky, and my hospitals in downstate southern Illinois, right next to Kentucky, have told me the same thing. They are losing money right and left. Do they think this is an urgent problem in Illinois? You bet they do, and I will bet the hospitals in Kentucky do as well. This is what the vice president of the Kentucky Hospital Association, Carl Herde, said: ``Since there is no clear path to recoup these losses, the hospitals are left with no choice but to look at their own operations to cut as much cost as they possibly can.'' The University of Kentucky is projecting a $160 million loss for its healthcare system. It has furloughed 1,500 employees. Jenny Stuart Health in Hopkinsville, KY, has furloughed 248 staff members. Appalachian Regional Health in Lexington will furlough 500 employees. St. Claire Health in Morehead is furloughing 300. Pikeville Medical Center has furloughed 200. Is there a sense of urgency in these communities, when many of these hospitals are the largest employers in town and hundreds of people are being furloughed because of the COVID virus, because of the fact that they cannot resume ordinary hospital operations with this shadow of infection hanging over them? The bill that passed the House of Representatives last week, which we did not consider or even discuss, to my knowledge, in the Senate this week, the HEROES Act, called for more than $100 billion more in relief to hospitals. How important is that? I know how important it is in Illinois; I can tell you flat-out. As a downstater, when you take a look at the rural and smalltown hospitals in my State, they are struggling. One hospital administrator told me that she had scheduled four elective surgeries last Monday, a week ago, and only one patient showed up. The other three called in and said they were too frightened to go to the hospital and run the risk of being exposed to the COVID virus. I cannot imagine there is not the same situation going on in Kentucky. Isn't there a sense of urgency in Kentucky, as in Illinois, for us to move and move quickly to help these hospitals before they furlough more people and ultimately face closure--a disaster in any community that we want to urgently avoid? State and local governments are struggling now to pay teachers, first responders, and healthcare workers as they face record revenue losses and increased costs of fighting the virus. The measure that passed the House of Representatives last week had almost $1 trillion to help these State and local governments--not just in Illinois but in every State, including the Commonwealth of Kentucky. In States around the country, red and blue--the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities estimates that States will lose $650 billion in revenues by next summer. By the end of the year, Kentucky is expected to lose between 10 and 17 percent of its annual revenues. Without help from the Federal Government, Kentucky's Governor announced that Kentucky's ``recession will be longer or unemployment will be greater.'' Congress appropriated $150 billion in funding for State and local governments in the original CARES Act, but that funding is not enough to make up for the enormous losses that are being faced by State and local governments across the United States. These Governors, these mayors, these leaders have a sense of urgency in making up this revenue. They face the reality of cutbacks in police, firefighters, first responders, paramedics, nurses, doctors, and teachers The HEROES Act which passed the House of Representatives last week and which has not been considered this week in the Senate included $875 billion in fiscal relief for State and localities to help cover the shortfall to make sure communities can continue to pay frontline essential workers. Understand the deadlines that were built into the CARES Act. The first deadline is June 8. That is the date by which small businesses that borrowed money under the payroll protection part of that act need to have spent the money in order to have the loan forgiven--June 8. Who among us believes that small businesses will be in a position to recover and get back to business as usual by June? I pray that is the case, but I know better in my home State and I will bet you in the State of Kentucky as well. How about unemployment? We came through in the CARES Act and did something dramatic and unprecedented. We said that we were going to give an extra payment, a Federal payment, to those who were unemployed so that they could weather this storm as their families try to adjust to no breadwinner in the house--$600 a week on top of whatever the State benefit of unemployment might be. For some families, it was just enough to get by. Understand, though, that benefit--that unemployment benefit of $600 from the Federal Government each week--is going to end at the end of July. That is not that far way. We are talking about 10 weeks at the most. Do we honestly believe the unemployment crisis, with 36 million unemployed Americans, will be behind us by the end of July? I wish that were the case, but we know better. In my State of Illinois, I know better. We are hoping to start reopening the economy in a safe, responsible, careful way and to give these small businesses a fighting chance to open their doors again and survive, but it is going to be a struggle, and many of them won't make it. Earlier this month, 69,000 people filed new unemployment claims in Kentucky--a 4,000-percent increase from last year. Do those families who are now unemployed feel that this response, this Federal assistance in unemployment benefits, is urgent? Well, you bet it is. How many of those in Illinois or Kentucky believe they won't need this help after the end of July this year? July--the same month the $600-per-week unemployment benefits expire--the unemployment rate in Kentucky has been projected to be 16.3 percent--the 10th highest in the Nation. Yet the Republican leader says there is no sense of urgency in moving on this measure that was considered by the House of Representatives and passed last week. The IRS has sent out almost 2 million economic impact payments to that State of Kentucky, worth more than $3 billion, helping families put food on the table and pay their rent and their mortgage. When you take a look at that economic impact payment, understand that the measure that passed the House, which we did not bring to the floor this week in the U.S. Senate, calls for $1,200 more for each adult and $1,200 for each child. Do families need it in Illinois? You bet they do. Even though it was originally proposed by President Trump, politics had nothing to do with the support that it received from both political parties--the support that this measure that just passed the House should receive from both parties here in the Senate as well. There is a sense of urgency when it comes to these cash payments to people who are struggling to make ends meet. The bill that passed the House includes a second round of these critical payments and makes sure that we extend the unemployment benefits beyond the end of July. According to the Kentucky Center for Economic Policy, tens of thousands of Kentuckians have lost their health insurance as a result of this pandemic. What a moment in life to lose your health insurance-- in the midst of a pandemic, with people facing hospitalizations, treatment in and out of the hospital and in some cases ICUs, to think that you would be without health insurance? The measure that passed the House of Representatives last week, which was not brought to the floor by the Republicans this week in the Senate, includes a provision to ensure that people who have lost their health insurance as a result of becoming unemployed can remain on their employer healthcare plan without paying any premiums. In other words, we want to make sure that people have health insurance rather than lose it. Was that brought up this week for debate and consideration in the Senate? No. No, it wasn't. Is it a matter of urgency if you are facing the loss of health insurance in the middle of this coronavirus epidemic? Of course it is. The Paycheck Protection Program still has funding left in it to provide some loans, but businesses have to spend the money within 8 weeks of receiving the loan or it won't be forgiven. Many small business owners across the United States are facing a June 8 deadline, struggling to spend the money due to the fact that they still haven't been able to open their doors. The HEROES Act, which passed the House of Representatives and was not brought up for consideration in the Senate this week, which it could have been, would extend the deadline an additional 16 weeks, providing small businesses 24 weeks to spend the money they were loaned by the SBA, and it would authorize the Paycheck Protection Program through the end of the year to ensure that we can continue to help small businesses through this difficult time. Is there a sense of urgency in small businesses in my State to extend this period that you can spend the money as a small business and have your loan forgiven? Of course there is a sense of urgency in Illinois, in North Carolina, in Georgia, and in Kentucky--across the United States. Why the Senate Republican leader does not feel a sense of urgency on this measure, which ultimately ends on June 30, is beyond me. I have heard from farmers across my State who are struggling to survive, asking for help. I have heard from the Census Bureau about the need to push back its response deadline to October 31--measures also included in the HEROES Act that passed the House of Representatives. Three weeks have ended here on the floor of the Senate, and, but for a few speeches on this floor, if you read the record of legislative activity, you would wonder if the leaders in the Senate even realize we are facing a pandemic. We have spent our time on nomination after nomination. We have spent our time in hearings on friends and those who pass political muster who want lifetime appointments to the Federal court. But somehow we have managed to miss the biggest story in America--the pandemic. I would say to Senator McConnell and the Republican leadership: We have wasted an opportunity--a 3-week opportunity--to move forward, and we have particularly wasted this week when we could have taken up the measure that passed the House of Representatives last week. Are we prepared to negotiate a compromise? Of course we are. We have done that every time we have brought up a measure related to the pandemic. It should be bipartisan in the end. But to say it is ``dead on arrival'' and there is no sense of urgency among the Republicans in the Senate to take up this measure is to ignore the obvious. Whether it is $1,200 payments to American citizens who are struggling to get by, whether it is an increased period of time for qualification to receive unemployment insurance, whether it is loans to small businesses so they can survive, these are the urgent needs of America. When we have hospitals furloughing employees in Illinois, in Kentucky, and around the Nation, we run the risk of losing these great hospitals that are needed for the future. Is it urgent that we take up this matter? Of course it is. Yet this week we have done nothing, zero, when it comes to this measure. We are going to leave now for the Memorial Day week, which means it will be about 2 weeks before we return. I can just about guarantee that the sense of urgency across America will be palpable at that time. The question is whether there will be a sense of urgency felt by the Republican leader from the State of Kentucky. The other day, my friend and colleague from Texas, Senator Cornyn, came to the floor, as he has before, to discuss the issue of liability and immunity as part of the conversation on the next measure of relief and rescue for our economy. For weeks, Senator McConnell and Senator Cornyn have said that unless Congress gives broad legal immunity to corporations, they would block emergency aid to help States and local governments avoid massive layoffs of policemen, firefighters, and teachers. The logic behind this position is hard to fathom. There has been no flood of COVID-19 lawsuits. There is a website maintained by the law firm Hunton Andrews Kurth that tracks all the lawsuits filed in America based on COVID-19. Senator McConnell has cited this tracking. That tracker updated its numbers as of yesterday. It reported that out of 1.5 million confirmed COVID-19 cases and 90,000 deaths, there have been 2--2--COVID-19 medical malpractice cases filed in the United States in over 1,000 complaints that have been filed and 26 cases alleging workplace exposure to COVID-19. The Senator from Kentucky has called this a tidal wave of lawsuits, a windfall for trial lawyers--2 cases of medical malpractice and 26 cases for workplace exposure? The other cases that mention COVID-19 relate to prisoners in prisons and jails, who are questioning whether their rights are being violated because of the health circumstances in the prisons. There are lawsuits against insurance companies as to whether the policy covers a business that has suffered losses because of the COVID virus. There have been lawsuits as well between businesses as to responsibility for it. But this notion of a tidal wave of lawsuits being filed--2 medical malpractice cases across the United States of America and 26 workplace exposure cases. Keep in mind that if you do get sick and you want to file a lawsuit, a good lawyer will advise you: Be careful. Proving where you were infected is not an easy thing. And they also look at the standard of conduct of the business or individual who could be the defendant. Did they act reasonably? We had a hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee last week on liability during the COVID-19 pandemic. I have quoted this before, but it is worth repeating. One of the witnesses called by the Republicans was a very good man, very thoughtful. His name is Kevin Smartt, and he is the chief executive officer and president of Kwik Chek Foods in Bonham, TX. He went through a litany of things that he had done in his workplace to make it safer, not just for his employees but also for the customers who came in. It was impressive. If the statements he made to us were accurate--and I believe they were--he is doing his part to try to make his workplace safer. Here is what he said: This was a challenge because the guidance provided by the CDC, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, as well as state and local governments, often conflicted with one another in addition to being vague and difficult to follow. Yet, despite many uncertainties, including the constantly fluctuating public health guidelines, we began to adjust to the pandemic. The point I am making--and I see our Democratic leader on the floor; I am going to wrap it up quickly--the point I am making is this: We should establish reasonable standards through the Centers for Disease Control and OSHA so that conscientious businesses can in good faith know what needs to be done to protect their employees and their customers. When they follow those guidelines, I believe they have absolved themselves of liability. They certainly have a valid defense to any claims of wrongdoing. But this notion that comes before us on the floor from the Republican side goes to an extreme--asking for government immunity from the conduct of businesses in the midst of this pandemic without holding them to any standards. We are still waiting for an explanation. Why would we allow the workplace to be more dangerous for employees? Why would we allow the business place to be more dangerous for customers? If the owner is willing to live up to reasonable standards established based on science and health, in my mind, that is a good defense, and that is the way it should be. To do otherwise is to give a green light to businesses that don't follow standards, endangering their workers, their employees. It means more people are going to get infected and sick in America--the last thing we need. I yield the floor.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Ohio (Mr. Brown), the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), and the Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. Whitehouse) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), the Senator from Massachusetts (Ms. Warren), and the Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. Whitehouse) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Leahy), the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), and the Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. Whitehouse) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, this week Congress submitted to the President the bipartisan Congressional Review Act resolution that overturned Education Secretary DeVos's borrower defense rule. The rule that she came up with at the Department of Education makes it almost impossible for student loan borrowers, including many, many veterans, who have been defrauded by their schools--these are usually for-profit schools--to have Federal student debt discharged because of the fraud under the Higher Education Act's borrower defense provisions. Ten Republicans joined with the Democrats in March to reject this rule in the Senate and pass this resolution. I thank those on the other side of the aisle who stood up for the veterans and for students who have been defrauded. I urge President Trump to sign this bill without delay. More importantly than my urging, 30 different veteran organizations urged the President to sign our resolution. We are going to be giving a lot of speeches about veterans on the Senate floor and back home over Memorial Day weekend. Here is a chance for the President to stand up for the veterans on Memorial Day weekend. In a March 13 letter to President Trump, these veterans asked him to ensure ``that the men and women who served their country honorably are not burdened with student loans that result from fraud.'' I ask unanimous consent that the March 13 letter to President Trump be printed in the Record

Mr. DURBIN. President Trump has the opportunity to be the one who rescues these defrauded veterans from a rule that the American Legion has entitled ``fundamentally rigged against defrauded borrowers'' and give these Americans who served our country not just a pat on the back but a chance to get back in the game in their lives. American voters are behind us, overwhelmingly, from both political parties. New polling by Third Way finds that voters in key red and swing States believe that the Federal Government should not make students who took out loans to attend fraudulent or misleading institutions of higher education pay back those loans. In Ohio, 73 percent of voters believed this, 68 percent in Indiana, 64 percent in Colorado, 63 percent Pennsylvania, 61 percent Missouri and North Carolina, and 60 percent South Carolina. When asked if schools that mislead student borrowers should be held accountable, the numbers are dramatically higher, and 95 percent of Republicans in North Carolina agree and 91 percent of Republicans in South Carolina. The list goes on. The DeVos borrower defense rule would make it impossible for defrauded borrowers to get the relief that the American people and I believe they deserve. It will lessen accountability for the schools that defrauded these borrowers. They are just going to do it again. God forbid we loan these defrauding schools money in the current economic crisis so they can continue to defraud veterans and other students. This isn't a controversial issue among the American people, just among politicians. By signing this resolution, President Trump will be supporting America's veterans, Democratic and Republican voters. I hope he listens.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Leahy), the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), and the Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. Whitehouse), are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, Americans owe a great deal of gratitude to healthcare workers on the frontlines of the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic. I can't tell you how many heartbreaking stories I have read of these healthcare workers who are so depressed over the number of infections, the suffering that people are going through, and, of course, those whose lives have been taken by this coronavirus. I can't imagine what it is like physically and mentally, what they go through. Bless them. Bless them for caring enough for us and for our families to risk their own lives and go to work every single day. I want to spend a minute talking about a special group of these healthcare workers--immigrants. That is right--immigrants. Consider this: 1 in 6 healthcare and social service workers is an immigrant; 3.1 million out of 18.7 million. Over 3 million immigrants. These immigrants are playing a crucial role in the battle against the pandemic. Yet, the President continues to disparage them falsely, claiming they are a drain on society. He wishes they would leave. I hope they never do. I have come to the floor to tell the story of one. I will continue to highlight these stories because we need to put faces on this issue. You need to understand who these people are, these people who are immigrants to this country and willing to risk their lives to save ours. I invite my colleagues to do the same. Tell the stories in your own States. I can guarantee you, wherever you are from, there are immigrant health heroes. Not to take anything away from those who are not new immigrants, but these people need special attention at a time when there is so much criticism of immigration to this country of immigrants. Many of these healthcare workers are young immigrants who came here as children. They are known as Dreamers. I know because 20 years ago, I introduced the DREAM Act so that these young people, brought to this country as toddlers, infants, and little kids, could have a chance to be part of a future. They are American in every way except their immigration status. I joined with Republican Dick Lugar years ago on a bipartisan basis, calling on the President to use his authority to protect these Dreamers from being deported. President Obama responded. He created the DACA Program. DACA provided temporary protection from deportation to Dreamers if they registered with the government, paid a $500 filing fee, went through a criminal background check, and had no serious problems. They were allowed to stay 2 years at a time, not be deported, and legally work in America. More than 800,000 Dreamers came forward and received DACA protection, and let me tell you what they did. They turned around and became teachers, nurses, soldiers, small business owners, and 100 other things important to America. Listen to this: More than 200,000 DACA recipients are essential critical infrastructure workers. I didn't make that up; that number came out of President Trump's own Department of Homeland Security. Among these essential workers are 41,700 DACA recipients in the healthcare industry. These include doctors, intensive care nurses, paramedics, and respiratory therapists. Understand this: These are undocumented people in America, brought here as children, grew up here, went to school here, got an education, developed skills and training, and now we need them in this pandemic--41,700 of them. On September 5, 2017, President Trump repealed DACA. Hundreds of thousands of Dreamers faced losing their work permits and being deported from this country to places that many of them barely remember. Thank goodness the court stepped in to stop the President's action, but the President decided to appeal the case, and now, across the street in the Supreme Court, they are sitting on a case that will decide the fate of 800,000 of these DACA protectees, many of them--thousands of them healthcare workers who are doing essential work every day. We can get a decision from the Court any day. Will we be better off if 41,000 of these DACA healthcare professionals are deported from this country in the midst of this pandemic? No sensible person believes we would be. If the Court rules in favor of President Trump, up to 200,000 essential workers in America would be sidelined in the middle of this national emergency. Many of them face deportation. I sent a letter to the President, with 37 of my Senate colleagues last month, urging him to extend the work authorization for DACA recipients to the end of the year. It is not too much to ask. They have lived in this country for years, and they passed a criminal background check. For goodness' sake, Mr. President, don't get tough on these people when we need them the most. But if you consider what the President said about immigrants over and over again, I know it is unlikely that he is going to have a moment of caring when it comes to their future, so Congress has to step in. The HEROES Act, which the House of Representatives passed last week and which we did not even consider this week in the U.S. Senate, includes a provision to automatically extend work authorizations for DACA recipients. This is what they are talking about when critics of that House action come to the floor and talk about all the benefits for undocumented people living in this country--the extension of DACA protection for thousands of essential workers in this country who are protected by DACA. They say: Oh, it sounds like they are opening the doors for illegal people to come in here and get royal treatment in America. The opposite is true. These are people who are risking their lives providing healthcare and essential services across America. The HEROES Act that passed in the House of Representatives simply said we are not going to deport them. What a radical suggestion, that we could use their help and we need their help through the rest of the year. We certainly do. Those who come and mock this provision by saying it is just a giveaway to illegal immigrants are really doing a disservice to these people and the sacrifice they are making. Ultimately, we need to give these Dreamers a chance to become citizens. I believe it now, and I have believed it for 20 years. It has been that long since I introduced the DREAM Act, a bipartisan bill, which would accomplish that. Last year, the Congress passed the Dream and Promise Act, which would have solved this problem based on the DREAM Act. The vote was 237 to 187 in the House. Leader McConnell has refused to even consider calling that measure for consideration in the Senate. And it isn't because we are overworked; just take a look at this empty Chamber. Over the years, I have come to the floor of the Senate more than 100 times to tell the stories of Dreamers. I want you to know who they are. These stories show what is at stake when we consider the future of DACA. Today, I want to tell you about Javier Quiroz Castro. Here is Javier dressed for work. He is the 121st Dreamer whose story I have told on the Senate floor. Javier's parents brought him to the United States when he was 3 years old. He grew up in Nashville, TN. His father worked in construction as a bricklayer. His mother cleaned homes and office buildings. As the oldest child and the best English speaker, Javier took care of his three younger siblings and helped his family navigate the challenges of being in America. Javier went to a private Christian college in Nashville, Lipscomb University. At Lipscomb, he discovered his love of nursing. He enrolled in the school of nursing and did his clinical training at Vanderbilt Medical Center. Javier graduated in May 2013 with his bachelor's in science of nursing. Javier received the Spirit of Nursing Award, which each year is given to only one nursing student who has best delivered quality care. Because President Obama established DACA in 2012, Javier had a chance. Before that, he had no chance to become a registered nurse in this country. But he had a chance, and he took advantage of it. Javier now lives in Houston, TX, and works at Houston Methodist Hospital. He is part of the team taking care of patients with COVID-19. This is what he wears to work. Javier wrote me a letter. Here is what he said: Thanks to DACA, I have been able to save a lot of lives. I have been able to be there with patients at their final moments of life. I have been able to take care of people of many different backgrounds, nationalities, races, socioeconomic levels, and cultures. This wouldn't be complete if I didn't introduce you to Javier's daughter. Take a look at this beautiful little girl. This is Isabelle Quiroz. A few weeks ago, she took her first steps. I bet you she is about the same age as my granddaughter, whose birthday is Friday of this week. She is about to take her first steps too. This beautiful little girl, Javier's little girl, her faith and future are at stake, too, in this debate in the U.S. Senate. I want to wish Isabelle a happy birthday tomorrow and my little granddaughter Jill a happy birthday on Friday. Javier's wife is also a nurse. She and Javier worry every day about not infecting their baby daughter as they go to work to save other people, but they still get up every day and go to work to care for their patients. I want to thank Javier Quiroz Castro for his service. He is indeed a healthcare hero. He is an immigrant healthcare hero. He puts himself and his family at risk in order to save American lives. He shouldn't have to worry about a decision across the street at the Supreme Court which would deport him back to a country he cannot even remember. We must do better. We are better than that as a country, to say to someone like Javier: Well, thank you for working so darn hard. Thank you for getting through nursing school with the highest grades. Thank you for your professionalism. Thank you for risking your life for America. But I am sorry, buddy, you are undocumented. Get out of the country. The bill that passed the House would protect him until the end of the year--until the end of the year. Yet Members come to the floor and mock this bill and say: Oh, you are trying to give things away to illegal immigrants. Illegal immigrants like Javier? Get real. Get serious. Be human. We have to do better for Javier and the DACA recipients. They are counting on us--those of us in the Senate--to solve this crisis created by President Trump's action. As long as I am a Senator, I will continue to come to the floor of the Senate to advocate for Javier and the Dreamers. I have done it for a long time, but the job is not finished. It would be an American tragedy to deport this brave and talented nurse who is saving lives in Houston, TX, as we speak. We must ensure that Javier and hundreds of thousands of others in our essential workforce are not forced to stop working when we need them the most. Ultimately, we need to pass legislation that demonstrates who we are, what we believe in, and what our values are. What does it say about America if we say to Javier ``We don't need you''? We do. We need him and so many just like him who are performing essential services at this time of national emergency. I yield the floor.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, I believe there is a unanimous consent request pending. Has there been an objection to my original unanimous consent request?

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Ohio (Mr. Brown), the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), and the Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. Whitehouse) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Ohio (Mr. Brown), the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), and the Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. Whitehouse), are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Ohio (Mr. Brown), the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), and the Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. Whitehouse) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, some of you at home may be old enough to remember a distinct circular scar on your upper arm. You may remember a parent or grandparent who had one. That mark was probably one of the world's greatest public health successes--the eradication of the deadly smallpox virus. That so many alive today no longer remember the death and misery caused by this disease is a testament to global efforts in a cooperative manner. The smallpox virus likely originated more than 3,000 years ago and was one of the most devastating diseases ever in the history of humanity. It was barely visible under the most powerful microscope and was known for fiery bumps covering the face and body, profuse internal bleeding, black vomit, and pieces of destroyed skin that would shed off one's body. Smallpox is estimated to have killed up to 300 million people in the 20th century--300 million--and around 500 million in the last hundred years of its existence. In 1967, the World Health Organization launched a historic, intense effort to eradicate smallpox. The global eradication effort initially used a strategy of mass vaccination to achieve 80 percent vaccine coverage in each country and, thereafter, used contact tracing-- familiar with the word?--to reduce and rein in additional outbreaks. Ultimately, the global eradication of smallpox was certified and endorsed in 1980, making it one of the most successful collaborative public health initiatives in the history of the world. In fact, this month marks the 40th anniversary of the World Health Organization's historic achievement: the end of smallpox. Similar global efforts have been taken to deal with diseases such as polio and Ebola. So imagine my concern and that of the rest of the world that, amid the devastating global coronavirus pandemic, the United States decided just recently to sit out a conference to collaborate and raise funds to research, manufacture, and distribute a possible coronavirus treatment and vaccine. Just as with the smallpox effort, such a global collaborative approach makes sense, being both morally and strategically the thing to do to save lives around the world. You see, joining forces with other countries would help speed up the development and eventual distribution of a coronavirus vaccine that we all desperately seek. It would save lives in America, but it would also save lives around the world. No one knows--no one knows--where the vaccine will eventually be perfected or produced, so we should be on this. The United States should be at the table. We should be part of the collective global effort to find this vaccine. Clearly, other world leaders get it. They understand the obvious imperative of raising $8 billion to be spent over the next 2 years. Eight billion dollars is a massive sum of money until you place it up against the price we are currently paying for this virus. Our allies in the European Union and Norway came to this table that the United States vacated, or refused to attend, and each pledged $1 billion toward this $8 billion goal. Who was absent from this critical effort to save lives around the world, including lives in the United States? Sadly, it was the United States itself. We were not part of this virtual global conference. You see, again, another short-sighted and critically missed opportunity to address the coronavirus, a question about what this administration was thinking. Why were we missing in action when all of these countries came together? I don't know where this vaccine will be found. It will be a great source of pride if it is in the United States. I have the greatest confidence in the men and women who are researchers and the businesses prepared to produce and develop it. I have the greatest confidence in them. But what if the very safest vaccine, the most effective vaccine, the one that is proven to be the best comes instead from England or Germany? Does that mean we will not use it because it is not the American vaccine? We know better than that. We want the safest, most effective vaccine, wherever it may come from, to be available to the world and, certainly, to the United States of America. Supporters in Congress said little or nothing when it came to the decision to vacate and to not be present at this international conference. The President has blamed others for problems that we face today, but it was his decision not to participate in this global conference on the vaccine. It could have devastating consequences. So what does it mean for America? Well, we continue to have some of the world's best researchers: experts at the National Institutes of Health, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and many universities and private researchers that work across the country and around the world. Many NIH-funded researchers have spent years studying coronaviruses. Their knowledge could help to pave the way for future breakthroughs. I applaud them, and I have to tell you, for the last 4 or 5 years there has been a quartet of Senators of both political parties who have given dramatic investments to the National Institutes of Health for additional research. We have been led by Roy Blunt, the Republican chair of the Appropriations Subcommittee, as well as Lamar Alexander, the Republican chair of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. Patty Murray has always been at the forefront of this effort, and I have done my best to back them up every way possible. We have had a 30-percent or more increase over the last 4 years in research at the NIH, so I believe in the NIH, and I have made it a major part of the job that I have undertaken here in the U.S. Senate with my bipartisan colleagues. Clinical trials, we know, are underway at NIH for vaccines. I want to commend that agency; Dr. Fauci, a friend of more than 20 years; and Dr. Collins, the same, for their tireless, unwavering, and inspired effort. But it is plausible, as I mentioned earlier, that the best vaccine candidate may turn up in some other country, not in the United States; that it will be some overseas company that decides to initiate and lead the production of the vaccine. In a rush to research and validate a vaccine, ramp up production, and address global allocation and supply needs that would ensure affordability and access worldwide, where will the United States stand: in the fray, in the battle, or on the sidelines? Last week we decided to stay on the sidelines and not to work with global partners to find this vaccine. When the United States pursues a go-it-alone approach while the rest of the world is working together, where does that leave us? That is why last week Senators Schumer, Murray, Leahy, Menendez, Murphy, Duckworth, and nearly three dozen others joined me in introducing a straightforward resolution that calls on the United States to join these global efforts. I am grateful to organizations like PATH, Shot@Life, Better World Campaign, and the UN Association of the United States for their support of this resolution as well. Quite simply, we should be part of these efforts to not only offer American expertise but to share in lifesaving benefits. We used to have a profound, well documented, proud bipartisan history of such effort. For example, I was pleased to rally around President Bush's call to stem the scourge of AIDS around the world through the historic PEPFAR Program. Many of my Republican colleagues in the Senate supported these efforts. Now we face this coronavirus outbreak. I was equally proud of President Obama's efforts to set up infectious disease prevention systems and his leadership on the Ebola crisis. I have been told that one of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle is going to object to enacting this resolution this morning. I wanted to read the resolution clause that this colleague will be objecting to. I want those who are following this debate to ask whether they find this objectionable. Here is what it says: ``. . . calls on the United States Government to boost funding for and strengthen collaboration with key multilateral institutions at the forefront of responding to COVID-19, such as the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations; Gavi, The Vaccine Alliance; and the Solidarity Trial.'' This is not a radical or partisan suggestion. We did our best to make it nonpartisan because it should be. Does anyone in this country care if the researcher who finds that vaccine is a Republican or a Democrat? I certainly don't. We shouldn't care, either, whether it is found in the United States or another country. I would be so proud if it is found here, but if there is a safe and effective vaccine found in another country, we certainly want to participate in its discovery, its production, and its distribution. To stay on the sidelines at that point in history would be disastrous. Last Friday I was driving from Chicago to Springfield. It is about a 3-hour and 15-minute ride. I had plenty of time in that rental car to listen to a lot of radio, but it was interrupted--interrupted by the President who, in a press conference, made it clear to us that he was going to address the need for this global vaccine, as he said, at warp speed. I have disagreed with this President on a lot of things, but I sure don't disagree with that statement. The sooner we can find it, the better, and I want the United States to use all of its resources to make it happen. The President was asked in a press conference afterward what that meant in terms of sharing this vaccine with the world, and he said, ``We'll do it.'' It was a simple statement. There was no reservation. He made a pledge right then and there that, if we discover this vaccine, it will be shared with the world. Thank you, Mr. President. That was the right thing to say, at the right moment, as the whole world was watching to see the United States' leadership. What I am calling on in this resolution is simply that we use our expertise and an investment--and we make investments every day in global efforts--that we use this for a collaborative effort, a global effort, to find this vaccine. As I have said from the beginning, it will be a great source of pride if it is found here, but if it isn't, if there is a safer or effective vaccine that is available and it is discovered in another country, what difference does it make, if it saves lives in America and around the world. Let's be part of this effort. Let's set our pride aside and, instead, talk about the impact it would have on the people today who are in fear, suffering and, sadly, dying as a result of this global virus. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent, as in legislative session, that the Committee on Foreign Relations be discharged from further consideration of S. Res. 579 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration. I further ask that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.