Now recall, back in the cares act there was an extension of a federal supplement to Unemployment Insurance. So we put in place a 600 federal benefit on top of the state benefit. At the time there were concerns about whether that would lead to people on Unemployment Insurance getting more money than they would at work, and there was actually an amendment here on the house floor, on the senate floor regarding that. And although it did not pass, i think pretty much every republican supported it with that concern. In fact, thats whats happened. If you look at whats happened over the past couple of months, as the 600 has been put in place, it clearly has led to people making more on Unemployment Insurance often than they can make at work. In fact, the congressional budget office, which is a Nonpartisan Group here in the United States congress that analyzes some of these economic issues, has said that if someone is on Unemployment Insurance today, they are likely to be making substantially more than someone who is mott not on Unemployment Insurance. C. B. O. Says roughly five out of every six recipients would receive a benefit that would exceed the amount they would earn during those six months if you were to extend this until the end of the year. In other words, theyre saying 80 of u. I. Recipients would make more on Unemployment Insurance than they would have at their old jobs, meaning that if you followed where the democrat negotiators are and keeping 600 in place until the end of the year, that there would be an unprecedented disincentive to go to work in this country. And i think thats widely acknowledged. The university of chicago has a study that isnt quite 80 . It says 68 , though. I dont think anybody disputes the fact that most people on Unemployment Insurance are making more than they would than if they were work. When i talk to my democratic colleagues about that, theyre hearing the same thing im hearing from Small Business owners. The by the way, from nonprofits, from employers of all size and all stripes saying its tough to get people to come back to work when they can make more by not working on Unemployment Insurance. And i think a lot of my democratic colleagues agree its good to get people back to work, get back to work safely, yes. And we ought to be sure that the employers are following the guidelines of the centers for Disease Control and others. But its good to get people back to work because then theyre reconnected with their health care if they have it with their retirement savings, reconnected with training. And that connection to work is a positive thing, providing people dignity and selfrespect comes with work. So we should all be for that, right . And yet, when you see whats happening in this negotiation, this is being stalled because democrats are being intransigent. Theyre saying stubbornly were going to stick to 600. Today there was a press conference with Speaker Pelosi and democratic leader schumer, and thats exactly what they said. Here is the quote, we have said that were going to have 600. This is necessary, end quote. So i know that thats not where the rank and file are here in this chamber because ive talked to a number of my democratic colleagues about this. They realize that the 600, even those who thought it might have been necessary at the time and i voted for the package at a time when, you know, we had unemployment that was such a shock and so high and people were in such need of immediate cash. But also i have heard, again, from so many of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle that 600 is something im hearing about more and more back home from the employers who say we cant get people back to work. So the 600 is something that there needs to be some flexibility on to come up with a smarter way to ensure people can continue to get a federal supplement, because we do continue to have relatively high unemployment in this country. In my own state of ohio, its almost 11 unemployment. But lets not have it be so much that people are incentivized not to work. That doesnt help anybody. There are help wanted signs all over my state. I was at a ford plant recently where they have 25 absenteeism which they attribute to this issue. Ive been in a lot of Small Businesses which is probably where most of my colleagues are hearing a lot of concerns about the fact they cant get people to come back who used to work for them and they cant hire the new people who they need, even though theyre reopening safely and doing everything theyre supposed to do in terms of the guidelines. And theyre having a tough time getting back to work. There is a auto plant in ohio where the white collar works p workers are working on the Assembly Line because they cant get enough workers to work on the Assembly Line who would normally have that job. This is a problem right now and i think everybody acknowledges this except democratic negotiators in this negotiation. I dont think were actually as far apart as the media accounts would suggest because there are lots of ideas out there. One idea, by the way, that makes a lot of sense to me and im going to offer this in a moment as a resolution for the senate to take up, and i think this is the ultimate common sense, lets keep 600 in place for now while we negotiate something. So lets have an extension for another week on the Unemployment Insurance at 600 just so we can negotiate something. Because what you dont want is for people to fall off the cliff, and thats starting to happen now. The 600 expired last friday. Six days ago it expired, and six days ago, seven days ago, Martha Mcsally, the senator from arizona, came to the floor and offered this same unanimous consent request saying lets just have 600 for another week, and Chuck Schumer objected, the democratic leader, instead offering the 3. 5 trillion package from the house but didnt respond to why wouldnt you at least give the negotiators a week to come up with something . So im going to offer that same thing today because i do think its not fair to have a cliff. I dont think there should be a cliff. I think people should be able to have some level, but not at 600 because thats not understood by everybody to mean that you are disincentivized to work. And americans are generous people. Back in 2008 and 2009, when we had the great recession, we also did this. By the way, we did 25 a week then. So for democrats who say this is unprecedented, well, we had 10 unemployment back then. Very high unemployment, and we did 25. I think we should do a lot more than that now. But not so much that people are making more by not working than by working. And there are a lot of ideas out there. Again, my ideas, ideas of individual members may not be what this body chooses to use, and thats fine. Were not going to all get our way, but we should be able to come up with a compromise here. My idea is to have a return to work bonus so that youre getting the 600, but then you can take some of that money back with you when you go to work. That will create an incentive for people to go back to work and connect people back to those businesses as we talked about, the importance of doing that. But there are other ideas as well. Theres a plan that was put out recently by former secretary geithner and jason furman. They joined with glenn hubbert to put out a proposal from the aspen institute, hardly a conservative group that proposes that the unemployment system, not at 600 but continue at a cap of 400 and have it be determined at 400 based on the unemployment level for the state. The way unemployment works in the states is, the states have a benefit and this federal benefit is on top of it. Most states provide on average about 50 of ben fits. Some benefits. Some less, no more. Again, the 600 is over 100 , its over 130 , in fact of the so this solution from, again, two Obama Administration economists is that you have 400 as the cap when unemployment in those states is above 15 and zero federal supplement when a state is at 7 or less. It phases out entirely. Thats one bipartisan solution thats out there. Instead of insisting on 600, i would hope theres at least a discussion of those kinds of proposals. Senator remove any has a romney has one that takes it to 400 to 80 wage replacement. Senator mcconnell put his proposal out for a 200 amount over a twomonth period as a transition and then to go to a percent of wages. His percent of wages is 70 of wages. Again, theres no state that thats high. The states are 40 , 50 , 60 , in that range. So there are ideas out there and yet the democrats keep coming back again and again to this notion of, we want it all or nothing. And i will tell you my colleague from oregon, who is here on the floor and im glad he did, did a very good job for the democrats negotiating this proposal. I told him that at the time. I know he took pride in it and he should have. But we also need now to figure out where were going going forward. None of us should want people to be disincentivized from going to work. We should not have people where you have the leaders on the democratic side, Speaker Pelosi and democratic leader schumer saying, quote, today we have sid said said that were going to have 600. Quote, this is necessary. End quote. We have to be able to show some flexibility or to be able to break this impasse to be able, yes, provide for people who lost their jobs through no fault of their own and need some help but not to continue to have this policy in place that doesnt work for our economy, for Small Businesses, and for workers themselves. Lets get the politics out of this. Lets do something that makes sense to be able to move forward on this broader crisis. And i think if we can fix the unemployment issue, were likely to get there. With that, mr. President mr. Sullivan will my colleague from ohio yield . Mr. Portman i would be happy to yield. The presiding officer the senator from alaska. Mr. Sullivan thank you. I want to thank the senator from ohio for his great leadership on this and so many other issues. I see my colleague from oregon is on the floor as well. But i want to talk about an issue that senator portman just touched on, but its really the key to whats going on here, and its good faith good faith. Our negotiations are negotiations happening in good faith or are they not . Sometimes thats hard to tell. Sometimes theres posturing, but, mr. President , last week at this time senator portman, senator mcsally, myself, we were on the floor with regard to discussing senator mcsallys very simple unanimous consent resolution which said, as we negotiate, hopefully in good faith, the difference between what weve put forward, the heals act and the Speaker Pelosi bill from early may, by the way, a bit of a stale 4 trillion bill, onethird of which has nothing to do with the pandemic. But as were trying to negotiate in good faith, lets move forward with an extension of unemployment so people who are hurting can continue to rely on it. That happens all the time in the senate. So what happened . The minority leader came down to the senate floor and blocked it. He blocked it in and his response was, im going to block this oneweek extension unless the republicans take the entire 4 trillion pelosi heroes act. Thats what he said. Thats what he said. Now, if youre watching or paying attention, that is the definition of not negotiating in good faith and every senator knows it. All 100 of us know it. That was not a goodfaith maneuver. What i predicted was the minority leader of the u. S. Senate, despite that maneuver, which will hurt millions of americans, did it because he thinks the National Media will give him a pass. That no one in the National Media will say, boy, oh, boy, the minority leader just blocked a reasonable request for an extension to help people but he thinks and i think with good reason that the National Media wont blame him for what he just did so he did it with no explanation. So, mr. President , thats not good faith by definition, saying, take my 4 trillion package or you wont get one week of an extension of unemployment. Let me mention one other that senator portman mentioned. Now on this tough issue of Unemployment Insurance, and as senator portman has been a leader on this, there were a lot of good ideas. I was talking to a lot of my democratic colleagues. I believe most dont think that 600 a week until january is a good reason. Again to have the minority leader of the u. S. Senate and Speaker Pelosi just say 600, take it or leave it, colleagues, you all know, we all know thats not good faith. Thats not good faith. So its starting to feel like the minority leader, the speaker are not negotiating in good faith right now. I hope they are. I know a lot of democratic colleagues are, but people have to remember, regardless of what party youre in, americans are hurting. They need help. We have one foot in the recovery, one foot still in the pandemic, but what we need as we negotiate this package is good faith. And so i want to thank my colleague from ohio, again, for his strong leadership on this and so many other issues. And im certainly going to be supportive of the unanimous consent request, which we made at this time just last week, to help people, not controversial, a week extension as we negotiated, it happens all the time here in the senate, and i certainly hope my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are not going to say, no, take my whatever or were not going to do it. Because it sure doesnt look or feel like good faith. And you know who whos hurt you know whos hurt by that . The American People who are suffering. Mr. Portman i thank my colleague from alaska. Reclaiming my time. I think hes made a good point. Were not talking about a negotiation, were talking about a weeklong extension of the existing 600 per week so we can enable people to have some certainty and predict ability in their lives. Im hearing that from people on Unemployment Insurance, what are you guys doing . Why cant you come to an agreement . We know that democrats dont appear to move off of their proposal. We heard it again and again. Maybe they think its good politics, maybe they think its worth hurting these people to see if im going to get my unemployment or not. I had a town hall of a woman whose husband works in the Hospitality Business and hes been told, sorry, were not open for business. He needs the help. She didnt insist on 060, but she said give us some certainty that something will go forward. That is what this is about. This is a unanimous consent to request to give us just a week in order to negotiate something that makes more sense for the economy, for Small Businesses and for workers. And so this Martha Mcsally motion which was offered earlier this week and last week, we are going to offer today. Its a unanimous consent request. I ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of the bill at the desk. I further ask that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. The presiding officer is there objection . Wyden wyden re mr. Wyden reserving the right to object. The presiding officer the senator from oregon. Mr. Wyden mr. President , the Senate Republicans have spent much of this week offering this idea of a oneweek extension of the 600 Unemployment Insurance supplement, and they have done this as an alternative to spending the week doing real negotiating, which is what i and Many Senate Democrats have been calling for for not just days but weeks and weeks, literally months as we called for it in advanced proposals. Now, in my view the only thing worse than what the republicans have done, cutting off desperately needed Unemployment Insurance to millions of mesh families and communities American Families and communities, would be to allow a bill to pass that promises money without actually delivering it. That is snake oil. And im going to be very specific in describing why thats the case. Even if this shortterm extension were to pass, experts and state agencies have said in very clear terms that states dont have enough time to reprogram their systems and avoid a lapse in benefits. A lot of them just have and as my colleague from ohio knows, i was talking about it for days in the finance room, these state unemployment systems are not equipped to flip the benefits on and off. These shortterm extensions wont work and dont work administratively. And nobody following this debate has to take my word for it. Thats what the National Association of state workforce agencies have said, and i was struck i think there was a comment, well, this is an image problem, its a problem of the National Media. Id say, mr. President , and colleagues, the National Media has been repeating what i just said which are the exact views of people who arent democrats or republicans. They are the administrators of this crucial program. A shortterm extension isnt enough for the hardworking americans relying on this lifeline who dont have jobs to go back to. What about next week and the week after . Theres going to be promises for week after week that also cant get them money to get the money to people so he had can so they can make rent and buy groceries. The only responsible route is to debris to the attention agree to the extension that looks to Economic Conditions, ties these benefits to Economic Conditions that will lower the payments only when its appropriate to do so. And that means when the economy is in recovery, not when it is facing the kind of dramatic contraction that we all were so concerned about last week. And, to me, this is all a part of an effort to deflect the fact that when i and im just going to talk about myself specifically, but senator schumer, the speaker sent letter after letter calling for negotiations because everybody knew there was a cliff. I said it repeatedly. I said dont go home, leader mcconnell, stay here. This cliff is coming, end of july, last weekend when people got the checks. So there was a comment about unemployed folks being pushed off the cliff. Well, im here to tell you it was Senate Republicans by their inaction who pushed those workers off the cliff. Now, whats needed is a longterm solution that insures the extra 600 remains available for as long as this devastating crisis continues. I heard my colleagues talk a bit about workers. A lot of workers who were laid off once and then got brought back have been laid off again. And thats really representative of the challenge. I also want to mention, as we talk about ideas i heard my colleagues talk about it another big snake oil idea coming out of the white house that somehow an executive order is going to accomplish all this. Now we hear the words executive word. That sounds like its going to be fast. Man, that sounds good. Executive orders. Lets move fast. In actual wallty, it would throw the states in chaos. It would be tied up in the courts. It would slow everythingen down just like each of the Senate Republican legislative proposals so far. For example, they also still try to drive the idea of wage replacement which weve seen problems getting the amount out initially, the 600. Wait until you see what happens with these republican wage proposals. Theres a path here and thats to negotiate in good faith. My republican colleagues have been stalling on negotiating in good faith because they thought somehow and i find this a real head scratcher they could win a war of words by insulting the American Worker in claiming that theyre kind of lazy and they dont want to work and the like. Being on the finance committee i hear continually from my friend from ohio who talks about the superior work ethic of ohioans and now hes out here talking about how everybody is not willing to work and unemployment folks Unemployment Benefits are causing folks to stay home rather than work because theyre too generous. I think thats just a bunch of hogwash. I believe americans believe deeply in the dignity of work. We just had a nationwide town hall meeting about the unemployment issue. And people were saying, i cant believe theyre calling us lazy and we dont want to work. I get a job offer on monday night. Ill be there at the crack of dawn on tuesday. Thats what workers are saying. So this idea that theyre staying home because they dont want to work, besides its a violation of the rules of the program as well i think is just hogwash. Mr. President , i would also like to put into the record right now the latest assessment from the bureau of labor statistics about whats really going on out here. Because the issue is not workers being lazy. The issue is the scarcity of jobs. And the bureau of labor statistics, again not a political operation, has reported that there are four unemployed americans for every job out there. Let me repeat that. Not politicians, not anecdotes, not somebody who said something to somebody else. Those are the facts, colleagues. The bureau of labor statistics, there are four unemployed americans for every job out there. Mr. President , i would ask unanimous consent to enter into the record the bureau of labor analysis showing the paucity of jobs. The presiding officer without objection. Mr. Wyden so i just say im just stunned that colleagues are saying that American Workers are out trying to scam the system and really dont want to work and all of these things that i think suggest a very different picture than i hear from workers. And by the way, i hear from my friend from ohio when hes in the finance committee so i have a final point. The republicans knew the cliff was coming in may when the house passed the heroes act. They knew that the cliff was coming in june. Im just going to walk this through because i heard oh, my goodness that, you know, all the democrats are involved in pushing workers off the cliff. The republicans knew the cliff was coming in may. Thats when the house passed their bill. They knew the cliff was coming a few weeks after that when senator schumer and i introduced and tried to get past a piece of legislation that was really based i say to my friend from ohio and something i heard our friend from south dakota, senator thune talk about. Senator thune said i get it when folks are hurting. The benefits got to be one that pace the rent and pays the rent and buys groceries. But when unemployment goes down, the benefit should taper down. Thats essentially what the democratic leader, senator schumer, and i offered to tie Unemployment Insurance to the realities of what is on the ground in the american economy. So republicans know the cliff is coming in may. They know a few weeks later that senator schumer and i tried to actually pass a bill that, as i developed it and brought it to our leadership and showed it to colleagues, was really to a great extent sparked by what our friend from south dakota, a member of the republican leadership, said about well, lets kind of recognize when the economy gets better, the benefit tapers off. Republicans knew the cliff was coming in july when again leader schumer and i tried to provide certainty for American Families and communities by passing our bill. Did they come to the table with earnest proposals . Senate republicans have spent the week on this idea of a oneweek extension which the people who run the programs, the people who are the most knowledgeable, who dont have election certificate, theyre experts in the field are saying it would not deliver to the people who are desperate to buy groceries, pay rent. It would not deliver the funds that they so desperately need for quite some time. These proposals are not serious. Theyre political theater. The cliff is here. And as American Families fall over it, im just stunned that were seeing republicans say, you know, its okay to offer these proposals. Ive seen a number in elevators leaving town. Im going to be here. Im going to be here because i think when workers are hurting and they cant make rent and they cant pay groceries, you stay at it. And the senator from ohio knows that thats how we got the 600 because when secretary scalia folded his arms and said you really couldnt do anything that would present a real benefit, we spent three days, three long days and we said on our side, youre not going to stiff the workers and well just average the benefit. Some would get more. Some would get less. But we give everybody in america who through no fault of their own had been laid off a chance to pay the rent, buy groceries and at the same time keep the economy afloat. So for all those reasons, mr. President , and especially reflecting my disappointment that after and i just walked everybody through it. One effort to go and negotiate. A couple weeks later another effort. Then in july another effort. But nothing happened. In fact, i stood right where i am as benefits were about to expire, and i said how can the republican leader basically say were going home . And when they asked him about moving anything to really meet the needs of the workers, the press reported everybody was quoted in the press that the republican leader halved. Mr. President , i yield the floor. Mr. Portman mr. President . The presiding officer is there objection . Mr. Wyden mr. President , excuse me. I object. The presiding officer objection is heard. Mr. Portman i was hoping after all that there wouldnt be an objection because i cant believe that my friend from oregon believes its not a good idea to do an extension. All were talking about is an extension a week of the 600, the full amount even though again all the data out there shows that amount is not practical for our economy, for workers, for businesses. And you did a valiant effort of trying to explain why youre not for that but i know that people who are watching just think its common sense. Lets continuing to discuss but lets be sure we have, as my colleague from alaska said, goodfaith negotiations. Its not good faith to say 600 or nothing. Thats exactly what the negotiators have ed is. I wish, to my have said. I wish, to my colleague from oregon they would authorize you to negotiate. I think we could work out something and i think you probably do, too. But they have not authorized it. And the democratic negotiators have said 600 or nothing. This notion that the oneweek extension doesnt work, absolutely it works. Are you telling me the state unemployment offices would not provide the 600 . Of course they would. There would be a lapse, of course. There would be a week or two, they say. But that 600 would be in peoples pockets. By the way, theres a lapse right now so people who lost their unemployment last friday in some states, including ohio continue to get it because theres a lapse in the payment. Yeah, people would get the money. Of course theyd get it and they would be able to plan on it and have some certainty. And, frankly, it hasnt been blocked last week when senator mcsally stood right over here and offered it, it would be even sooner that people would get it. I say its one to two weeks. For some people they would be getting it right now. So it is absolutely essential for us to figure out how to find a way forward here. Its not, to me, an option for us to do nothing. We cant allow this cliff to continue. But in the meantime, all were saying is lets just have a little time to work it out and hopefully the democrats will get off their 600 and realize that thats not a path forward because it doesnt work. Youre right, when we put the 600 in place, our thought was that would be about average. In other words, it would be the average wage replacement so that you would have half the people making a little more than half the people making a little less. Thats not how it worked out. Again, congressional budget office, nonpartisan c. B. O. Says more than 80 of the recipients are going to make more on unemployment than their old jobs if you follow the democrat proposal. In chicago 68 but thats not what we intended. So certainly we should be able to adjust here and we should be able to get to yes. And my deep concern is that the negotiators are so intransigent on the democratic side on this that well end up hurting the very people that democrats are talking about helping. So lets come up with a sensible solution. I think there is a path here and its to negotiate in good faith. I think an executive order isnt necessary if we do our work. I think inaction by not negotiating in good faith is the worst possible outcome. I yield to my colleague from alaska. Mr. Sullivan thank you, senator portman. I have a lot of respect for my colleague from oregon who unfortunately just left the senate floor. But, mr. President , there they go again, right. On the senate floor the senator from oregon just said republicans cut off Unemployment Insurance for millions of families. Thats a quote. When in reality what we just witnessed, if you were watching, on the senate floor is that the senator from oregon objected to restoring unemployment for millions of americans. That is a fact. Thats just what happened. So he says one thing. And again, i think they get a little bit careless because they think the National Media will just report what he says. But he said, i object. When he said i object, heres what he meant. I object to restoring Unemployment Benefits for millions of americans. Thats what the senator from oregon just did. Theres no ben nying that. No denying that. And right before he did it, he said republicans cut off unemployment for million, of americans. Millions of americans. Thats just not true. Not true. He just objected to restoring Unemployment Benefits for a week, 600 for millions of americans just like the senator, democratic leader from new york did last week. Then he said, shortterm extensions are not enough. Thats another quote from the senator if oregon, but he didnt finish the sentence by saying and because i objected, theyre going to get zero. So think about that one. Shortterm extensions are not enough, sounds good, so he objects so there is no extensions. Again, thats just what happened on the floor. And, mr. President , he didnt say one thing about this issue that senator portman and i have been discussing, which is goodfaith negotiations. There is not one senator in this body that believes that when the democratic leader comes to the floor of the senate and says take the 4 trillion Speaker Pelosi bill passed in early may or nothing, that thats good faith. Its almost by definition bad faith. So i think our colleagues who are trying to negotiate in good faith but are getting locked down by their leadership are having a bit of a problem because they know this isnt good faith, and they know people are suffering, and thats why we have got to Work Together to get to an agreement. But what we cannot do, mr. President , and what i fear the other side is starting to do is use people who are suffering as leverage in negotiations. Thats not what we should be doing. We should be working in good faith to try to get to an agreement, and we should be making statements on the senate floor that are actually factual. And what just happened here was that the senator from oregon objected to american citizens getting their Unemployment Benefits restored. Thats a fact. I yield the floor. The presiding officer the senator from texas. Mr. Cornyn mr. President , before they leave the floor, i just want to compliment my colleagues from alaska and ohio on making a very important point. You would think that from the press that there are negotiations taking place, but the truth is that Speaker Pelosi and the minority leader in the senate, senator schumer, have shown zero interest in resolving the differences on this next covid19 package. And i think its just very important for my colleagues to to to lay out the facts because there is a tendency not to ignore the facts in favor of a mythical or fantasy construct. And so i appreciate their statements. Mr. President , i have four requests for committees to meet during todays session of the senate. They have been approved by both the majority and minority leaders. The presiding officer duly noted. Mr. Cornyn mr. President , hopefully sometime soon now that the enhanced Unemployment Benefits have been allowed to expire as a result of democratic objections and where the Paycheck Protection Program, which is the single most selfpart of the cares act legislation that we passed is likewise scheduled to terminate here soon, i hope democratic negotiators will get serious about providing a fifth Corona Relief package to support our country through this unprecedented crisis. You know, were doing pretty good. During the previous legislation, we virtually passed these trilliondollarplus bills, multitrilliondollar bills essentially by unanimous vote because we knew we were in the middle of an emergency. We knew it was not a time for politics. It was a time to try to help people who were out of work or needed help from our Beleaguered Health care providers. So we rose to the occasion previously by bolstering our health care response, making testing free of charge, providing vital funding for our hospitals and arming our medical workers with the personal protective equipment and other medical equipment they needed in order to sustain the fight. We have poured funding into the research and development of a violent crimes, therapeutics and treatments which are coming along, and were all hopeful an American Company will win the global race for a vaccine in addition to these pair these therapeutics. The legislation we have passed so far has given families in need of Financial Assistance direct payments, bolstered Unemployment Benefits, as well as conferred the ability to defer student loan payments with no penalty. We have supported the wouldbely economy for main street businesses through the Paycheck Protection Program that i mentioned a moment ago and other loans for industries at our state and counties that our state and counties rely on, as well as countless jobs. While republicans and democrats were negotiating these bills in good faith, it was clear we had some different ideas about the best way to support our country through the crisis, but what mattered most is that we shared the same goal. At least we did then. Im beginning to doubt whether we share the same goal now. The goal then was to help people in distress economically and from a Public Health standpoint. Now it seems like Speaker Pelosi and the minority leader in the senate are more interested in trying to score political points. And use people who are in distress and anxious and fearful, to use them as a hostage. Well, its really, really unacceptable. We should be strengthening our fight against the fire and supporting those harmed by Economic Impact and lay the foundation for a rebound of our economy, which was one of the strongest in my lifetime right before this pandemic hit. Those remain my priorities today as we navigate these Uncharted Waters and prepare to strengthen our fight at this crucial time, but the hangup in negotiations between democrats and the administration seems to indicate that our democrat colleagues have shifted course, or at least that Speaker Pelosi and minority leader schumer have. The majority of information were learning about these negotiations is not coming from rankandfile members but from links and press conferences to the media about private meetings in Speaker Pelosis office. From what i understand, it sounds like the speaker and the minority leader have simply stiffarmed any offers that fall short of their ridiculous heroes act legislation, that the speaker and the house passed on a partisan basis a few weeks ago that they knew at the time had no chance of becoming law. This legislation was heralded by Speaker Pelosi and minority leader schumer as the solution our country needs to defeat this virus, so lets talk about whats in it. For starters, the socalled heroes act is a massive tax cut for millionaires and billionaires. That the if the heroes act became law, the wealthiest people in new york and San Francisco would receive an average benefit of nearly 60,000. 60,000. Higher than the Household Income for many texans. Well, this has nothing to do with covid19. Or supporting those who are struggling to make ends meet. Its a handout to the people who need it least. At everyone elses expense. But there is thats only one line in the long list of absurdities in this legislation, the heroes act, that have absolutely nothing to do with the crisis at hand. Once the speakers priority whats the speakers priority when it comes to covid19 . Well, its a soil health program, Environmental Justice grants, permanent changes in election law, and not one but two diversity studies in the marijuana industry. Politico called this bill at the time a democratic wish list filled with all the parties favorite policies. Npr, hardly a bastion of conservative communication, said it is a long wish list for democrats. The new york times. The new yorkthe the new yo basically a party organ for the democrats, said the bill was more a messaging document than a viable piece of legislation. The reason they said that is because onethird of that bill is unrelated to the coronavirus. It paid people more to stay home than to work. It sent checks to illegal immigrants. It bailed out poorly run states. It facilitated ballot harvesting, marijuana banking, and as i said tax breaks for coastal elites. That stands in stark contrast to what we have proposed and what leader mcconnell aptly summed up as kids, jobs, and health care. Those ought to be our priorities. As we discover our new normal that exists somewhere between the virus arriving in the u. S. And a vaccine being distributed, that is where we need to target our attention and our support. That includes funding for educators that are in the process of planning the safest way to teach students in the fall, and child care for working parents who are heading back to the office. It includes helping workers who had the rug pulled out from under them when our democratic colleagues refused to continue bolstered Unemployment Benefits until they could get until these workers can get back to a steady paycheck. Our bill included continued support for our war against the virus itself, both in hospitals and research labs. These have been the main concerns in my recent conversations with my constituents in texas, especially now that the bolstered Unemployment Benefits provided by the cares act has expired. Since march, more than three million texans have filed for Unemployment Benefits, and recipients have taken advantage of the additional 600 a week. This additional income has helped families cover the rent, groceries, and other critical expenses until they are able to return to work. And for many workers, there is still a great deal of uncertainty about when that might happen. Well, its clear, though, that that 600 additional benefit had some unintended consequences. Frankly, we should have capped the amount somebody could receive for Unemployment Benefits at their previous earning level. But according to the Texas Workforce commission, with the 600 weekly benefit on top of the state benefit, 80 of the people receiving the Unemployment Insurance benefit were making more on Unemployment Insurance than they were previously employed. 80 . That brings us to a point far beyond giving workers the Financial Support they need to stay afloat. Instead, the federal government is paying people not to work. Thats the wrong incentive and certainly completely unnecessary. Payroll, wage substitution, yes. Paying people not to work, no. A recent poll found that twothirds of americans believe that these enhanced benefits discourage people from going back to work, and theyre right. Among unemployed americans, nearly half said they would avoid returning to work if these benefits were extended. The businesses in my state that closed their doors earlier this year have now had trouble hiring employees back because some of these, 80 of those former employees are making more not working than they were working. If we were to extend that benefit through january, as the heroes act would, our economy would not recover as we all need it to do. So there is a delicate balance, but its an important balance between supporting those who need help until they can return to the workforce and giving them an incentive to avoid returning to work. This is not an allornothing approach. Its not 600 or bust, even though thats the way Speaker Pelosi and minority leader schumer like to put it. We can and we should begin continue to supplement state Unemployment Benefits and give workers the income they need to support their families without paying people more to stay home than to work. Its not rocket science. Mr. President , were all anxiously awaiting for the speaker and the minority leader to wake up and start focusing on the task at hand, which is on commonsense policies that support our country through this crisis. Texans dont have time to wait for the posturing and the politicking and the grandstanding, not to mention the heel dragging. They dont have an interest in knowing how diverse the marijuana business is, and they dont want to provide a massive tax break to the richest americans on the east and west coast at the expense of everyone else. My constituents want to be able to feed their families. They want to be able to work. They want to be able to pay their rent. And they want to know their kids will be healthy as the school year begins. So, mr. President , i implore our colleagues, Speaker Pelosi and minority leader schumer to drop the games, quit hurting people you claim to champion, and Pay Attention to what america really needs. Mr. President , i yield the floor. Mr. Sullivan mr. President . The presiding officer the senator from alaska. Mr. Sullivan mr. President , i want to thank my good friend and colleague from texas on laying out the choice before us and highlighting again this issue of good faith negotiations, which were hopefully were starting to see but last week we didnt see, and you talked about the socalled heroes act passed in may. So quite stale. I will say one other element of that that was shocking and has been shocking to me is a whole section on clawing back cares act money that went to alaska natives. With the heroes act, the pelosi to 4 trillion billion has a section that targets expressly about 20 of the population of my state, and my state only. By the way, amazing patriotic people who have been through pandemics before and have suffered horrendously through these pandemics. And the heroes act targets them and says any money that native alaskan organizations have received by the way, organizations regional and village corporations set up by congress any money that theyve received will be clawed back in the heroes ability. So, of course, im never going to let that bill pass ever. On this floor. Its an outrage. So they need to get more serious about these negotiations and take it or leave it on the 4 trillion pelosi bill that specifically targets some of those patriotic americans in the country, who happen to be my constituents, alaska natives, is good morning, everybody. Hearing will come to order today. We will have a video