Mitch McConnell

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it stand adjourned under the previous order.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, there has been a lot of focus lately on the drama here in Washington. For weeks now, as leading Democrats blocked more pandemic relief over unrelated liberal demands, the press has covered their stonewalling like any ordinary political standoff. Who talked to whom? Who said what in which meeting? What new metaphor did Speaker Pelosi use today to explain that she was blocking progress? But it does the Nation a disservice to act like the last several weeks were just another routine political standoff. It does struggling families and laid-off workers and stressed-out school principals and healthcare professionals a disservice to act like this has just been more Washington gridlock. The New York Times proclaimed a few days ago that ``[Speaker] Pelosi is playing hardball on coronavirus relief.'' Well, that is one way to put it. You could say it is ``playing hardball'' to refuse any outcome for the country. You could say it is ``playing hardball'' to insist on non-COVID-related liberal policy changes that the Speaker and the Democratic leader know would never pass the Senate or be signed into law by the President. But if Democrats are ``playing hardball,'' their opponents aren't us Republicans--not really. They are playing hardball against kids, workers, and vulnerable Americans who need help. They are playing hardball against our medical system when the Speaker and the Democratic leader say they won't allow another dime for testing, treatments, or vaccines unless they can bring home a massive tax cut for millionaires in San Francisco and New York City. They are playing hardball against our Nation's ability to detect and fight the virus. They are playing hardball against science when the Speaker and the Democratic leader say they will not allow another cent for schools to reopen or for the job-saving PPP unless they get $1 trillion for a State and local slush fund that is completely out of proportion to actual needs. They are playing hardball against children and parents when the Speaker and the Democratic leader say they will not allow any resolution on any issue unless Democrats can pay people more not to work. They are playing hardball against millions of households that ought to get another stimulus check and against the ability of jobless people to get any Federal benefit whatsoever. There are life-and-death matters at stake, but Democrats have treated this historic national crisis as a political game. Just look at the redlines the Democratic leaders have drawn around these negotiations. Imagine sitting down with a working family at their kitchen table and explaining that these are the kinds of issues over which the Speaker and the Democratic leader are refusing--refusing--to let them have relief. First, as I mentioned, the Democratic leader has made clear he doesn't want any pandemic relief to become law unless--unless--it carries a special State and local tax carve-out for high earners in places like New York. Just imagine these Democratic leaders from New York and San Francisco going anywhere in the middle of the country and telling a working family of four, earning $40,000 a year, that they aren't getting a relief check that could increase their income by 10 percent until millionaires in Manhattan get a tax cut. Economists on all sides have panned this. A huge, costly tax cut for wealthy people in blue States is not the life raft that struggling people need. Even liberal economists have jumped ship. Here is what one self-identified progressive told reporters: ``This is not a good idea. . . . It would not help the economy heal and it would not benefit the people who need help.'' These are the economists on their side? But forget about the experts. Forget about laid-off people. Forget about Middle America. The Speaker and the Democratic leader want to cut off funding for our war with the coronavirus unless they get this special carve-out. Here is another one of those dead-on-arrival demands: Democrats insist that working families, small businesses, and healthcare providers will not get any more help unless a new trillion-dollar slush fund for poorly managed States tags along. Bear in mind that States and localities have only spent about a fourth--a fourth--of the money we already sent them last spring. Even Senate Democrats seem to acknowledge this, for example, by sponsoring legislation that would extend the deadline for the States to spend down their CARES Act aid. The States need extra time to spend what we have already sent them, and the serious estimates of the COVID shortfall that State and local governments may face are a fraction--a fraction--of the Democrats' trillion-dollar demand. Their demands aren't based on math. They aren't based on the pandemic. They want a massive slush fund to make up for decades of mismanagement. It is just how the Speaker explained her view of the crisis. This is what she said: This is an opportunity. Every crisis is. That same opportunism leads them to another absurd demand. Democrats say nobody should get any more help unless--unless--the Federal Government sends out jobless benefits that pay more than what people made working. Republicans support extending a Federal supplement for unemployment--make no mistake about that--but we share the view of Democrats like the House Democratic majority, the senior Senator from Maryland, the Democratic Governor of Connecticut, all of whom indicated it should be doable to land somewhere smarter than a flat $600. This is not complicated. Both sides want to help unemployed people. Republicans never wanted the Federal benefit to lapse to zero and tried to extend the money. But as our economy tries to reopen, there is no reason Uncle Sam should take taxes out of essential workers' paychecks to pay other people more to stay home. This is just a flavor of the Democratic demands. The two parties should have been able to agree on a huge sweep of subjects--from testing to school money, legal protection to direct payments and more. Republicans wanted to reach an agreement everywhere we could and then continue to fight over the contested questions later. Democrats said no because they know their unrelated wish-list items would have no prayer--no prayer--of standing on their own merit. Only these hostage tactics could possibly get their bad ideas across the finish line. So struggling people have waited and waited and gotten nothing. That has been the Democrats' decision. Reporters can call it ``hardball,'' like this was some ordinary standstill, but families are suffering. Americans are dying. This is not a Washington game; it is a national crisis. It would serve the Nation better if the Democratic leaders would act like it is a crisis

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 11 a.m., Wednesday, August 12; further, that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day; finally, that following leader remarks, the Senate be in a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. If there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it stand adjourned under the previous order.

Mr. McCONNELL

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

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, on a totally different matter, this weekend brought more unsettling news in the ongoing struggle for Hong Kong to preserve any shred of its civil liberties and self-governance. One of the region's most prominent pro-democracy advocates, Jimmy Lai, was arrested yesterday for alleged violations of the so-called national security law imposed by Beijing. Last year, after a historic election that saw millions flock to the polls to overwhelmingly reject President Xi's preferred candidates, the Chinese Communist Party moved quickly to choke Hongkongers' free expression. Mr. Lai has been at the vanguard of the vibrant Hong Kong-based media and publishing world. Jimmy Lai was arrested for an alleged violation of the so-called national security law imposed by Beijing. He has devoted much of his life to advancing precisely--precisely the sort of values that the CCP finds most repulsive: freedom of thought and freedom of speech. The Senate, the country, and freedom-loving nations across the world stand with Mr. Lai and with all the peaceful demonstrators who have met the business end of the CCP's repression.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 117, S. 1014.

Mr. McCONNELL. I ask unanimous consent that the Duckworth amendment at the desk be agreed to, that the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time and passed, and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I had hoped that this week the Senate would be busy providing more coronavirus aid and that the chairmen and ranking members would be working overtime across the aisle to finalize another major pandemic relief package for the American people. After all, there are so many important ways in which American families need help and which Democrats say they see as big priorities, just like Republicans do--priorities like continuing a Federal add-on to unemployment insurance, more tools for schools to safely reopen, more access to testing and diagnostics, more resources to develop vaccines and treatments, a new round of checks to put cash in families' hands ASAP, and another round of the hugely successful Paycheck Protection Program that small businesses have relied on, which was left out of the Democrats' proposal. All of these things and many more were in Senate Republicans' trillion-dollar proposal for another coronavirus rescue package focused on kids, jobs, healthcare, and legal protections to help our country reopen. So I had hoped the Senate would be spending this week turning a major agreement into law, but sadly for the country, sadly for struggling Americans, the Speaker of the House and the Senate Democratic leader decided we would not deliver any of that--none of it. For weeks, Speaker Pelosi and the Democratic leader in the Senate stalled and stalled in backroom negotiations with the administration's team. For weeks--weeks--they held up important aid over non-COVID- related demands. They stayed true to their comments from very early on in this pandemic. This is the way they looked at it: They saw this pandemic as ``a tremendous opportunity to structure things to fit our vision.'' That was the House Democratic whip. Speaker Pelosi herself put it this way: ``This is an opportunity. Every crisis is.'' Working families call this pandemic a crisis. They call it a nightmare. But leading Democrats call it ``an opportunity.'' Just listen to some of their demands. These are the Democrats' demands that stood between all of this help and the Americans who need it. Here is one: Democrats say nobody gets another dime of relief unless State and local governments get about $1 trillion in extra money. Let me say that again. Democrats are saying nobody gets another dime of relief unless State and local governments get $1 trillion in extra money. Let's put a few facts on the table. No. 1, State and local governments have spent only about one-fourth of the huge sums we sent them back in the springtime--$150 billion. No. 2, the economists who have calculated the likely COVID-related shortfalls for State and local governments have mostly produced estimates that are entire multiples less--entire multiples less--than what Democrats are demanding. No. 3, in our HEALS Act, Republicans tried to give States and localities extra flexibility around the unspent funds they already had--extra flexibility around the unspent funds they already had. In my State, for example, 94 percent of the money we sent them has not been spent. We wanted to send huge sums to help with schools, which are one of the States' biggest expenses. Typically, in a State budget, the two biggest items are education and Medicaid. But forget all that. Democrats are demanding that we send State and local governments a colossal amount of money, with no relationship to actual need, while they have only spent a quarter--25 percent--of the money they have already gotten. Clearly, this isn't about COVID. Democrats think they smell an opening they have wanted for years--to make Uncle Sam bail out decades of mismanagement and broken policies in places like New York, New Jersey, and California. So they have decided that no working family anywhere in America can get another cent--not one cent--unless they get to create a trillion-dollar slush fund for mismanaged States, completely and totally out of proportion to pandemic needs. Here is another one of those far-left demands: Nobody gets another dime unless we indefinitely pay people more to stay home than to go back to work. Republicans agree we ought to continue additional Federal jobless benefits during this extraordinary time. Senate Republicans tried several times to stop them from expiring. The Democratic leader blocked us. Our view, which a majority of Americans share, is simply that it disincentivizes rehiring and reopening to pay people more to stay home. It is a statement of the obvious. It disincentivizes rehiring and reopening to pay people more to stay home. Plenty of Democrats said they saw the point and were happy to negotiate on this. Speaker Pelosi's own No. 2, the House majority leader, said: ``It is not $600 or bust.'' That was the No. 2 Democrat in the House. The senior Senator from Maryland said: ``We certainly understand. We don't want to have a higher benefit than what someone can make working.'' Oh, no. But the Speaker and the Democratic leader overruled them. No deal. No deal unless we pay people more to stay home. That is not about COVID. It is not about a real reopening. It is about far-left ideology. They preferred for the jobless benefits to go down to zero--zero--unless they could pay people more to stay home. Does anyone in this country really believe that relief for Americans should be totally contingent on bailing out States for mismanagement that predated the pandemic by decades? Does anyone really think it was better for jobless benefits to completely expire unless we pay people more not to work? And does anyone really think that Congress should walk away from countless subjects where a bipartisan agreement should be possible over these fringe positions? Do Americans think Democrats should walk away from school funding, testing, cash to households, preventing a spike in seniors' Medicare premiums, legal reform, and more, over this? I think almost every family in America would answer these questions the same way, but unfortunately Speaker Pelosi and the Democratic leader have answered them the opposite way. They think they have political leverage over the President of the United States, and so they are willing to personally increase the pain for vulnerable families unless they get their way on matters not related to COVID. Republicans wanted to agree on the things we could agree to. Democrats said: Our way or the highway. Republicans wanted to send cash now--right now--for schools, testing, and unemployment benefits and argue over State bailouts later. Democrats said nobody gets a penny unless Texas and Florida bail out New Jersey. That is their position. Nobody gets a penny unless Texas and Florida bail out New Jersey. So this is where we are. The previous UI benefits expired. The PPP closed its doors. Over the weekend, President Trump took steps to soften the blow of the Democrats' hostage tactics on American families who need help most. His decisions will help spare some Americans some of the pain from the Democrats' hostage-taking. From the beginning--from the very beginning--our side has tried everything possible to find common ground and deliver more help, but the Democrats have said no. At least the American people know the score. At least they know the score.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it stand adjourned under the previous order.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 11 a.m., Tuesday, August 11; further, that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day; finally, that following leader remarks, the Senate be in a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, it has been 1 week since Senate Democrats forced the additional Federal benefit for jobless Americans to expire. Senate Republicans tried everything to prevent the lapse. That Monday, we rolled out a comprehensive proposal for another rescue package that would have kept extra Federal benefits flowing. The Democrats refused to act, so we tried to force the issue. One of our Senators requested unanimous consent to continue these benefits through the end of the year at a still historically generous level. This plan would have also corrected the bizarre choice facing American workers whom the system was actually paying more to stay home than to resume working, but that wasn't good enough for the Democratic leader, and he objected. Another Republican Senator then asked unanimous consent to extend Federal support exactly as it had been for 1 more week so that jobless Americans didn't have to bear the cost of the Democrats' leisurely negotiating pace. Once again, the Democratic leader objected. Finally, Republicans forced a floor vote to demonstrate whether Senators were even willing to debate the issue, whether Senators would even consider extending these benefits, and every single Democrat present voted no. The week since then has seen plenty of talk and plenty of stalling from the Democratic leaders, who have insisted on handling this themselves--but no significant movement toward progress. They have still kept their ranking members and more reasonable voices locked up. The Speaker and the Democratic leader continue to obstruct the kinds of committee-level discussions that delivered the CARES Act, which are no longer in style. Only they are allowed to speak. Only they among the Democrats are allowed to have an opinion. Day after day, they have stonewalled the President's team. Day by day, they have tried to invent new euphemisms to create the illusion of progress. Yesterday's contribution from the Speaker was this: There is now a light at the end of the tunnel, but ``how long that tunnel is remains to be seen.'' Well, there are a lot of struggling Americans who could tell Speaker Pelosi exactly how long this tunnel has been and that it will continue to be endless unless the Democrats let us provide more relief to the country. Their second week of inaction has brought the country to a second cliff in coronavirus aid. Last week, it was the extra Federal benefit for laid-off workers. This week, it is the enormously popular Paycheck Protection Program that has kept millions more Americans off the unemployment rolls in the first place. The PPP was written and designed in March by Chairman Rubio and Chairman Collins as Main Street America was hurtling toward a cliff. Their innovative policy has saved small businesses on a massive scale. Hundreds of billions of dollars have gone out in emergency loans to more than 600,000 small businesses. I hear constantly from Kentuckians whose local businesses and whose jobs would not have survived the last several months without this program. From distilleries to medical device suppliers to domestic violence advocates, the PPP has helped community institutions weather the storm and keep more Kentuckians on the payroll. This emergency program hasn't been perfect, but it has been a huge, huge success. It has remained a success because, back in April, we finally got the Democrats to let us provide another wave of funding after a pointless delay and pointless brinksmanship--you may detect a pattern here--but now many of these businesses are reaching the ends of their ropes. Their PPP money is dwindling, but since the virus remains with us, even where shutdown orders have been lifted, commerce has not roared all the way back. One survey found that one in four workers who were hired back and kept getting paid because of the PPP has now been warned he might be let go again, and you can bet that number will increase. Here is how one business owner explained the looming danger to reporters: ``If there isn't another round of stimulus, we'll start cutting past the fat and to the bone, and that's our people, and our people are hard to replace.'' Congress should be strengthening the PPP. Instead, the Democrats have put it in jeopardy. This Saturday, August 8, is the official deadline for anyone who hasn't yet gotten a loan to apply. The door closes the day after tomorrow, and many firms that did receive the assistance are getting nearer to the bottom of the well. This is why the Senate Republicans' blueprint for another major rescue package would put $190 billion into a second draw of the PPP for the businesses that most need help. The House Democrats' $3 trillion wish list totally left that out. They ignored the PPP. We want to re-up it This is just one of the many ways our serious proposal beats the absurd far-left wish list the Democrats' own moderate Members laughed out of the room. While they focus on unrelated liberal demands, like tax cuts for rich people in blue States, we are focused on serious solutions for the problems facing Americans right now. Yet, instead of getting serious, the Democratic leaders have chosen, instead, to misrepresent and even lie about what is at stake. The Democratic leader's repeated misstatements about the legal protections that the Senate Republicans and the White House want for schools, doctors, nurses, charities, and employers have earned him ``three Pinocchios'' from the Washington Post and a ``Mostly False'' rating from another fact-checker. Let me say that again. The Democratic leader's repeated misstatements about the legal protections the Senate Republicans and the White House want for schools, doctors, nurses, charities, and employers have earned him ``three Pinocchios'' from the Washington Post and a ``Mostly False'' rating from another fact- checker. He doesn't even seem to realize that we modeled our medical malpractice reforms on the COVID-related protections that his fellow Democrats put in place in New York. So this is where we are--another week that the Speaker of the House and the Democratic leader have spent stonewalling the President's team in talks and holding out for ideological pet projects with no relationship whatsoever to the COVID crisis. Now, as a result, struggling Americans are facing another cliff, with another important form of relief on its last legs. We face a second straight week of political theater from our Democratic colleagues with no result--except more pain for families, more uncertainty for workers, and more evidence to suggest that perhaps the Democratic leaders were never serious about getting something accomplished in the first place. All across America, small business owners are hurting and hoping the Democrats get reasonable and allow another major package to move forward. Unemployed Americans need these endless talks to finally bear fruit, and so do school principals and working parents and senior citizens and nurses and doctors and university presidents and students of all ages. That is why I will not be adjourning the Senate for our August recess today as had been previously scheduled. I have told Republican Senators they will have 24-hours' notice before a vote, but the Senate will be convening on Monday, and I will be right here in Washington. The House has already skipped town, but the Senate will not adjourn for August unless and until the Democrats demonstrate they will never let an agreement materialize. A lot of Americans' hopes--a lot of American lives--are riding on the Democrats' endless talk. I hope they are not disappointed.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I understand there is a bill at the desk due for a second reading.

Mr. McCONNELL. In order to place the bill on the calendar under the provisions of rule XIV, I object to further proceedings.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session for the consideration of executive Calendar Nos. 820 through 832 and all nominations placed on the Secretary's desk in the Air Force, Army, and Coast Guard; that the nominations be confirmed; that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate; that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate vote on the nominations en bloc with no intervening action or debate; that if confirmed, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table en bloc, and that President be immediately notified of the Senate's action.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the en bloc consideration of the following nominations: Executive Calendar Nos. 833 and 834.

Mr. McCONNELL. I ask unanimous consent that the Senate vote on the nominations en bloc with no intervening action or debate; that if confirmed, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table en bloc; that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to legislative session for a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. 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 with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 677, submitted earlier today.

Mr. McCONNELL. 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 with no intervening action or debate.