This was hosted by the hill newspaper. Mr. Secretary, thank you for joining us this morning. I want to get right to the news. 2. 4 million new jobless claims of unemployment this morning, several Senate Republicans said yesterday they want to see some action now on the next relief package. Is another package necessary and if so, when . Secretary mnuchin well, let me comment first of all, im very sympathetic to the people who are not working at no fault of their own because we close down the economy and as we slowly reopen the economy in a safe way we will get people back to work. In the current cares package, there is several parts of it that are designed to help those american workers. One is the ppp and getting people back to work through that process. The other is the Economic Impact payments which are the direct payments, and finally the enhanced on Employment Unemployment insurance. We do need to fix where in certain cases we are paying more than they made, so we need to fix that. We are going to carefully review the next few weeks. I think there is a strong likelihood we will need another bill, but we just have 3 trillion we are pumping into the economy, and will step back for a few weeks and think clearly how we need to spend more money and if we need to do that. As you know, mr. Secretary, the house passed a 3 trillion bill that is strongly opposed by the administration and Congressional Republicans. You have a very Good Relationship with speaker pelosi, the president not so much, but when is the last time you communicated with the speaker about a possible next package . Sec. Mnuchin i spoke to the speaker last week. Really our conversation was more about the execution of the current cares act and was not focused on the next steps. What i would say is, look, im very pleased that the last two bills that were passed were 960 and 100zero in the senate. They had overwhelming bipartisan support. These are extraordinary times. The whole senate came together. And i would hope the next bill we do has overwhelming bipartisan support. The speakers bill obviously is a partisan bill, so that is not something we are focusing on at the moment. You mentioned before the Senate Banking committee that this is an unprecedented challenge, and as you mentioned , this is no fault of americans. This virus started in china and was not contained and they were not transparent. Mr. Secretary, a lot of americans are angry at china. Is china going to be held accountable in any way . I understand why americans are angry, and i think they have the right to be angry. It is not just americans, it is the rest of the world. And i would start with people want information. People want to know what went on with the virus, and i think that china should be held accountable, first by at least giving information and understanding what went on and how to combat this. President trump has talked about a transportation bill, the possibility of it being a stimulus down the road. Mitch mcconnell, the majority leader, is not a big fan of that approach. Should congress, at some point this year, for another stimulus pass some type of transportation bill . As you know, the president has been focused on infrastructure going back to the campaign, and that was part of the president s platform, to rebuild our roads and bridges and dams and the nations infrastructure, as well as cutting edge infrastructure such as rural broadband. So i think that is something that congress is going to need to look at. Id say whether we do it as part of the coronavirus bill or whether we do it separately, that is something that is on the president s agenda. You are an author of this ppp program, an Unprecedented Program that has saved many, many jobs. How many jobs has the ppp Program Saved to this date . I think its about 50 million jobs, and i think by the time we get through this, it will be 60 million jobs. You know, it wasnt perfect getting it up and running, but was important was we developed a program from scratch. We knew that if it took four months to get up and running, it wasnt going to help at all and it was unprecedented and we got this up in a few weeks. We got money out the door and this is a major part of the u. S. Economy, the small and mediumsized businesses. And we wanted to protect the workers, and just as important, we wanted to keep those workers attached to the business so that when the businesses could safely open, they had workers attached to them. As you know, congress has replenished the ppp. When will the ppp need to be replenished again . How much time do we have . Right now we have over 100 billion left. One of the things we all are working with congress on, and there is bipartisan support, is lengthening the eightweek period. One of the Things Companies are having an issue with because theyve been closed and rehiring workers, there is bipartisan support to extend that to ten12 weeks, and i know the restaurants have asked for 24 weeks, but that is something we definitely want to fix. It doesnt cost us any more money and there is bipartisan support. As far as that eight week provision, as you mentioned, congress is talking about that, there are some that say you could do that administratively. Can you do that administratively as well as the 7525 provision, or does that happen to be done by congress, both of them . Sec. Mnuchin well, the eight weeks i wish could do administratively. If i could, we would already have done it. Let me comment on the 7525, because theres been a little bit of confusion on this issue. When the program was designed, and again, let me remind people it is called a paycheck protection program. It is not called the overhead protection program. It was designed that you got eight weeks of payroll plus 25 for overhead, which we thought was a reasonable amount, but the real purpose here was to get people back to work. When we came up with a 75 test, it was a belt and suspender test. What we thought was how the program was designed, which, again, was the eight week plus the 25 . We did not think the intent of the program was to have 50 spent on workers and 50 spent on overhead. And obviously, we are somewhat concerned. We realize people do have more overhead. They can go out and take out a loan which is a 30year sba loan to pay back, but we want most of this money to go to workers. We believe the 75 was exactly consistent with the way the program was designed. There are roughly around 30 companies, Public Companies that say they wont return the money that they received in this loan grant program. They say that the goalposts have been changed. Will you go after these companies and why, if it is safe saving jobs after all . Let me comment that there was a certification that was in the application that the funds were necessary. And as i said before, there were a few companies that became the poster child for the public being upset. I said this before, im a big fan of the los angeles lakers, they are one of my favorite teams, we did not envision this was a program for the los angeles lakers. They obviously have the financial means to pay their players and support staff. Also, as you look at shake shack, which was a large public company, again, they have the financial means, whether they want to pay their people or not is completely up to them. But i dont think those were the types of companies that we thought could make the certification, so i came out early in defending the program, and again, it was a small number of companies and what is over four and half million loans its a small number of companies that jeopardize the program, and we did say that we would review and hold accountable anybody who has a over 2 million. I think some legitimate Companies Got very concerned about the liability, so we toned that down and said ok, if you go through your review and pay back the money, the sba will not refer you to any other further enforcement actions. But yes, the bigger loans will be reviewed. They will be reviewed on a casebycase basis. Companies can make their arguments no different than you go through any review. Theres a lawsuit pending about the nonPublic Companies. Media organizations have said they deserve the right to see who is getting this taxpayer money. Do you agree with that, that the public deserves to know who is getting the money, whether public or not public . Sec. Mnuchin well, let me just comment. I very much support oversight and transparency. When we negotiated this bipartisan bill, we added in unprecedented oversight and transparency. We created a new Inspector General for various parts of this. We created an Oversight Committee that was bipartisan. And in the fed programs, weve specifically agreed within 14 days to release the names of companies, and that was something that was interest in. I think in the ppp it does not require disclosure. I think the concern was that there is proprietary information off of payroll that should not be in the public domain, but again, that is something will be discussed. Bob mr. Secretary, speaking of oversight, the house has set up a special panel that Congressional Republicans oppose. They say its not necessary to oversee this specific committee because theres a lot of other oversight built into the law. If you were asked to testify before this house panel, would you . I cant comment on that. I have not really reviewed it one way or the other with my internal legal team and others, but i would say i testified this week at the Senate Banking committee with chairman powell. That is required on a quarterly basis. We absolutely plan on doing that. Again, i would emphasize there is a specific Oversight Committee set up that consists of republicans and democrats and im not exactly sure why the house needs to set up another committee. And again, there are other committees that the house does have jurisdiction that sheriff chair powell and i will testify before. Cbo recently has predicted that unemployment will be 10 plus this year into next. Do you agree with that prediction . Well, let me just comment this is nothing against cbo and nothing against the rest of the economic models. We are in an unprecedented situation. This unemployment was not a result of bad economic issues. This is a result of medical issues. I think its very hard to predict. A lot of it depends on reopening of the economy. A lot of it depends on, as we make advances in virals, vaccines, and testing and people feel comfortable. I think the economic models, follow the medical models and i think its too premature to predict those things. What i do think is the Second Quarter is going to be a dreadful corner because literally it is like we took the water faucet and turned it off so nothing came through. Now we are slowly reopening the economy, so i think we will bottom out in the second order. I think the third and Fourth Quarter will be better, and as the president has said and i have said, with the great advancement in medical progress in killing this virus, we expect our economy will be great again next year. You said this spring that the Fourth Quarter would be gigantic. Are you tempering expectations . Do you still think it will be gigantic in the Fourth Quarter . Sec. Mnuchin im not tempering. What im saying is when you come off a low number of closing down the economy, you will have very, very big increases, so yes, i thank you will see a very large, call it a gigantic increase in the Fourth Quarter. Bob regarding production, some have called the administration to use more of the defense reduction act, which the administration has employed, but that the Administration Plan to do more than as far as manufacturing . A lot of people say we need that now or certainly we both needed down the road in the fall going into next year. Sec. Mnuchin its a very important tool. It should be used carefully. I know the president is very much willing to use it if we need to use it. I got an update on vaccines yesterday and the investments that barta is making, which i think is terrific. In many cases, they have commitments to take over a large amounts of the vaccines, but the defense production act is a very important tool to protect the american workers, and if the president needs to use it, he will. Bob mr. Secretary, the president has been critical of the Postal Service, which is running out of money. There are provisions in the new house built that i know is considered dead in the senate. But the president has said the Postal Service should charge more for carriers like amazon and others. Do you think that should be looked at and maybe the Postal Service should charge amazon more . Sec. Mnuchin weve looked at this, so let me give you a history here. I chaired the federal financing bank. The post office is largest creditor in the federal financing bank, so last year i asked my team to give me a financial update. I was shocked at how bad it was. I updated the president on that, and as a result of that he me to chair a task force. We have put together a complete plan to fix the post office. Let me also say that when we came into office there were no governors. Again, this is just outrageous. This is corporate 101. There was no oversight on the post office, so the postal board of governors did not have anybody. We now have a fully functioning governance board, people appointed by congress, both sides of the aisle. I think its extremely important. They ran a search. They just hired a new postmaster general, someone with terrific business experience. And during the last bill, people thought the post office was going to run out of money, so they wanted to throw the post office 10 billion. I said thats not fair, lets give them a loan if they need more money. As of now, the package deliveries are up over 50 to offset the mail. As of now, they dont need to use the loan. So absolutely think the president is right. We want transparency on these agreements. We want to make sure that, again, any of the ecommerce transactions, and again, right now, post office is doing an amazing job delivering things to people as they are at home, an amazing job. We just want to make sure that the post office is paid fairly and isnt subsidizing that business. The first class mail business is a business that should be subsidized. The package business and again, what im trying the overnight package business. Im not talking about if you take your package to the post office and send it crosscountry. What i am talking about is the overnight business that services amazon, ebay and others and that should not be subsidize by taxpayers. An Unusual Program has come out of the state department. Its been reported that the eagle plant where Social Security recipients could get a 5,000 or 10,000 payment in exchange for reducing their Retirement Benefits down the road. It is odd that this has come out of the state department. Is this something that will come out from the administration . Democrats have been critical of it. Sec. Mnuchin it is not something that we are considering at this point. It did come out of the economic group. We look at lots of things. As you know, Social Security is very important to the president and we will look at other options of people who need money. Bob the president and Vice President have been tested regularly. Have you been tested and will you continue to be tested in the weeks ahead . I am also tested on a regular basis because i am in pretty much daily contact with the president , Vice President and others. The white house has thought it prudent. With these abbott machines, its a very easy process. I hope we can get more and more of these abbott machines into the workforce. In many places, if people could go into work and could get tested, they would be much more confident in going to work. But yes, just as a precaution because im around the president on a regular basis, i do get tested. Bob last question, mr. Secretary mnuchin im happy to report i dont have it. Bob thank you for joining us this morning. We appreciate your time, mr. Secretary. Andhe idea came to go ahead take a little car trip into the everglades. There would be lots of exotic plants and animal life and it would be an adventure. It was pointed out to them that there is not really any room and it is dangerous and there are alligators and people could die, but they knew better. There was a monsoon. There were snakes. There were alligators. They fled. But they liked the idea. So it came about that they would take a trip once a year, if they could, but with a little bit of planning, so the disaster would be less looming. Sunday night at 8 00 p. M. Eastern on cspans open q a. Q a. Cspans washington journal compelled live every day with cspans washington journal. Coming up, the status of the paycheck protection program, helping businesses keep their workforce during the coronavirus crisis. Also, a spokesperson for Chapman University talked about how urban centers could be affected by the pandemic. Watch live at 7 00 eastern sunday morning. Join the discussion. Has unfiltered coverage of congress, the supreme court. Now, the federal response to the coronavirus. You can watch all of cspans Public Affairs programming on television, online, or listen on our free radio app, and be part of the National Conversation through cspans daily washington journal program, or through our social media feeds. Cspan. Created as a Public Service and brought to you by your television provider. We are back with andy serwer, the editor and chief of yahoo