Transcripts For CSPAN3 Labor Secretary Scalia Testifies On Economic Impact Of COVID-19 20240712

Welcome, everybody, to our hearing. Both those in the room and those that arent in the room. Before we start, i think its important, again, to note whats going on all around us, and that is the acknowledgement of Racial Injustice that has gone on for far too long in our country. I certainly support those who are speaking out and making their voices heard in a peaceful manner to bring about change. While change does not always come easily, i want to remind those watching this hearing today that change is possible. In december 2018, the first step that i first introduced became law. And i worked in partnership with several republican and democrat senators. Senator durbin was the lead person for the democrats. This law is the most significant criminal Justice Reform in a generation. A lot of people didnt think it was possible but we did it by working together, in a bipartisan way. But also working together in other ways to address racial disparities. Such as in health care, the c. A. R. E. S. Act and other Covid Response efforts aimed to help all, but especially minority populations have been hit hardest by the virus. Weve knocked down financial barriers of receiving care through the pandemic and provided support to our front line providers to ensure access. We continue to focus attention on the devastating effect that covid has had on nursing home and the need to do better for resident staffs. The Trump Administration has announced a number of efforts to address the desperet impact of covid19 on others. I ask for unanimous concept to insert a document along those lines in regard to those efforts. I hear no objection, so ordered. Were also taking action beyond coindividua cov covid. Were working on a bipartisan issue to tackle Maternal Mortality and improve outcomes for mothers and babies. All americans want lower Prescription Drug costs but our efforts are especially important as minorities suffer from the high rate of common disease such as diabetes and hypertension. Were exploring improvement for those with Kidney Disease and patients in need of organ transplant and more beyond that. Were also in the middle of a transformation of our Child Welfare system. We know that too many children end up in foster care and that black children are overrepresented in this system. And thanks to bipartisan effort states are transforming the way they operate to keep more kids safely at home instead of placing them in foster care. Theres obviously much more to be done. And i look forward to working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to continue nose efforts. Now, id shift to my remarks to focus on our topic of our hearing. As a result of covid19 and related stayathome orders, millions of americans across the country have lost work. Congress passed the c. A. R. E. S. Act to provide help to those affected by in many different ways, including by temporarily expanding Unemployment Insurance. These increased ui benefits have played an Important Role in helping those who lost a job. Or who couldnt work as a result of the pandemic. Given the need to act quickly to reduce the spread of covid19, providing extra help through the unemployment system made sense as a way to reduce the Economic Impact of stayathome orders. But now, were facing a much different situation than we were in midmarch. States are reopening. Employment recently turned positive. We need to shift our focus to helping people safely return to work. Making sure businesses are able to come back quickly and to put the country back on a path to economic growth. Weve also learned a few things since the c. A. R. E. S. Act became law. The c. A. R. E. S. Act provides an additional 600 per week to those receiving ui, representing the gap between the u. S. Average weekly wage and the average weekly ui benefit. One thing weve learned is how poorly targeted the additional 600 per week was. As it appears most recipients are being paid more on the Unemployment Insurance than they were when working. This, of course, discourages people from returning to work or taking a new job, thus delaying the recovery. Recent Research Published by the university of chicago estimates more than twothirds of the ui recipients may receive benefits that exceed lost earnings with more than 20 potentially getting double what they used to earn, as long as they dont work. Some will say this is just an academic paper and that these extra payments arent really an issue today. Those folks saying that havent been reading the many letters that i get from iowans each day. And im sure every member of the committee is hearing the same thing, businesses having a hard time bringing people back to work or from hard working constituents earning less than others they know who are getting unemployment. Let me share a few stories from letters ive received. Letter number one, my daughter went back to work voluntarily because she wanted to help ensure the company would still be around after covid19. Many of her coworkers chose to stay at home and due to the 600 extra dollars per week are making more than she is. This isnt right. Now, letter number two, senator grassley, im a Small Business owner whos in desperate need for additional employees yet i receive very few applications when i post jobs. The issue is the additional unemployment. With the additional 600 per week, my potential employees make more on unemployment than they would working. Letter number three. Were trying to hire back laid off covid19 related employees or anyone else as well. For 15 an hour, and we find that theyre receiving equivalent of 20 an hour in Unemployment Benefits. Suddenly, the government became our competitor. The question to me then from this consti stistit stistitcon could that happen. Based on the letters that weve received, you think we would need to find a better way to those who lost income but youd be wrong. Despite the mounting evidence that these extra payments are causing, the house passed a bill recently to extend them not just for a month or two. But for another six months. Through january 2021. Given this, i ask the Congressional Budget Office, what impact these additional payments might have if continued. Heres what they said, roughly five of every six recipients would receive benefits that exceeded the weekly amounts they could expect to earn from work during those six months. Employment continuing to, quote, employment would probably be lower in the second half of 20 than it would be in if the increase was not extended. In the calendar year 2021, employment would be lower than it would be without extension. That doesnt sound like a recipe for economic growth. Especially given last weeks jobs report which will shows people are returning to their job and that millions more expect to return soon. I know everyone is focused on these extra 600 checks, but let me remind everyone of the other c. A. R. E. S. Act policies that continue past july. First, the c. A. R. E. S. Act allows those out of work as a direct result of covid19 to get ui benefits through december. This includes people who are infected or caring for someone in infected. Those who cant go to work because the workplace is closed due to covid19. And those who rely on day care thats not available as a result of the pandemic. Second, individuals get an additional 13 weeks of unemployment if theyre still unemployed after state benefits run out. And in states where Unemployment Rates remain high, further weeks of benefits will also be available. And most importantly, the c. A. R. E. S. Act provides funding for what is called work share programs. Under these programs instead of laying out employees, business with reduced hours can pay employees a partial ui check to offset lost income. States can also use it to bring back workers on a parttime basis if they cant fully reopen for a while. And dont forget, ui is the only game in town here or its not the only game in town. The c. A. R. E. S. Act includes many policies to help those affected by the pandemic. Including the Employee Retention tax credit. The Paycheck Protection Program, direct payments to individuals and other policies designed to help businesses reopen and people to return to work. The ui system will continue to play a very Important Role in addressing the impacts of the pandemic. However, our efforts must be coordinated to help workers and businesses in a way that is most productive. I look forward to hearing from our Witnesses Today to learn whats worked. What hasnt. And discuss how we can make sure our efforts in congress can best support a strong economic recovery at the same time were trying to help people who are hurting. Now, i call on Ranking Member wyden, thank you for being here. Thank you, mr. Chairman. And thank you, mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing. There is lots to discuss today. And id like to start with fridays jobs report. The president celebrated like it was the greatest victory in america since the end of world war ii. And i want to start by trying to give this a little bit of perspective. Speaking conservatively, more than 20 million americans are still out of work today. And my guess is, theyre not doing a whole lot of celebrating. If youre among the many people who dont know how theyre going to pay rent or put food on the table this month. Watching the president celebrate in the midst of this jobs crisis is yet another sign that donald trump just doesnt understand what its like for people born without a real estate portfolio. First, i want to walk through how the senate got here, starting in march. The pandemic hit, the economy went into lockdown. And unemployment shot into the stratosphere. So when the c. A. R. E. S. Act negotiations began, democrats made our bottom line an expansion to Unemployment Benefits that would bring more workers into the system and fully replace peoples lost wages. Throughout the negotiations, and they went on for days, secretary scalia said that couldnt be done because the states run Unemployment Programs on bronzeage technology that cannot crunch the numbers for individual workers. Senate democrats said that doing nothing is just unacceptable. When you have this hurt from sea to shining sea. When secretary scalia failed to offer a plan to get benefits out in a timely way, democrats proposed a slap sum solution. 600 per week, across the board, on top of traditional benefits, adding up the full wage replacement for the typical worker. So, lets fast forward now to this afternoon. The pandemic is still killing thousands of americans each week. The nearly 2 million new unemployment claims filed last week tripled the highest number of claims made in any week during the Great Recession. It is a National Scandal that africanamericans are not only dying of covid19 at much higher rates, theyre also suffering vastly more economic pain than virtually anybody else. Black unemployment is disproportionately high. And because black people have systematically been excluded from opportunity and wealth in america, its a lot less likely that they have the Financial Resources to weather the storm. For the president to say the recovery has arrived. And everything is turning into sunshine is just going to perpetuate the economic injustice. The bottom line is the crisis is going to go on a lot longer. If the Trump Administration and Senate Republicans start yanking out these key pillars of economic support like super charged Unemployment Benefits, much of which go to the lowest paid folks in the work force, main street businesses nationwide, so many of them hang on by a thread. Workers could lose their homes and fall through the cracks if the senate is not in their corner. So like the chairman, i want to respond to a few arguments that ive heard coming from the otherwise, arguments against super charged Unemployment Benefits. First is the idea that americans who have lost their jobs in the pandemic are just plenty happy to sit around instead of going back to work. In my view, that is dead wrong, and its an insult to american workers. Its also a misunderstanding of how the system functions. Ive been talking to out of work oregonians throughout this crisis, and what i hear overwhelmingly is they want to work. They want to work. They want to get back to their jobs. They believe deeply in the dignity of work. They want to earn their pay, support their families, and return to their lives, lives they had before this pandemic, and most importantly they know that the path to getting ahead in america is moving up the economic ladder rather than being on unemployment. Second, members of this committee have said its somehow unhealthy for people to get Unemployment Benefits during the crisis. I sure think this is out of touch with the realities people are facing in this crisis. These benefits are saving millions of jobless people from hunger and homelessness in the middle of a pandemic forcing people back into a contagious workplace also further spreads the virus that has killed 110,000 americans and turned Nursing Homes nationwide into scenes of tragedy. Third, ive heard talk among republican senators of cutting the expanded benefits, possibly just saying lets cut them in half, so i want colleagues to really get this one straight. Between the cares act and fed lending programs, big corporations are getting trillions of dollars in support to weather this crisis, and now Senate Republicans are saying, well, were just going to cut what the little guy gets maybe in half . The systems already rigged to favor the powerful and the wealthy. Congress sure shouldnt stack the deck any longer. Our Unemployment Insurance system created in the 1930s, should have been modernized long ago to cover the gig worker, the selfemployed, the freelancer. Long ago benefits should have been tied to Economic Conditions on the ground. I also believe congress should examine whether a federal approach for administering Unemployment Benefits could do a better job than the quilt of 50 different state systems operating today. Nobody predicted the volume of crisis the volume of claims were seeing, but whether its due to neglect or political sabotage, too many of these state systems are failing the people who are desperate for help. Im going to close with one final thought. American workers are not to blame for the jobs crisis that the country faces today. By now, everybody has seen images of cars stacked up for miles at Food Bank Distribution centers around the country. I gave out food just recently at one of them. Colleagues, these are modern day bread lines with so many people out of work, americas on the precipice of an eviction tsunami, particularly in the black community. Super charging Unemployment Benefits, fully replacing peoples lost wages, bringing gig workers and freelancers into the system was the right thing to do, and i know thats not just the opinion of democrats who got it done because right now the president absurdly is taking credit for the expansion in Misleading Campaign ads on the air waves right now. It is also a fact that every republican member of this committee voted to strip the expanded benefits and slow down their distribution. And at least a few turned around and then sent out press releases touting the expansion that they voted against. Colleagues, that is some seri s serious the senate has a choice. Its about fairness for africanamerican s who are disproportionately suffering. Its about fairness for the blue Collar Worker who looks around and sees a whole bunch of support going to multinational corporations than to hard hit people like them who have done nothing wrong. The extension of super charged Unemployment Benefits, and to do it now. I look forward to our witnesses, and again, i want to thank you for scheduling the hearing. Thank you, senator wyden. Our first panel is one person. Our secretary of labor, so ill give a short introduction. Secretary Eugene Scalia of was sworn in as secretary of labor september 27th, last year. He has served in a number of high level positions in and out of government prior to his appointment. He has served as solicitor of labor, the departments top legal officer, also as a special assistant to the attorney general and as a partner at a law firm. The Labor Department plays a very central role in overseeing the new federal programs intended to help workers and their families respond to the virus pandemic. Secretary scalia, please proceed. Chairman grassley, Ranking Member wyden and members of the committee, thank you for the invitation to testify today. Last friday, the Labor Department issued a very encouraging jobs report. 2. 5 million jobs were created in may versus expectations that we would lose 7. 5 million jobs. The Unemployment Rate dropped nearly a point and a half instead of rising five points as projected. Moreover, the survey period for that report ended in midmay. Since then, many, many more americans have returned to work. Our economy has turned the corner against the coronavirus. All of us welcome that news, and we celebrate it Ranking Member wyden not because we think the job is done but because we know the situation has begun to improve more robustly and earlier than had been expected. But were also mindful that millions of americans remain out of work. In midmay, unemployment was still at 13. 3 . Fortunately, in march, President Trump and the congress acted swiftly to address the Economic Hardship of the virus. The cares act, as weve heard, provided an additional 600 a week in Unemployment Benefits on top of those provided by the states. By contrast, in a socalled Great Recession of 2008, 2009, the additional federal payment was 25. The act also extended these benefits to independent contractors and the selfemployed who ordinarily do not receive unemployment, and in the familys first Coronavirus Response act, President Trump and congress made a billion dollars available to states to help them administer their Unemployment Insurance programs. Ranking member wyden thank you for your letter last week acknowledging that after these laws were passed, the Labor Department, quote, took important steps to ensure these benefits were made available to workers as expeditiously as possible, end quote. We dispersed the billion dollars of administrative funding within a day or two of each state certifying it had met the criteria set by congress. This enabled states to hire more staff and improve technology. We swiftly provided state guidelines on implementing the cares act, less than ten days after cares was enacted, we had issued the essential guidance states needed to administer the programs. The first state began making cares payments april 4th. Weve been in constant communication with the states including 14 different webinars for state personnel. I personally participated in two large briefings for state Unemployment Insurance directors and have spoken with more than 20 governors still, we know that too Many Americans have waited too long to receive Unemployment Benefits. State unemployment offices were overwhelmed. Before this year the highest number of unemployment claims filed in a week was 695,000. This spring in two weeks in a row, we had weekly filings nearly ten times that previous record high. We had 6. 6 million two weeks in a row. On top of that, many states have antiquated Computer Systems as much as 40 years old. I spoke with one governor who had to bring in Computer Programmers from latvia. Members of this committee will recall when cares was being written that i cautioned about the age of these state systems and urged the senate to use a different means, and i did identify different means, to play unemployment during the crisis. Fortunately, unemployment claims are now declining. States have hired more staff. Theyve made enhancements to their Computer Systems. Theyre reducing the backlogs of claims, and americans are returning to work. Going forward, our department has these goals, first, continuing to help states make prompt unemployment payments to workers entitled to them. Second, ensuring program integrity. We are working with our Inspector General, other federal agencies and the states to address fraud and the criminals preying on the system. Third, well work with states to help americans transition back to the job safely. The 600 benefit was an extraordinary measure to help americans who were shut out of the workplace in a closing economy. As the economy reopens, i appreciate that members of this committee do not want the cares benefit to be deterrent to resuming work. The best thing for workers is work, not unemployment. That you thi thank you, again, for this hearing on this important sumgt, a subject and i look forward to your questions today. We will have fiveminute rounds for questions. Ill start and then senator wyden, and ill go down the list, follow the usual course we do for our hearings according to first come, first serve unless youre at the table when the gavel falls. Mr. Secretary, based on our witness today, all of our Witnesses Today and a request sent by democrats to the department of labor Inspector General yesterday it seems that my democratic colleagues plan to highlight problems florida has had in distributing ui benefits but as i remember when the cares act was being developed, you warned states would have a difficult time dealing with the unprecedented surge in application for benefits, let alone implanting many new programs on top of that. Many of us warned state ui systems would have major problems, and unfortunately were right, but its not just florida. One other state where i heard the state of oregon a person running the program resigned because of troubles with the program. That would be another state plagued with issues. Ill ask you if thats correct, but before you answer that, my main question is what is your department doing to help put states on better footing Going Forward . Well, mr. Chairman, as i mentioned, there was just entirely unprecedented surge in claims during the months of march and particularly april. Weve never seen anything like it in our history, and it came at a time when unemployment had been so low that the unemployment offices were shortly staffed. Thatt that added to the challenge together with the technology. We began working with the states even before cares was passed. In february, we were starting to talk to states about ways that they could be using their unemployment systems to help get benefits out to people. When cares was enacted, we moved very quickly in a variety of ways. Weve issued 19 different guidance documents to make the requirements clear. We had the essential guidance out to the states within ten days of enactment. We, as i mentioned, have had a number of webinars. Weve been in essentially Constant Contact with the states. Weve also put them in touch with something called the u. S. Digital service, which is a tech group within the executive office of the president. It ordinarily helps federal agencies with Technology Problems but we made that resource available to the states as well as our own chief Information Officer. We provided them flexibilities to increase staffing as well, and we also moved as quickly as we could to get the funding out, that billion dollars, within a day or twof g of getting the information from the states that theyd satisfied the criteria, we got the money out. Its been a subject of great focus, but we know there is still work to be done. I have one last question at this point. Weve seen in recent weeks that states are reopening businesses. People are adapting to new guidelines about social distancing and mask wearing, and these changes are allowing Economic Activity to resume in many different ways. You run an agency that gathers a variety of data points on jobs, and the economy. What are some of the things that youre seeing in the data and try to tell us good signs and troubling signs. Well, mr. Chairman, the most troubling sign, of course, has just been how Many Americans have had to file for unemployment. Its much more than we saw, for example, in the socalled Great Recession of 2008, 2009. We recognized the hardship thats men for those people and for their families. Thats been the most troubling thing. The good news we saw friday, 2. 5 million jobs created at a time when we thought we had lost 7. 5 million. Thats what the experts were forecasting, a 10 million job swing, unemployment going down when people thought it was going to be going up, and mr. Chairman, that was that was nearly a month ago because, as you know, that survey was taken in midmay. We know that since then more states have reopenedme. People have been returning to work across the country. When i look at fridays jobs report, i see very good news, for example, many in retail went back to work. Many went back to work in leisure and hospitality. But i see other areas where people have not yet gone back to work, but we can be confident they will. One is health care. We lost about 1. 4 Million Health care jobs, i believe, in april. We only put about 300,000 back in may. Those jobs will come back, so there still is important work to be done, but we are making progress and programs in the cares act are helping. Thank you, mr. Secretary. Now senator white. Mr. Chairman, thank you. Its going to be a long day, and ill just say, mr. Chairman and secretary scalia, ive been a little puzzled to hear your simultaneous claims that workers are going back to work and the 600 a week benefit is deterring them from returning. Both these claims cant be correct in my view, and were going to want to examine it. Let me start this way, secretary scalia, reopening the economy when it is safe is a good for everybody situation. The experts tell us, though, that if People Choose to go back to work before it is safe, the pandemic will last longer, more people will die, and the economy will suffer. Now, i believe that most employers want to do the right thing and keep their workers safe, but they cant do it if they dont get clear guidance on what makes a safe workplace in the covid era. The department of labor has failed completely on this issue. The law is clear that a person cannot be kicked off of unemployment if they turn down a job because of unsuitable conditions or a health or a safety risk. Enforcing these rules is crucial during a pandemic. On may 19th, along with more than 20 senators, i sent you a letter about this issue. I have yet to receive a response. So mr. Secretary, lets see if we can get this off to a decent start. Will you commit here and now that the department of labor will provide safety first guidance in writing to ensure that nobody loses their Unemployment Insurance benefits because of risks to their health or safety . Thats a yes or no question. Ranking member wyden, you mentioned clear guidance. Thats actually been one of the principle focuses of the Labor Department. When it comes to health and safety through the workplace through osha, we have been putting extensive guidance. My time is short, mr. Secretary. A yes or no answer with the question with respect to the guidance that more than 20 senators asked you about. As i was saying, weve put out approximately 20 guidance documents on how to make the workplace safe so that workers can return. Thats been an area of great focus, that clear guidance is what were aiming to do. In terms of the return to work that you ask for, that is to a large extent a function of state law. We dont want workers coming back to unsafe workplaces. Thats why weve made such a priority of explaining for them and employers whats needed to make them safe. However, if it is safe, the workers should come back. We want them to come back, and if they feel its unsafe, it needs to be something thats rooted in the facts, not just generalized fear. Thats a topic generally covered by state law, and the states have we asked you about a federal matter, and nobody ought to be forced to choose between their health and their income, and i believe states, employers, and workers deserve some clear safety first guidance on the issue more than 20 senators asked you about, and if youre okay with taking away, you know, a lifeline to send people back to unsafe jobs in the middle of a pandemic, i think thats wrong, and i think its unhumane. Now, a couple of other issues because time is short. Do states have the capacity right now to implement 100 wage replacement on an individual basis . As you know, we talked at length about this during the negotiations. You said they didnt have it, so now were talking about what may have changed, so we need to know do states have the capacity now to implement 100 wage replacement on an individual basis. Two points in response, Ranking Member wyden, first, just to be clear, we have never suggested that workers should sacrifice for returning to work. We oppose them being put to that choice as well. Second, as to the state systems, i would welcome the opportunity to talk to you about this further. You and i have had two or three, i think, really from my perspective secretary, we need an answer on the record today because that was one of the big issues in the days and days of negotiations we had. I made it clear that what i wanted was 100 wage replacement. And senator, as i was saying, weve had some valuable conversations from my perspective, i hope from yours, and i would look forward to the opportunity to discuss this with you further. I think actually, the states have made some progress and are in a different place they were than before. But can they do it . Can they actually do wage replacement on an individual basis now . That was why we had to go to this rough justice kind of approach, and i think youre still telling me that they dont have the capacity to implement 100 wage replacement on an individual basis today, and so that is still going to be a major issue. Respectfully, sir, i did not say that. I said we should talk about it. I asked you whether they had the capacity to do it, and you w wouldnt answer the question. Ill look forward to getting anything else youd lake to offer. So how many people are out of work today without any benefits . That data is very hard to track for a couple of different reasons, Ranking Member wyden. As you know, the unemployment data we put out last week, for example, was already from three to four weeks ago, so we dont have an exact fix on the number of people. Well, whats a ballpark . Youre the secretary of labor. Youre the guy in charge, how many people are out of work without any benefits . And if i could finish, the second piece of data we dont have is a precise count now of who has received the benefits. We receive weekly reports from the state on that, but again, those are two very fluid pieces of data. I would simply be guessing if i tried to tell you as we sit here today compared to where we were three to four weeks ago and the jobs report we put out and then with state numbers that, again, are not current either. Id just be guessing if i gave you a number. What we do know is that americans are returning to work in large numbers. Thats very good news. But we know what we know let me tell you what we know for sure we know the backlogs remain that will need to be addressed. Mr. Secretary, what we know for sure is that more than 20 Million People are out of work now, and we know that about 2, 2. 5 went back, and those 20 Million People are disproportionately found in those sectors where the wages are really modest, and i gather if you and others have your way, a loft those folks are going to face evictions and theyre going to face evictions in a matter of weeks, and we are going to fight for Something Else, which is to make Unemployment Benefits tied to Economic Conditions. That relates to a marketplace. Thats something that i think we could be working on together. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Senator cornyn. Secretary scalia, thank you for being here. I thought we were unified as a congress and as all americans to try to deal with this pandemic both on a Public Health and a economic front, but apparently thats not consistently the case. Sometimes our bad habits come back. We descend into partisan accusations and question peoples good motives, but i would like to id like to ask you just to remember with me what we did in the cares act, which included this enhancement for Unemployment Insurance. We were worried that not only were we in the middle of a pandemic, but that people through no fault of their own as a result of mitigation efforts would not get any money, any pay, and so we decided to make a direct payment to them through the Treasury Department direct deposit. The second front was to make sure that we expanded and extended Unemployment Insurance benefits that would be what i would consider sort of the second tier of support for individuals who through no fault of their own found themselves out of work. The third thing we did was pass the Paycheck Protection Program, which now as weve appropriated 670 billion to incentivize employers to maintain their payroll, their employees on payroll. And then the next thing we did is through the Federal Reserve to appropriate money that they could then lend according to Treasury Department rules under their main Street Lending facility. This was an historic response to an unprecedented situation, and i know the Ranking Member disagrees about the 600 enhancement, but there was an amendment that was voted on in the United States senate. People worried about what you pointed out, not wanting to disincentivi disincentivize people from seeking work because they got paid more not to work. I agree with that concern. We should never pay people not to, who to work. We should try to help them get back to work. But as i recall the vote on the cares act was unanimous in the United States senate, so trying to suggest that we did not support assistance through the Unemployment Insurance system to workers is false. So i just want to make one comment, too, about the texas work force commission. In my state thats the folks who administer the Unemployment Insurance assistance. They experience the kind of thi things that you described earlier, a crush of applications, and theyve done the best they could, and theyve added personnel and resources in order to try to be more responsive, but i wonder if our goal is to try to fight this virus and then also at the same time to fight the economic fallout associated with it, do you think there are better ways that incentivizing people not to work by paying them more not to work than to work . Are there better ways in your opinion to help people get back in the work force . Well, senator cornyn, first, the cares act really was, as you say, an extraordinary piece of bipartisan virtually unanimous legislation. The programs that youve described, i think, are part of the reason that workers are able to go back to work now. They were kept in contact with their employers up through the Paycheck Protection Program. They were given Financial Support through the Unemployment Insurance benefit, which was a very good benefit for a closing economy, savings right now are at nearly all time highs. Thats in part because people have been kept this their homes but its also because of the benefits that were made available through the Treasury Department and through the Unemployment Insurance program. Going forward, i think the single best thing for bringing workers, there needs to be a thriving business. The president had delivered us an extraordinarily thriving economy with record low unemployment, with wages that were rising and rising more quickly for lower wage workers until the virus struck. So i think we keep those policies in mind as we look to bring people back to work to keep our economic base strong, and i know that theres also been interest, i see senator portman eyeing me intently. Theres also been interest in possibly providing a bonus that might further incentivize people to come back to work. Thats Something Else thats been discussed as another way to get people back to work. Which, again, is always our first preference over unemployment when we can provide it. Now by stabenou, thank you vy much chairman and secretary scalia ya scalia, i do want to stress at the beginning, mr. Chairman that certainly the pandemic is not over. The crisis for families that challenge us for Small Businesses certainly arent over, and this, i hope, is going to mean that were going to have additional action on the floor of the United States senate to be able to address the continuing needs of americans. I also want to add to what Ranking Member wyden said about the discrepancy on the one hand. Mr. Secretary, youre saying that so many people are going back to work. Great people going back to work. We certainly all want people to go back to work and people in businesses to reopen, but at the same time saying people going back to work, but 600 extra help to workers and families to survive the crisis is stopping people from going back to work. I think its pretty tough to argue both sides of that. The reality is, i can tell you from michigan, that the provisions in the Pandemic Unemployment Assistance Program and the additional 600 in weekly benefits have really been a lifeline for workers and families and employers in michigan, and its helping people put food on the table and meet basic needs. Those arent just words. Thats a reality for folks. I also wanted to say that the increase in weekly unemployment benefit, has helped employers in our state that have signed up for work share, and i want ospeo to speak about that and get your reaction to that. In michigan, there are signs up for work share can reopen at their own pace, reducing employee hours by as little as 10 or up to 60 , the employer pays part of the wage, as you know. The unemployment system pays the other part of it, including the 600, and its created a real incentive for people to go back to work. People want to work. People in michigan work hard. They want to go back to work. But there needs to be a bridge, a way to be able to do this, and work share has allowed our employers to retain their talent, save money on salary costs as they are reopening and ensure that employees have a livable wage, a livable wage. And thats over 1,400 businesses so far in michigan using work share as well as over 70,000 jobs. So mr. Secretary, i wonder instead of debating whether or not we should allow the cares act to have strong unemployment provisio provisions or whether or not they should expire, i hope we would be talking about work share. Its 25 states now, and it needs to be expanded. So could you speak about how we could further lower the barriers so more states can develop their own work share programs and what you are doing to promote that . Thank you, senator. First, i agree that although fridays jobs report was exceptionally good news that the economic challenges that americans facing as a result of the coronavirus are not over. Our job at the Labor Department to help the states make sure people get Unemployment Benefits is not over, nor is our job to work with the states to help people return to work, so we very much appreciate that, but that said, that report is one to be celebrated for what it tells us about how robustly and how early our economy began reopening in may. The 600 benefit, as i said, was an important thing that this committee, congress and the president did to help workers during a closing economy and i actually agree there are a number of reasons that workers should prefer to be back at work, that and in the length of time that i have, could you speak to work share and whether or not you are reaching out to businesses to let them know about this as an important way to be able to bring people back to work while maintaining a livable wage for workers . Is that something youve been focused on . It is something that weve looked at, senator, ordinarily, the concept behind work share is its a way of helping a company that might have to have layoffs keep people on a parttime basis. But we do agree it can be a way of bringing people back, albeit on a parttime basis. It might work well in a restaurant, for example, that cant go to 100 capacity. We have been speaking to the states about doing that and about working with them to help set up those programs, but just to finish on the 600 benefit because i want to be clear, it was an important thing to do to help workers back in march. What were talking about now is congress set to expire in july, and my point is simply that recognizes well be in a very different place in july where the opportunity for people to return to work will be far greater. If i might, one other thing i want to ask, and that relates to safety in the workplace. People want to go back to work. They have a right to know their workplace will be safe and, in fact, if there is a concern from workers that their workplace is not safe, they should not have to return until it is, and im very concerned that the guidelines youve talked about are voluntary guidelines. Theyre not enforced. Theyre not requirements of the cdc or osha to make sure that workplaces are safe. Theres not strong enforcement, and so what weve seen over and over again are people in workplaces getting covid19, being infected. Health care workers, over 38,500 Health Care Workers that have been infected, 358 and more dead as a result of that. We know that in meat picturing plants we have had over 3,000 people test positive, and workers that have died because theyre not requirements to keep people safe in thewo workplace. People want two things, they want to know theyll be paid for their work a livable wage, and they want to know its safe. I very much need you to tell us that you will enforce Safety Standards for workers in this country as they go back to work. Absolutely we will. We have put out extensive guidance to help workers and employers understand their rights and obligations, but we also have rules and statutory authorities to enforce. We are conducting investigations, and we are responding to whistleblower complaints to keep workers safe on the job. Okay. But i thank you. Senator thune, before senator thune starts, im going to ask senator wyden when thunes done will you call on senator menendez by tv, im going to step out just a moment. Thank you, secretary scalia for taking the time to be here today. This is important oversight. This is what weve talked about hearing from those who are implementing the many bills that we passed, whats working, whats not working, how we can improve, what we can do better, and i think that will shape and inform and guide our decisions about future action that Congress Might take. On the forefront of the coronavirus pandemic, we have passed now, four pieces of legislation. If you count last week, five, to address the coronavirus medical emergency and the economic fallout associated with the pandemic. These bills are providing assistance to the American People through Economic Impact payments, student loan deferm t defermen deferments, other programs and tax incentives to help businesses keep people employed. I think that has been working. Obviously theres no we cant start spiking the ball yet, but the numbers that we saw last week were certainly encouraging, and i think evidence that some of these programs, particularly the Paycheck Protection Program has had the desired effect, keeping businesses functioning and keeping workers employed. Secretary, its already been noted that as businesses begin reopening their doors that many are struggling to rehire furloughed workers due to the disincentive created by the 600 per week supplemental payment, though individuals are supposed to be ineligible if they turn down an opportunity to return to work. What are some of the challenges you see the states facing, after refusing an offer to return to work . Well, senator, if i could say, first of all, i think there are many reasons that workers will want to go back to work. I think all things equal, people like being at work, especially perhaps after having been at home for two to three months. So i think americans are excited to get back to work, but as anybody who has studied Unemployment Insurance policy programs knows, at the margins, there is always a certain population that particularly if theres an opportunity to have an equal or greater income not working, there is a certain number of people that will choose not working, and thats a challenge that is recognized to exist, and particularly as we look toward a reopening economy after the expiration of the current benefit in july, its something that needs to be kept in mind. We have been reinforcing with the states, senator, from very early on their obligation to ensure that people who are on unemployment certify that work no longer is available, to coordinate with employers that are calling people back to work. This is an unusual circumstance where weve got hundreds of employers at a time in a state bringing workers back. So thats an opportunity for the state Unemployment Insurance agencies to take note that the jobs are returning and the workers can return, too. Wed like them to keep an eye on that. Then as ive mentioned, weve been spending a lot of time including working with our Inspector General to address the possibility of fraud in the Unemployment Insurance system, employers or supposed employers engage in it, third parties engage in it and sometimes workers do too. Thats something weve been asking the state to look at as well. Thank you. Unemployment offices in states across the nation continue to be overwhelmed with claims, even as americans begin returning to work. And in addition, states unemployment systems are dated. These two factors will unlikely make any additional changes to Unemployment Programs potentially overly burdensome on state unemployment agencies. So could you explain a little bit about what worked after passage of the familys first Coronavirus Response act and the cares act in terms of the department of labor helping states adapt to some of the system changes that are required by these two laws. Sure, ficrup provided us a billion dollars to give to states to help with Unemployment Insurance administration and they were able to use that money for staffing and also for technology enhancements. I made it a priority at the department to disburse those funds absolutely as quickly as we could, and i think that we succeeded in doing that, and that did help. The flexibility they had to bring in staff was certainly helpful to them. They were in a period where unemployment had been so low, there wasnt a need for much staff. They needed to bring people in quickly, train them. Over time they were able to do that. And then as i mentioned, there were Technology Problems. We found that there was a problem with a Computer Program we run called icon, which the states use. We fixed that over a weekend within three or four days of learning of the problem. We were able to remedy that, and that at least helped the states deal with one of the technological hurdles they faced. As i mentioned we also put them in touch with our chief Information Officer and with something called the u. S. Digital service to help them with their technology as well. Mr. Chairman, my time expired, id like to submit for the record a question dealing with the gig economy and gig economy workers and how theyve been dealing with this. Thank you. Okay. Your questions will be received now, senator menendez, by tv or whatever you virtual or whatever you call it. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Secretary, i share some of the concerns of the Ranking Member raised, senator wyden. I think its fair to say if you have an amendment that strips the 600 and every republican votes for it, that was your intention. You didnt want the 600 to be part of the Unemployment Compensation, but what im concerned about is that it seems to me that these rosy expectations that everybody will be able to go back to work with just not going to be realized by august 1st. I live in a state that has the second largest number of covid19 deaths and infections. It is going through a staged reopening. That means that many businesses still wont be open by then or they will be opened with less capacity by then, which means that they will require less workers by then, and so if thats a reality, and weve seen where there has been a premature opening in states, that, in fact, we ended up with higher Covid Infection rates as a result of the premature opening. So when, you know, we have a national Unemployment Rate of 13. 3 , when Unemployment Rates among africanamericans is even higher, 16. 8 . When unemployment among latinos is higher than that, 17. 6 , what is the administrations plan for august 1st . Senator menendez, thank you for the question. I think part of what wed like to do is watch how things develop over the weeks ahead. One of the really striking things about the nations experience with coronavirus has been how swiftly things change, and in the early weeks unfortunately that was a series of swift changes for the worse as the Health Problems increased greatly and, of course, as we very suddenly stopped our with all due respect, secretary, im looking at we know theres going to be a cliff on august 1st. Why should we wait to address the cliff after august 1st than before . Theres no question that unemployment is still going to be very high on august 1st no matter how well we might desire, you know, it to be different, and so for all those workers who either cannot get back to work because their phased reopening has not opened their former place of employment or the phased reopening has only allowed for argument sake 50 of the employees to come back, or there is still a risk, a reasonable risk, a serious risk of contraction of the infection, what are we going to do august 1st . As i was saying, things have changed quickly for the worse for a period of time. Now were saying things have the capacity to change quickly for the better. We know where the economy was in midmay. Well know more when our next jobs report comes out in early july about the state of the economy. I think based partly on that, we can make an assessment of what measures, if any, could be necessary after july 31st. I recognize that as you say, we will not get back to the extraordinary economy that President Trump brought us of 3. 5 unemployment. We wont get back there in early fall, but we will know let me turn to a different question, i dont want to talk about of the let me reclaim my time, mr. Secretary. Im not going to let you filibuster my time. We are in the phases of reopening. How many coronavirusrelated complaints has osha received . My understanding its 20,000, is that correct . We have received several thousand. I dont have the exact current number. How many im sorry, senator, im just trying to complete my answers. How many coronavirus citations have been issued by osha . Weve issued one citation to date, i would add a six months limitations period. Its been less than six months since the virus came here. We have a number of cases that we are investigating, and if we find violations, we will certainly not hesitate to bring a case. This is something ive talked it seems to me number of talked to our head of osha a number of times. It seems instead of guidance, you should be issuing Emergency Temporary Standards that are very clear under osha and that would make a clear example of what is acceptable to return to work safely and what is not acceptable and those who are forced to return to work in a situation that is unacceptable will have a valid claim. One out of 5,000 is unbelievable. Senator toomey by tv. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Secretary, thanks for joining us today. I just i just want to be clear about something. According to the university of chicago, about 68 of people who are unemployed today make more money being unemployed than they do being employed. Is this your view that thats a disincentive to going back to work . Thank you for the question, senator toomey, and i unfortunately wasnt able to complete my answer to senator menendez. That can function as a disincentive. I would point particularly to the study that the chairman received from the Congressional Budget Office that looked at this question which projected that for the second half of the year if the 600 benefit were retained, five out of six people on unemployment would be receiving more than the wage they were likely to get from work and i dont think any people many people would design an unemployment system that operated in that way, and thats why this discussion makes sense now. And weve had unemployment before. Theres always some level of unemployment. We have never said lets make sure that people are paid more not to work than they get paid working. We hear everyone talking about how they want to get everyone back to work, but at the same time some people are advocating a system that we know discourages people from going back to work. Isnt it also true that if people affected by this disincentive dont go to work, its not only they who are not back at work, but the mere fact that theyre not at work means other people are unable to go back to work just because the economy is that much slower. Theres less business being conducted. So doesnt that have a knock on effect throughout the economy . Thats correct, senator. We want people who are not able to get to work to have the safety net of an Unemployment Program, but youre right, if people have the opportunity to return and dont, it can function as a hindrance not just to them but to the functioning of whats a very, very interconnected economy. So lets if we could focus on some great news because theres a lot of great news, actually. One is the fact that weve had quite a number of states that have been quite open for business, some for many weeks now. This is not the case that the entire country is closed down. Its in fact, theres a long list of states that began their reopening in april and early may. Isnt it true that there is no big spike of covid cases in the states that have gone a long way towards reopening . In fact, the data shows that the decline in the new cases in covid19 has continued overwh m overwhelmingly in the states. Is that your understanding . The reopening seems to be going well, senator. Its rr very encouraging. There are spots we need to keep an eye on, and we need to be safe about how we go about it. Its been very encouraging. The other thing that has been very, very encouraging is the fact that back in midapril we had a week where we produced 2. 5 million new jobs when we thought we might be shedding, 6, 7, 8, 9 million jobs. It was the exact opposite, and isnt it true that that midapril number, look, i dont have a crystal ball, but i do know that many states moved in the direction of reopening since that time, and so it stands to reason if our economy was producing 2. 5 million new jobs in a week back in midapril that its been probably producing new jobs since then. When i say new, obviously were really talking about penal gopl getting back to their old jobs. Isnt there good reason at least to be hopeful that were starting to really climb out of this and starting to create the opportunities for people to go back to earning their livelihoods . Absolutely, senator, one of the numbers that has caught my attention in both the report for the month of april and the report for the month of may is a very high percent of workers who are unemployed but believe temporary. In our report for the month of may, nearly 85 of workers who had been put out of work said this is temporary. Im going back to my job, and i regard it as one of our most Important Missions right now at the Labor Department to help make that happen and help make it happen safely. Thanks very much, thank you, mr. Chairman. Now i call on senator cardin by tv, i believe. Thank you, mr. Chairman, and mr. Secretary, thank you very much. First, let me share the concerns that have been expressed in regards to worker safety. To me thats one of the most Important Roles that you have is to make sure that workers are safe. Secondly, let me underscore what i believe is our need to act, that the job is not done, whether its Unemployment Insurance or whether its the pp program and Small Business aid or whether its the tax code itself. We know that were going to need a transition from where we are now to when our economy is fully performing. So i just urge us show a sense of urgency. Thirdly, i want to underscore the point senator stabenow said. That gives an employer an opportunity to share work so that he can keep or she can keep her work force intact during these tough times. So mr. Secretary, i would hope that you would give some personal attention as to how we can implement this provision because i do think it helps us transition back to when our economy is in full performance. I want to get your response to a question i had from the governor of maryland in regards to implementing this program. Maryland, like most states had i. T. Challenges because of trying to put the state program in with the federal program, but it was the interstate Connection Network icon that did present some original challenges, and i believe you have indicated that there were startup challenges in regards to icon, but in addition, theres been changes in guidance given by the federal government, which has required our states to change their i. D. Programs. Can you share with us how youre working with the states in the current status of icon, and the i. T. Capacity of our states in order to get timely decisionmaking . We still have in maryland a lot of people who are waiting for determinations. What is the current status of that . First, i agree with you that our job is not done in helping workers during this challenging time, and in fully restoring our economy, and i agree as well on the importance of worker safety. I think theres a difference as to means, perhaps, but it is something thats been of great, great focus at the department of labor. By the way, i have personally engaged in the work share subject and looking at ways we can encourage states to do that and have assisted in that. With respect to the icon system, which you mentioned, yes, there was a problem that came to our attention. Wei we fixed it within days. Ive had a couple of considerations wi conversations with governor hogan, who you know is also chair of the National Governors association. Hes never expressed any concern to me about changes to the guidance that we have provided. Im not aware of any changes that he might be referring to. We have put out a great deal of guidance. I suppose some of that guidance made certain points clearer than they might have been before, but i think weve largely been unswerving and clear in the guidance as weve given it, although weve provided refinements as theyve been requested. Finally, with respect to the technology, i appreciate that thats been a challenge for the states. As you heard, Ranking Member wyden say, that was something i cautioned members of this committee about when cares was written, that the state Unemployment Insurance Computer Systems are really old. They are bulky, but we have tried to help by making our chief Information Officer available, by making the u. S. Digital Service Within the executive office of the president available to states, and we do believe that states have found fixes, have found work arounds. Weve worked, for example, with florida on one, which related to a problem they were having with icon, and we also worked with new jersey on one that related to ways that certain forms were being submitted through their system. I think those systems have been problematic, but i think theyve been enhanced in the last few weeks. Can i follow up on the se Certification Requirements . Have you had concerns expressed by states that the weekly certification to make sure that the recipient is not getting benefits in more than one state has caused undue challenges to the states in implementing the program . Senator, we have had some states that have expressed interest in doing away with the Certification Requirements, and we understand the desire that theyve had to, you know, get payments out quickly, but there is a balance to be struck with respect to the integrity of these programs, and weve felt its important to retain that certification requirement as one check against the fraud, against the system that we know has occurred. There has been very substantial fraud weve learned against the Unemployment Insurance systems of the states during implementation of cares, we do need to keep that in mind as well. Senator cassidy. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Secretary, thank you for the hard work you and your department have done. One of the advantages, if you will of speaking after many other people. Republicans have been concerned that 600 a week in which people are earning more than they are paid would encourage them not to work, and that has negative effects for the person, negative effects for society. Thats known. But its been roughly a but its been roughly a republican democrat with democrats poohpoohing that to see if there can be an analysis of that. I found a quote from professor summers who was obamas director of something or other. Everybody knows who he is. Government assistance programs contribute to longterm unemployment by providing an incentive not to work. Each unemployed person has a reservation wage, the minimum wage which he or she insists on getting before accepting a job. Unemployment insurance and other social assistance programs increase that wage causing an unemployed person to remain unemployed later. Again, Larry Summers who is esteemed, from harvard, with obama, et cetera. Let me ask you, sir, what would be if the 600 week pandemic payment is extended through the year, what must a business offer to someone on unemployment to convince them to return to work and is this a wage that businesses would be able to match or bear if theyre a Small Business . Thank you for the question on this topic which obviously is of great interest to members of the committee. I would like to be clear again that the 600 benefit that was provided in the cares act was one of the important things done in that act. It was the right thing to do, at that time, in a closing economy, and im mindful of the concerns and i heard members express them at the time that that might result some people turning down work. We made it a priority working with the states to focus on the existing protections in the law to make sure that doesnt happen. However, much of the discussion that i think weve having now is looking ahead, as you question does, not to what we put in place, but what if anything will be done when the 600 benefit expires on the deadline that the congress agreed to set of late july. I have not read the piece, obviously, hes a highly respected its an older piece. I dont think hes saying it right now. Maybe hes recanted. But youre correct. At the margins, for some number of employees, im not talking about the millions of hardworking americans who would rather be at work. But for some number of employees, youll have to set that wage higher do you have a sense of what that would be . I dont have a sense of what it would be, but it would be probably appreciatably above 100 of what the i dont think anybody is criticizing anybody of making a rational decision. If i make more money not working, im not going to work. We know that working is good for people, statistically. Im not asking you to do that. Some folks have said, wait a second, is there a way to gradually scale it down so we provide support but we dont we encourage people to return back to the workforce, good for the family, good for the individual, good for society, but im struck with what youve said about the inadequacy of state information systems. Are state unemployment systems cable of a system that would scale down the amount of benefits received from month to month . I believe that the states have made progress in their systems from where we were in march. And i was explaining to Ranking Member widen, this is something that i would be interested in exploring further with the committee. I think there may be a greater capacity now than there was in march for the systems to scale or for the Treasury Department, for example, to assist in that. That was an approach that we had raised at the time that cares was being considered, there might be a way for the Treasury Department to function. Theres also been discussion of perhaps having a smaller benefit, not 600, perhaps 250. Ive heard that could you scale it down . Let me move on to my last question. Im almost out of time. Theres been a lot of layoffs. The job numbers were great. We continue to have people laid off. And many of those are in the education system. Now, when you go back, there will be smaller classrooms with more assistants in order to help the children maintain social distancing, et cetera. Senator menendez and i put together a smart act which would help the state and local governments rehire these employees. Do you know how many of these 1 million or so state and local employees in education who have lost their job are on temporary furlough or are they expected to be rehired or let go entirely . Do you have any sense of that . I dont have those figures. I could get them for you. Government jobs were the really were the one category with substantial losses in may. 600,000 jobs. And many of those jobs were in k12 education and in college. So i could try to get more detailed data, but i know that many of the jobs lost in may were in that sector, but im confident that those are jobs that will come back as schools reopen. I yield back, thank you. Senator brown by tv. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Were all learning the technology here. Thank you so much. Thank you for being here. Ranking member widen and i along with 22 of our colleagues sent you a letter dated may 14th outlining concerns about benefits being delayed in so many of our states. I would point out in spite of all of my republican colleagues on this committee talking about how they like that benefit now, they all the only amendment that senator mcconnell allowed on the floor was to wipe away the unemployment benefit, that 600. They can take credit for doing it and now theyre against it. Anyway, we outlined we saw too many states, too many people were not getting the benefits. They were delayed. Our letter asks you to undertake a survey of state Unemployment Programs so we can fix the problems that caused delays. Would you commit to conducting that survey that 24 members of the senate asked for and responding in a timely fashion . Senator brown, thank you for that letter. I believe it gave us a midjuly return date. It had asked for certain information within 60 days. Because i dont have the letter in front of me, im hesitant to commit that we will provide every piece of detailed information that was sought. We certainly will respond to that letter and i okay. Thank you. I think that you and i share and all of us share an interest in making sure that we can fix this system which has had a workout that nobody expected it to have, but also a ui system that is outdated. Thank you for that. Second question, the national Unemployment Rate is over 13 . The Unemployment Rate for latixo workers is 17 and 18 for black workers. If we phase out the c. A. R. E. S. Act, do you expect black and Brown Workers to be disproportionally affected by that policy decision, yes or no . Senator brown, i do agree with you on the state Unemployment Insurance systems. As i said, i think there have been significant progress made. As we look back at Lessons Learned and things that we might want to fix Going Forward, i think thats an area that is worth further consideration, how they can be enhanced. In terms of the job prospects for africanamericans, hispanic americans Going Forward, that will depend in part on different parts of the companies countries reopening schedule, different sectors of the economy. What we do know is the economy that we had before which President Trump was instrument im going to interrupt you. I want the floor back. Mr. Secretary weve heard the that is the objective once again. Would you gavel the witness, please. We heard the Trump Commercial over and over, how great the economy was even though very strong. Even in the great growth of the trump economy which was not nearly as good as the secretary likes to keep saying. Its clear that brown and black workers will be disproportionately affected. That was a simple yes or no and i got a commercial for the president s reelection. Some have argued that the 600 is going to keep workers from going back to work. Its a clear take away here, the companies that they worked for didnt pay them enough to work with. If we raised the federal minimum wage to 15, would you expect the number of workers who receive more in ui than they did in their paychecks to decrease, is that a yes or no . Will that make more workers make more on the job than theyre getting in ui . Not necessarily. The payment right now with the 600 plusup averages between 50 and 55,000 a year on Unemployment Insurance. Thats substantially more than is made on unemployment. If i could finish. In fact, the 600 plusup alone is more than the minimum wage on an analyzed basis but you have an admission to the state payment. I dont think thats a helpful comparison. I can see how what a good lawyer you were as a corporate lawyer. The fact is, its not 55. Its 39 weeks is the maximum. But lets put that aside. I wanted to say i was analyzing the benefit. Senator menendez, what he how outrageous it was, workers were terrified they were going to get coronavirus on the job and go home and potentially expose their families and you only done one citation. I would like to ask you to submit to this committee and my office a list of all on site, inperson inspections received from osha. We know what the president said when we saw what happened in sioux falls with hundreds of people being diagnosed with coronavirus at the slaughter house. And the president using the defense production act, ordered them back to work. Nothing about worker safety, nothing about slowing down the line. Nothing about food safety. That tells the story. Ill close with this, mr. Chairman. Were in the midst of a pandemic. We have a president and administration that calls worker essential but treats them like theyre expendable. The president said last week the unemployment numbers are stupendous. Theyre the worst since world war ii. And in ohio theyre opening up eviction courts in arenas, if you can imagine that. We learned from the dol, theyve issued one citation showing how much they really care about workers. Over the weekend, they said theres isnt any institutional racism in policing. We shouldnt be cutting off senator we cant allow this administration to continue this senator bennett. If i could respond to that . You may respond to it go ahead and respond to it. We are investigating every single complaint that we receive from workers about unsafe conditions pertaining to covid. We have a sixmonth limitations period, and when we find violations we will bring citations if we find them. We have the tools needed to do that and we have a sixthmonth limitation period. We will do that work. That said, i think its a real disservice for people to suggest that osha is not taking this seriously. Employers need to know that indeed we are and they do need to protect their workers and we want workers to show if they have complaints, bring them to us, if they think theyve been subject to retaliation for raising health concerns. Bring them to us. I want to correct any impression that people listening might have that osha is not indeed taking these matters seriously. Anybody can correct me if im wrong, but i heard senator brown say that the president used the defense production act to order the workers back to work. He ordered the companies to get the company up and running. The only way youre going to get workers to go back to work, if they realize that they arent going to go into a Death Chamber when they go back to work. And that was the companies or that was the if they think theyre going to lose their job if they dont return back to work. Workers are going to go back if they think theyre going to lose their job. He didnt correct me. Thank you. Thank you, secretary, for being here. We appreciate it. And im grateful for the in response to senator browns question, i think its important. If people dont think theyre going to be safe, if they dont think health is going to be enforced at work, theyre not going to go back to work. What i heard you say, secretary, is that you want osha on the job, you want people to know that they can file complaints if theyve been mistreated at work and report to the committee the work that osha is going to do has not yet done is going to do. I think thats important to all of us. We want to know it and what the facts are. Its the only way people are going to go back to work. I think its just clear that we have we are facing an Unprecedented Health Care Challenge in this pandemic and that has created an unprecedented economic crisis in our country. One in six workers in this country are unemployed. I would say about the trump economy and all this stuff, the reality is, the average monthly job creation under donald trump is lower than it was under president obama for the first three years of the Trump Administration. So rewriting that history here, i dont think is all that helpful. But in this moment, mr. Chairman, to the Ranking Member, i would say, thanks to this committee, weve helped workers in two major ways. First we expanded Unemployment Benefits to cover almost 10 million selfemployed workers, gig workers and others who are usually left behind and i hope wont be left behind in the future. We added 600 per week to the normal unemployment benefit for all 30 million workers claiming benefits. And had we not done this, without this, tens of millions of families across the country from iowa to oregon through colorado would have seen their incomes drop by 60 , 70 or more. And we prevented that from happening. And i know were hearing criticisms today about the benefits. I just want to be very clear about what is done until now. The weekly benefit has prevented a level of severe hardship that its almost impossible to comprehend even in this hearing room. It paid the rent and prevented evictions, its kept food on the table so families dont go hungry. Its kept the lights on and paid for internet so kids can have access to learn and its been a central lifeline to families in the middle of the worst economic crisis since the great depression. Even President Trump seems to recognize this, because hes Running Campaign adds touting these benefits. But even as hes running the ads, hes also threatening to take them away. And i think that would be a profound mistake. Right now 17 of American Families cant cover three months of basic expenses without the extra benefits, that number would rise to 43 . Think of what that would do to our economy . So if we let these benefits expire at the end of july, mr. Secretary, i would argue that were going to throw tens of millions of people who rely on them into a financial crisis, family by family, all across the United States of america. Mr. Secretary, you called expanded Unemployment Benefits, quote, important shortterm measure adopted in these extraordinary times to alleviate the impact of the virus on working americans. I think youll agree probably with me, mr. Chairman, that were not going to create 20 million more jobs in the next two months, do you think we are . Senator, i wouldnt predict 20 million jobs in the next two months. What i do predict and what weve already observed is a different economy than existed when cares was enacted. This body itself set a july 31st expiration for that benefit. I think where we sit now is the recovery and the job market has happened for quickly than Congress Expected in late march. Lets hope thats right. But i think its probably safe to say at least 10 Million People will be unemployed at the end of july with no jobs to return to. Does that feel like an extraordinary circumstance, along the lines you described the importance of the unemployment benefit in the last downturn . I think that 10 million unemployed americans is 10 million more americans without a job than we want. It makes sense for us to consider particularly as we get closer to that july 31st date what measures may be necessary. If i could underscore again the size of the benefit, as important as its been, its great. In massachusetts, youre able with this 600 plusup to obtain 75,000 a year, thats the analyzed income that you get on unemployment in massachusetts right now. In the state of oregon, its analyzes at 65,000 a year. Senator brown asked me about the 15 minimum wage. As i said, the 600 weekly benefit by itself is slightly more than that 15hour minimum wage. But on top of that, you get the state Unemployment Benefits. Its been a very important system. As we look long term, theres few people that would suggest that you have an unemployment i got my last minute taken away from me. If i could take 30 seconds to finish my point. Ill give you 30 seconds. Thats all ill take. In answer to senator cassidys question, you said you thought the state departments were now up to the challenge of dealing with a benefit that ratcheted down over time. I believe that it was a mistake for us to tie it to a date certain. I dont think that makes sense. I think what we should do is tie it to the Economic Conditions that the country is facing and that our workers are facing so when the unemployment is going up, the benefit is going down, when the unemployment when were doing worse, the opposite would be true. I hope youll work with the committee to design something rational like that, because having it just end on a date certain is going to be very cold comfort to millions of people in this country. Thank you. Senator, i would welcome the opportunity to continue that conversation. Thank you. Before i call on senator casey next, i want to remind people that during the debate on the c. A. R. E. S. Act, senator sasse and others put forward an amendment to the bill, not to block the extra 600 payments, but instead to tell states they would have to make sure that they didnt pay people more for not working than working. States said it would have taken them months to implement, so clearly states were hit with an overwhelming shock that was difficult for their systems to deal with, but no one proposed to block these extra payments entirely. Mr. Chairman, if i could, the states were incapable at that time of doing what sasse was talking about, which is why, and you were in the negotiations, we had to go with a rough justice approach, and it is why we have tried to extricate from the secretary this afternoon an answer to the question about whether the states would be capable of doing 100 wage replacement now accurately and he has not indicated that was the case. So i just want to i know were going to be debating this. I just wanted to set the record straight. Now we go to senator casey by tv. Mr. Chairman, thanks very much for this hearing and i want to thank the secretary for his presence at the hearing. Mr. Secretary, ill have a question for you regarding workplaces and covid19. But let me start with some of the data which we cannot escape and we have to bear in mind. What i consider just in my home state of pennsylvania, heres some of the data, the case number now is more than 76,400 covid19 cases. The death number has gone above 6,000. As of today, the last number was 6,014 people dead from covid19. In addition to that, the unemployment are extraordinary. More than 15 of our the 15 Unemployment Rate in pennsylvania, 15. 1. What that equates to is 976,000 people unemployed. We never saw those numbers as bad as the Great Recession was, never saw those numbers at that time. Now, i know with regard to both covid19 and the economic devastation that flows in its wake, that weve passed i guess its technically five bills now, two by consent and three that were actually we had a vote on. Those five bills were helping in a lot of ways, but more action is needed by the congress. Unemployment benefits had a very positive impact on peoples lives. 600 per week additional payment, by one estimate, replaced 30 of total private sector wages lost. Huge impact on peoples lives. Benefits, as you know, are about to end at the end of july, july 31st. So the benefits end, but the costs dont end. The costs for mortgage, the cost for food, the cost for rent. So many other costs in the life of a family do not end on july 31st. And i think its about time we started to say that more and bear that in mind as we hear senators talking about ending this program in an arbitrary fashion with no approach, no strategy to replace it or mitigate the damage. And more broadly, many in the Senate Majority want to stop legislating all together on covid19 and jobs. Some have said they want to help state and local governments. Theres some bipartisan action on a few issues. But in terms of the substantial help that our states need and our communities and families need, it seems like the Senate Majority wants to walk away from that responsibility. I dont think thats what the American People want and especially they dont want us to spend another month voting on nominations instead of covid19 and the jobs crisis. I think we can do better than that. Now, just back to the Unemployment Rate, we know that as much as the Unemployment Rate is high across the nation at more than 13 , its especially high for africanamericans. Almost 17 for africanamericans and at last count for hispanics, 17. 6 which happens to be the same Unemployment Rate thats in my home county in pennsylvania. Theres a lot of pain out there. As we talk in this academic fashion about ending a program, we should acknowledge and be responsive to the devastation out there. We should not cut off Unemployment Insurance with no effort to mitigate the damage, the economic devastation so many families are facing. So we ought to be talking about providing pandemic premium pay for frontline workers who have risked their lives. All of that should be part of our debate. I want to ask the secretary a question about a letter we sent him in may. We sent you a letter to clarify whether workers who had been offered their jobs back would lose Unemployment Insurance if they refused to work in a circumstance where the workplace they would return to is in fact unsafe. Will the department of labor issue guidance to states to clarify that workers cannot lose Unemployment Insurance if the workplace is not safe and following cdc or osha requirements . Senator casey, its good to have the chance to speak to you again. There was a lot in that question, just a couple quick comments and ill answer your question. I agree with you, its very important that we remain mindful of the impact that the coronavirus has had on workers on unemployment. Thats a focus of the staff at the Labor Department, every minute of every working day and those have been long days too. I do think its important to remember that as much as we want our unemployment system to function as effectively as possible, even better is a job. And so our longterm goal really does need to be getting our economy back to where it was. It was so vibrant through the first week of march. And there was actually a piece in the wall street journal, just came out today, speaking of how the economy under the president , which was affected by coronavirus, qualifies, quote, the best africanamerican job market on record is how the journal described it and thats what the numbers show. We want to get back there. In terms of your question, senator, the precise circumstances in which a worker can decline to go to work because he or she believes the workplace is unsafe is something that the states determine according to their law. The requirement is that it be suitable work, suitable work has to be safe. And so the states are to judge that. There are certain broad parameters let me interrupt you there if a worker has facts telling him or her that the workplace is unsafe because there are unmitigated covid exposures, we would think that the workers should not have to go back until that workplace is in fact made safe. Senator warner. You are the secretary of the department of labor of the United States of america. One of the programs created under the c. A. R. E. S. Act for Unemployment Insurance, pua, the pandemic unemployment assistance, that is a federal program. And you have responsibilities beyond that when you oversee Unemployment Insurance more broadly across the nation. Dont you feel that or dont you believe you have a responsibility to give guidance on something as fundamental as the safety of a workplace in the middle of a pandemic . I just think that has to be an obligation you have. I dont understand why you think you would pass that off to the states . It was a federal state partnership. Senator warner. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Secretary, thank you for appearing here tonight. I know theres been a lot of discussion about the bumpup on the unemployment assistance during the pandemic. I think one area that i hope there is bipartisan consensus, and i appreciate the chairman and senator wydens good work on this, and that was trying to make sure during the pandemic that we covered all workers. I think we all now realize how many workers were not covered by unemployment, in my state of virginia, 683,000 workers that were freelancers, 1099ers, gig workers had not been covered. 20 million workers were not covered by traditional ui. And i do hope one area that we could make sure is that kind of the economy is not changing, were not going away from freelancers, gig workers, how do we make sure they get some of these benefits and thank goodness under the leadership of this committee we did that. While about 18 and a half million americans qualified for traditional unemployment, over 10 million americans qualified for the pua, the expansion, and i think that lifeline has made a difference from frankly economic ruin. And, again, i hope, mr. Secretary, that you would believe that that type of a Program Needs to be continued. One thing, mr. Secretary, i want to drill down on is something weve been trying to get an answer from. If we all agree that the intent of congress with this expansion was under pua was to cover all workers during this unprecedented time, i want to make sure that you would confirm something weve weve still had some lack of clarity on. That is that freelancers, including those who work from home who have lost work or Domestic Workers who obviously work in the home but who have lost work, that most of those categories are covered by the pua. Senator warner, thank you for your attention to this set of issues which i know is very important to you both in the context of the Current Crisis and unemployment and more broadly. I do agree that one of the really terrific things that was done in the c. A. R. E. S. Act, were hearing a lot of disagreements today. But the c. A. R. E. S. Act was the product and reflection of a whole lot of great agreement. And one of those great agreements was covering gig workers. There are other programs, something called dua that can provide coverage, but weve never done anything on a scale such as that and i think it was a very good thing to do in the c. A. R. E. S. Act. With respect to your questions, i always need to becarefbe care addressing hypotheticals about particular jobs. But i believe that the freelancer is something that we have addressed. Theres been concern about that. If somebody was making a living as a freelance journalist and was for some reason just unable to continue that for one of the qualifying reasons that congress put forth in the c. A. R. E. S. Act, then i would expect that person to be covered by this what were calling this pua benefit for the eventual employed if theyre not covered by the ordinary, and theyre probably not and that journalist could have been somebody who was working at home, a freelancer working at home. If you could address the domestic worker. With the caveat, i think thats correct. Address the domestic worker. Same answer, senator. With a caveat, i think that would probably be the case if one of those qualifying conditions was met. Domestic workers may actually be covered employees under state law. I think theres likely to be coverage one way or another. Ive been working with a group of the Domestic Workers alliance, and i think theyll be happy to hear your comments and look forward to trying to work to make sure that this area, at least, where we we ought to make sure that these 20 million americans, 10 million who have already qualified in this pandemic, this expansion of this coverage ought to be maintained. Ill take my last 28 seconds, ive made the case to you, mr. Secretary, but make the case to my colleagues on both sides of the aisle. I think we need more experimentation with these portable benefits, benefits that move with individuals from gig to gig. There were five members on this committee that embraced an experimentation that we would try a variety of models and i would say to my democratic colleagues, theres a number of models that come out of europe, sweden, belgium, denmark, where these systems are actually administered by labor unions and have become the methodology for them to move into the 21st century. This is a this is one area where theres partisan agreement. It hope, mr. Chairman, we can continue to work on it in the next bill and we go ahead and expand experimentation around portable benefits because i think this is a were looking at the workforce of the future. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Senator by tv. Thank you, mr. Chairman, thank you, secretary, for being here today. One of the main issues that i hear about from New Hampshire constituents is delays in receiving Unemployment Benefits. New hampshire is working to implement the expanded benefits under the c. A. R. E. S. Act. As issues arise, i hope that the department of labor will continue to support the state and help ensure that New Hampshire workers quickly receive the support that they need. My first question, secretary, is about the Unemployment Benefits weve been discussing. As our country has responded to covid19, expanded Unemployment Insurance has helped workers. As senator casey mentioned, Unemployment Benefits also support workers who themselves are sick or at an increased risk of the virus, helping them afford to stay out of the workplace to protect themselves and others. So, secretary, yes or no, do you agree that during this unprecedented time, Unemployment Insurance has been an important tool to support Public Health strategies to contain the spread of covid19 . I do agree with that, senator hassan. In the first half of march, we issued a guidance document even before paid leave was made available for employees of small employers. We issued a guidance document showing how the system could be available to workers who had covid were caring for somebody who did. I agree with that. Thank you quickly, please, because i have several questions. I understand. We understand the difficulties that states have had processing benefits. We are here to help. If we can do more, please have the folks in your state system let us know and well do all we can. Thank you. And i just wanted to follow up on your answer about the unemployment benefit being a Public Health tool. Despite what we think the economy may or may not look like in july, we do know that this pandemic will still be with us and we do know that that will prevent critical challenges for our workforce as they try to balance this new world. Senator stabenow talked about the capacity for employers to use Unemployment Benefits to supplemental parttime work which may in fact be very important for families where childcare is still not available at the beginning or school may not be available, especially if we dont provide more state and local aid as they face budget crunches. I just want us all to keep that in mind. I wanted to ask you too, secretary, about the issue of expanded paid leave for many workers and you just referenced it a bit ago. In addition to expanded Unemployment Insurance, Congress Also enacted emergency expanded paid leave for many workers. This includes two weeks of paid sick leave and up to ten weeks of additional paid leave for parents whose children schools have closed. Access to paid sick leave is an important tool to encourage workers to stay home when they are sick. The department of labor is tasked with ensuring that workers are aware of their rights to paid leave, but data has indicated that many workers who are eligible for this leave are unaware of this new program. Secretary, what additional actions will the department of labor take to improve its outreach in education to workers regarding their access to emergency paid leave benefits . Senator, i will take a look at what guidance we have on that currently. I will tell you that when it was enacted, we engaged in a very intense campaign to provide guidance, answer questions, for workers and employers so that they were familiar with the program. We put out a series of five or maybe even six frequently asked questions to provide guidance. We featured it predominantly on the website of our Wage Hour Division and we also very swiftly put in place rules to implement that benefit. I will note that secretary, my time is almost up weve recovered nearly 650,000 for workers and mr. Secretary in our implementation of that program. Mr. Chair, im going to ask for your indulgence for just a moment. State your question and he can answer it. We still have ten people here. Thats i will say, my question is this, and its one we can i will follow up with the secretary after the hearing. But i just want to put the question on the record. One is that we still need to have the department of labor do more because people are not aware of their paid sick leave rights under the legislation and i would like to follow up with the secretary about the issue of workforce training because since 2001, state formula Grant Funding levels have fallen by 40 as adjusted for inflation. Were going to need to think about how our workforce systems can help get workers who have been dislocated by covid19 back to work and what kind of additional federal resources will be necessary to support these workforce training and reemployment activities. Thank you, mr. Chair and mr. Secretary. Just to respond quickly, we point out a very extensive set of documents to explain how that program will work. With respect to help to dislocated workers, in addition to all the things i mentioned, we have made dislocated worker grants to 40 states in an amount of approximately 225 million. Senator enzi. Thank you for doing this hearing and i want to thank secretary scalia for being willing to answer questions. I appreciate all the comments that there have been about the 600 per week, all the discussion on that. Senator grassley, you started off with a couple of letters that you had received and one was from an employer, one was from an employee, theyre both about the employees. There are also some employers out there in Small Business who are making less than their former employees who are on unemployment. Im appreciative of the effort that senator portman is making to make changes in that and i appreciate all of the answers that youve given on that. Ill maybe submit a couple of questions. Ill change the subject to something we havent talked about yet. Its concerning to me that my state of wyoming was a target for foreign fraud. How are you advising states to prevent fraud and abuse by foreign entities . Is there a Department Plan to recover any of the fraudulent payments . Does Congress Help with the need to help with these efforts . Thank you, senator enzi. Fraud on the unemployment system has always been a problem. Im pleased to say that in 2019 for the First Time Since it had been monitored, we got our improper payments rate below the 10 target. So we were on a good trajectory, but the coronavirus, obviously, as upended so many things and that included the risk of fraud in the system. Theres been fraud, as you say, senator, theres been highly sophisticated criminal enterprises that have engaged in fraud on the system. Were working with our Inspector General. Weve been working with other federal agencies. Weve been working with the states. Theres something called the ui, integrity center, that the states are working with. That center sponsors a data hub. So there are many different mechanisms in place and congress did make 26 million available to our Inspector General in the c. A. R. E. S. Act to address this problem. We will continue to work on it hard. We know its real. We know its interfering with the delivery of benefits to the people who are entitled on it so we will stay on it. Thank you for the wide range of things that you have to cover. Thanks for the great job you do. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Senator carper. I would like to say, mr. Secretary, welcome. I want to stay on point that the senator just raised. I spoke last week with our own secretary of labor at the department of labor in delaware and the issue of fraud came up. He mentioned foreign involvement and he talked about the folks a criminal element in nigeria, i think is what he said, and thats correct. And the amount of money that may have been stolen, literally, by these folks, pretty smart. In the billions of dollars. And i would just ask as a followup question with respect to what mike enzi was just raising, i think youve said this, would you commit to provide jo and the agency Inspector General with the information they need to conduct oversight of the responses with respect to ui benefits . We will certainly cooperate with in investigations being conducted as to that. Were working with the Inspector General. I actually sent a joint memo to all Labor Department employees, joint with the Inspector General, about a month or so, maybe six weeks ago, emphasizing the importance of integrity at the department generally, but the Inspector General, i spoke about the importance of integrity and guarding against fraud in connection with the c. A. R. E. S. Act Unemployment Insurance benefits. Youre right, its theres a nigeren ring. We received a letter from Washington State just the other day, they believed theyve covered hundreds of millions that had been misappropriated through this criminal enterprise. But there are very significant challenges. I urge you to work with the jao as well. Quick question, the Unemployment Rate in our country is high, as you know, very high, the Unemployment Rate for folks who happen to be black or hispanic is even higher. And any ideas and specific steps that the administration is taking to address this particular issue, this particular challenge . Well, as i mentioned earlier, until the coronavirus hit, we had hit alltime lows for unemployment for africanamericans, for hispanic americans. There were also steps that the president took that were very important to him including establishing opportunity zones in improv issued neighborhoods. It made it easier for people who had been in the criminal Justice System to come back into the workplace. Those will remain a priority. I know how proud the president was of the Job Opportunities that his economy was providing to mr. Secretary, im going to mr. Secretary, im going to ask you to stop talking. I have another question. Just answering your question. You more than answered my question, thank you. The workforce restraining this is a big issue. When i used to im a former governor. I do customer calls. I used to do them every week, customers, businesses large and small, and ask them how are you doing, what can we do to help . And i this was a time when we had maybe 150, 160 Million People going to work on a given day and we had six or seven million jobs where nobody was showing up. The jobs that were needed were not inherent in the people who are working for work. And the situation has been exacerbated now. Ive given a lot of thought to workforce restraining, we train kids right out of high school for jobs and careers that are going to be out there. We have labor unions working with apprenticeship programs, so but theres got you know, all of these businesses that are gone, theyre gone, theyre not coming back. The folks who work there, dont have a job to come back to. They may have skills, be u they dont have the skills that are needed for the jobs that are out there. And we need a thoughtful comprehensive approach that involves not just the federal government, not just state governments, Community Colleges and other nonprofits to focus on how do we help these folks retool and train for the jobs that are going to be there in the months or years to come. Any thoughts there . I agree with much and maybe everything you said. I think that workforce training is important. We learned a great deal in the economy that we had. One of the things that i really appreciated in that economy was businesses were reaching out more to train workers, apprenticeships were thriving, Community Colleges were playing an Important Role. We learned a lot that i think we can now apply Going Forward. I do think that although we will bring back to work millions upon millions of workers who were put out of work by the virus, there will be others who dont go back to those jobs and i think well want to apply some of the Lessons Learned and you described some of them, will want to apply some of those Lessons Learned and i would be happy to talk to you further. Senator portman. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Let me say, first of all, to my colleague and friend, i couldnt agree with you more. We had a need for worker retraining because we didnt have the skills needed to fill the jobs in our economy. The jobs act is a good way to do that. There are lots of ways. I think this will be important and youre going to play a leading role in that because youve been involved in training. Let me just, if i could, talk about how we got to where we are. Ten weeks into this Unemployment Program that we started in the c. A. R. E. S. Act and where we go from here. We chose 600 bucks for a simple reason. And senator wyden said it well when he said it was rough justice. It was rough justice for trying to make sure that people on average had wage replacement. But i think speaking i think for everybody, what we all were looking for was wage replacement. 600 is well above wage replacement for a lot of people. And the university of chicago study that was cited earlier today is that 60 to 70 of th people on Unemployment Insurance are making more on ui than they would make in their previous jobs. So there is this issue. And, look, the last session i had with anybody in ohio was on monday before i flew here, it was a Small Business, and the first thing the guy said to me, is what you hear from Small Businesses when you do your conference calls, which i do periodically which is now im finally able to reopen and were starting to get business back, but i cant find people and people are telling me i would rather stay on ui because i can make more money there. With 60 to 70 of the people making more money on ui, thats going to happen. I think people like being at work. When they can make more money not being at work, it creates a disincentive. I had a town hall and a woman called in and said i have two daughters, one is working and one is on ui, and the one on ui is making more than the one who is working and the one who was working is mad about that. We have to face it. It was good intentions. We were trying to find the average wage, its about 600 month additional benefit so it would be comparable. And so i i think it was rough justice, but i think now were in a different situation. One, we got an economy that is starting to grow. And the numbers for last month were surprising. We thought we would lose 7 1 2 million jobs and we added 2 1 2 million jobs. No one should say thats good news, however theres 21 unemployment people are on unemployment. We have a huge problem here. The 600 bucks was necessary, in my view, to get us started in this, but now we have a situation where the economy is starting to reopen and people are working for workers. Second, remember, back then, we didnt want people to stay at work because we were encouraging people to go home. In other words, we were shutting down the economy, except for essential businesses. We want to encourage people to work. This is why we come to the proposal with you and other people which is to say, for people who are on unemployment making whatever the state benefit is, usually about 360 bucks on average from the state, plus theyre making the 600 federal addition to that, for those people who are on unemployment making more than they could make at work which is 60 to 70 of those people, why not give them a bonus to go back to work . That bonus could come out of the 600 . That bonus could be 450. Why . Thats the amount that would make people even if they were on minimum wage in this country. They would be able to make just as much if not more in the private sector than they could make on ui. For us, it would be a sixweek program. Its a transition back to work. I like it because i think it gets people back to work at a time we need them in the economy, but also because its good for workers. Work is where most people get their health care, right, mr. Secretary . Most people get their health care from work and they lose it when they lose their job. Thats where they get their retirement if they have a retirement account. Typically its a 401 k at work. But i think the meaning of work is important to people. I think the selfrespect that you get from going to work is important to people. We want to encourage people to go back to work. Its good for Small Businesses who are looking hard for workers. Its good and good for the taxpayer. Think about it, if its 450, the federal government saves money, but so does the state government. Then the people are off Unemployment Insurance and back on the payrolls and theyre paying taxes, by the way. Even taking out the fact that theyre paying taxes and contributing to the economy, that alone, taking them off the federal 600 down to 450, whatever the number is, and congress may choose another number, and not having the 365 bucks on average, its tens of billions of dollars in savings to the state governments and the federal governments. Thats a winwinwin. Good for workers, good for businesses, good for the taxpayer. Now, having said all of that, what do you think about it, mr. Secretary . Dont you think that makes sense in order to get people back to work . I think it makes sense to get people back to work. Weve got to have Unemployment Insurance safety net for the reasons that you gave, work is even better. And so i look forward to senator portman speaking with you and others about what we might do Going Forward. Im certainly not here to criticize the c. A. R. E. S. Act. I think the c. A. R. E. S. Act is a really admiralable achievement by the United States government during an extremely difficult time. If it was rough justice, lets find justice. Lets use these months, these weeks to make things even better. And i think lets i would love to find justice, in other words, to be able to say, what is wage replacement . Senator whitehouse. But i dont believe theyre capable of doing that. Theyre going to want one flat number. Theyve had enough difficulty doing that. Unfortunately, i think thats where we are. Lets do something that makes sense to get people back to work and provide an incentive to do so. Senator whitehouse. Does the department of labor have a specific counterproposal, senator portmans, or any other to ending to extending the 600 benefit past july. Senator, i dont have a particular proposal that i would want to air at this hearing. Okay. I certainly you answered my question i think it would help the no. Mr. Secretary, you have tried to talk over us through this whole hearing. That was a simple question. Just let me go through my questions, would you please. The second question is, with respect to the fraud investigations and Unemployment Insurance, we are seeing in rhode island and in other states a fraud that looks like it has massive, coordinated, and perhaps driven from overseas. How much of a priority is investigating and remedying that fraud for your department . High, low, superhigh . Give me a measure. To complete my answer, because i had no completed hi answer to your question look i had a conversation with Ranking Member widen about this. What we would like to do Going Forward, and i look forward to further discussions on those lines. With respect to senator whitehouse, with respect to fraud on the Unemployment Insurance system, it is a very high priority for us. We recognize that Unemployment Insurance fraud has always been a longstanding problem in the system. We recognize that because of the size, the prominence of the cares program, its become an acute problem. So its one that im certainly spending my time with my staff to address. I know you have more questions. I wont this has become a little bit of a sport for you to filibuster us. I dont think thats fair to us. With respect to the osha guidelines related to covid, what is the difference between an osha guideline and an osha Emergency Temporary Standard with respect to enforceability . A standard is a legallyrule, already have a number of that we believe we can use for enforcement with respect to covid. We also have but to be clear a statutory tool we can use but to be clear, the covidrelated guidelines that you spoke about earlier are not standards that osha is capable of enforcing against. It is only if they overlap with another preexisting actual standard that you can enforce against them. Is that not a correct statement of the law . Thats respectfully not entirely true, actually. Guidelines that we issue which are consistent with those issued by the cdc and those adopted by industries, recommended by unions and the like, establish a background in which i believe we can bring a general duty clause action if we need to. The other difference let me read you something from your website. Osha guidelines are advisory, do not create new employer obligations and are not the bay sa basis for citations. Further down it says the recommendations contained in guidelines are not enforceable under the general duty standards either. It looks to me like its hard to enforce. Respectfully, its a legal officer department. I was the chief legal officer president previously and as i said, guideline can provide part of the background for the action. They are two different things, are they not . Final point, theres been a lot of, i think, scorn heaped on the 600 tl 600 a week which hyped up during this crisis and people are overpaid and idle and all that. Just in context in evaluating that narrative, i would also advise everybody whos watching this hearing that 43,000 americans who enjoy incomes over 1 million got a benefit from the c. A. R. E. S. Legislation amounted on average to over 1. 6 million each, not for their businesses but flowing back to their personal tax returns. The amount that flowed back to individuals earning over a Million Dollars each to their personal tax returns as a result of this, 1. 6 million on average for those 46,000 people was over 100 billion. So, lets just bear that in mind as we evaluate what it means to a family struggling to get by to have an extra 600. I think we probably do need to rethink this program, but it would help if we had a proposal from the department of labor. Thank you. My time is up. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Secretary, i represent a very Big Aerospace cluster. About 150,000 people are involved in aerospace both working for boeing as a manufacturer but also the supply chain. So, we worked very hard on getting the c. A. R. E. S. Act to support activity that would get capital into those areas and also to try to focus on what we could do to protect essential workers. Im sending you a letter today asking for trade adjustment assistance for workers who are impacted at boeing, so i hope that you will look favorably on that petition. I dont know if you want to make any comments about that. But one of the issues i think we really have to think hard about is that we want to maintain or competitiveness in aerospace. These are highlypaid jobs. And when people get laid off, because obviously weve been impacted by this and the whole transportation sectors been impacted, then those people who get laid off may have a package that keeps them connected to the company for a while. I was a big advocate of saying critical defense workers should have extra Health Care Benefit activity so that when this crisis is over they would be more likely to come back into the fold and we wouldnt lose these critical defense workers. As it is we ran into this road block. So, so much of this discussion this afternoon has been around the 600 and extending that. My question is really more on health care. What are we going to do to keep critical workers in the sector that we would like to keep them in is after their one month of cobra benefits runs out and were now talking about Aerospace Engineers that they are then on the hook for paying for their health care themselves. They can continue that cobra benefit, but if they pay for it themselves, which again, is a big outofpocket expense. My worry for those Aerospace Workers is theyre going to find another job that has health care because theyre not going to wait until a year from now for the Aerospace Market to pick up. So, what do we need to do . If you want to comment on the benefits of trying to provide assistance to Aerospace Manufacturing from trade adjustment, but also what is your plan . What do you think the plan should be for keeping critical workers connected by having some sort of Health Care Benefit thats out there and available in an affordable way . Ill certainly look carefully at the taa letter. I recognize the trade adjustment assistance act is an important form of relief to industries, companies that have been affected. And well certainly take a look at that. And im saying they were affected before this, obviously. The whole sector was affected because of trade issues. Yes, and i certainly share your view that its a very important sector for this country for a number of different reasons. With respect to health care, providing it is always important and often a challenge. We extended the time that people would have to elect cobra benefits during the pandemic so people had more time to evaluate that option and in the rush of Everything Else going on didnt lose out on those benefits as a result of the sort of ordinary deadlines that apply. Ill have to give further thought to mechanisms that might be used to induce people back to aerospace jobs, perhaps through a Health Care Benefit rather than having them go elsewhere, that might be of less importance to National Security and the like. And its not an issue that ive looked at, but i would certainly be interested in talking to you about that aspect of this problem. Well, its one of the highestpaid manufacturing jobs that we still have in the United States. Yep. And i think the second hundred year of aerospace could be a very big opportunity as the rest of the world continues to grow economically in the future and gets into aerospace. So, i would hope that we would figure out how to upskill these workers and also figure out this benefit. Because if they dont have health care, theyre not going to stick around waiting for us, even if theyre on taa. Weve got to figure out how to get the Health Care Benefit to these workers and get them back into the aerospace and maintain u. S. Competitiveness. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Now, senator young. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Welcome, mr. Secretary. Good to be with you. I appreciate you visiting today. Most states including indiana waive job search requirements as it relates to Unemployment Insurance in order to encourage people to shelter in place, to stay at home, to prevent further spread of the coronavirus. But now as all of our states begin, to varying degrees, to reopen, employers are calling their workers or hiring new workers to get their businesses up and running and try to resume some semblance of normalcy. But theyre having difficulty doing so because of the additional ui plus up which i know has been discussed at some length today. What im wondering, mr. Secretary, is at what point states will feel its reasonable for workers to be expected to search for work as a condition of receiving further Unemployment Insurance . Is this something your department has given some consideration to . Senator, thank you. And the work search requirements are ones that are part of the unemployment law infrastructure that the c. A. R. E. S. Act was enacted on top of. And although there were states that, for example, sought to waive the weekly certification requirement, we have asked that that requirement continue to be honored. I certainly agree that especially as the economy is now reopening, as jobs are becoming available, it is important that states begin applying the usual mechanisms to encourage workers to look for work. Its we appreciate that its a difficult balance for them. We still want them also to be able to be getting payments out to people who need them, are entitled to them. But we know now millions of jobs are reopening. We want to get people back there. Can you give me some sense of how states are approaching this, of what timelines they might be looking at as it relates to resuming the normal work search requirements and what expectations are being made of workers as they engage in this work search and what is somewhat different environment. We expect them now to be applying the weekly Certification Requirements they have. We appreciate that a few weeks ago some wanted out of that for a period of time, but weve asked them to comply with that requirement. And i think, again, now its taking on more value, more importance, something that ive suggested to the governors. I sent a letter to the governors at the end of last week talking really about these kinds of questions, that theres still work to be done providing benefits for the economys reopening. So, theres now this new job of, for example, having employers let unemployment commissioners know when theyre open for business, or having these state work force agencies informed when employers are open for business and working with people on unemployment to get them back to work. We have these work force agencies in the states to help people make that transition. And i think now increasingly their services are being called on, and we want them to do that job too. Excellent. Thank you. So many hoosiers have lost their jobs over the course of the coronavirus, and many wont have a job to go back to. For others, they wont have a job to go back to for some period of time. And still, others may find that theyve created a new job for themselves or they can find a new job that didnt exist prior to the pandemic. You may have spoken to this earlier. I know its been a long day for you, and im appreciative of your presence here for a session period of time. But do we know what jobs wont be coming back postpandemic and what jobs have been created as a result of the pandemic . Thats a good question. This has been such a challenging stretch for american, workers that i hesitate to point out the positives that have been there. But there have been some. We have seen some Companies Hire in some cases hundreds of thousands of workers, particularly some of the larger retailers have done that. And i think we can imagine some areas that will see further growth as the result of some changes in lifestyle that people are now making as a result of the virus. There are other industries that are going to take longer, and we know that. Ive met with workers in the hotel sector and Business Owners in the hotel sector. And thats going to take longer. Likewise, we know the Sports Industry will take longer. But i think we can bring them back. We have two questioners left. Before i call on senator cortez masto and mr. Danes, were not going to have a second round, but i am going to as a matter of privilege give senator wyden, he asked for two minutes, and if he wants a response from you, i hope you can respond in two minutes because were holding up the second panel. So, senator cortezmasto by tv, i think. I am here, thank you. Secretary scalia, thank you. It has been a long afternoon, and i appreciate you coming and answering all my questions. Let me say you were just touching on an industry that is hardest hit. Im from nevada in the hospitalitybased organization. We have the highest Unemployment Rate in the country. And unfortunately, what we have seen are Unemployment Insurance, training and rehabilitation, weve received more than 500,000 claims for standard Unemployment Insurance and nearly 100,000 for pandemic Unemployment Insurance. And thats with the population of just about 3 Million People. So o, can you talk a little bit about how you anticipate addressing unemployment for the haas pill talty industry . Im in banking. We asked which is going to the first to bounce back. What do you think in purposes of unemployment and how we should be addressing the long term unemployment that were seeing in hospitality and tourismbased industries . Thank you for the question. I spoke with governor sisolak i think just last week about nevadas reopening. And i know that las vegas is now beginning to reopen which is wonderful news. But i know that it will be a process that takes place over a period of time. As i mentioned a moment ago, i do appreciate that its a sector of the economy thats going to be slower coming back, unfortunately, than others. I think that were seeing the rest of the country reopen safely. I just read that disney, i think, is going to be begin opening its facilities i believe later in the month. So, im hopeful these business places that depend more on business for large gatherings are not far behind and that the reopening in las vegas, nevada can also proceed more quickly. That said, i appreciate that we do need to continue to watch how these things develop over the next month or so, next few weeks, and evaluate whether there are additional steps that have to be taken postjuly 30 and the circumstances that you have in nevada, i do believe, is one that is going to warrant watching and perhaps further discussion about how things are progressing. I think that it makes sense to talk about this situation that, woers are in come the end of july and what particular mechanisms and unemployment could be one part of that i agree is worth discussing, particularly if youre able to target in certain ways. Yeah, and please know that part of our industry too includes entertainers. That includes individuals that are seasonal promotion. So, for purposes of that industry which is the new economy, im curious how youre thinking and even now when we address unemployment needs. What are you doing to address this issue because so many of them, it is a new economy. We should be looking at how we provide unemployment. Many are classified, as you well know. So, what are you looking at to address this new economy and these workers . Senator, the audio cutout just a little bit, but i think you were asking about workers that are often treated as independent contractors, socalled gate workers, selfemployed. As i mentioned earlier, providing Unemployment Benefits to them, a form of unemployment benefit, in the c. A. R. E. S. Act, was an important thing to be done given how they were affected in much the same way as many other workers. I think there are other things that can be done to help people in that segment of the economy, something that we proposed. We adopted a rule for what we called Association Health plans to make it easier for the selfemployed as well as for people who work for Small Businesses to band together to buy Health Insurance. Senator warner something for big workers. I think thats a segment thats really important. I think there are many people that like the independence that comes with having a job of that nature, but it does makes sense to talk about ways to adapt some of what we do for workers in light of the particular line of work that those people are in. Thank you. Thank you, i notice my time is up. Thank you, chairman. You bet, thank you. And now senator from oregon for two minutes. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I just want to correct the record on some of the key issues. First, when i talked to the secretary, you know, last week, on one of the key questions of why we had to have 600 a week supercharge benefit, the secretary said that the state still didnt have the ability to do full replacement, which i would have been happy to do in the first instance. Today he said seems like they made a lot of progress, and i dont know what might have happened over the weekend, mr. Secretary, but i think thats just misleading the committee, its misleading the public, and on a key kind of question which is what to do Going Forward because ive indicated and i mentioned some of my colleagues being open to this, that im open to a variety of approaches. But it doesnt help when we have misleading comments. And that was the case in several other areas, both myself and senator casey asked about this question of whether an unemployed person could turn down an unsafe job and continue to claim Unemployment Insurance. You said repeatedly that was a matter of state law. Weve been looking at it. Its not. Pandemic coverage, then you have the capacity as the secretary of labor to give the states guidance which is what weve been asking you about for the last three hours. And finally, i was just stunned by this. You said that, well, isnt it great that weve all been able to agree on the pandemic coverage, which we called the gig workers and the selfemployed and the like. And i just went back and looked at the record. And the fact is that the mcconnell bill was eight lines long and had nothing to do with those workers. And it was because people on this side of the aisle said that a program that began in the 1930s, it was time to modernize it and bring it into the next century. We would like to work with you, but it doesnt help when on key issue after issue. I understand being lawyerly. Im a lawyer in name only. Ran the office for the elderly. But thats different than being misleading. And i think on too many key issues today you were simply misleading, and i think its going to make our job harder because we want to do a bipartisan bill which is what we came out of the Committee Room the first time before we got to the floor. Thank you, mr. Chairman. If you want to answer, please do it in two minutes. Thank you. And, Ranking Member wyden, i hope we can continue talking about different mechanisms that might be available there. The approach that i think that i suggested to you when we spoke last week was one which resembled in some ways what we discussed in march which was potentially involving the Treasury Department in helping disperse benefit for unemployed workers. That is actually approach that would have included the states since they have critical information. That said, i actually have learned more since you and i spoke. Weve had discussions with states. Weve learned more. And i confess, i am as i sit here now, more optimistic about the capabilities that the states may have based on the conversations that weve continued to have. So, i look forward to exploring that further with you, but the more recent information that ive gotten has been encouraging. And then with respect to safe workplaces, im sorry that you dont feel that its clear as you would like, but as i said, we want safe workplaces. We dont expect people to be forced back to workplaces that are unsafe. The unemployment standards are, as you know, stateadministered. Weve provided guidance, i think including guidance, regarding at least some circumstances where we would expect workers can safely return. But if we hear from states that scenario where they need further guidance, well certainly have discussions with them. Thank you. Mr. Secretary action you, y long afternoon here. And youve been a longattended committee member. All but three members came to have dialogue with you. I thank you for your patience, and i also appreciate the cooperation of our staff through i mean of our members through all of this. So, ill excuse you now. And then while our staff is putting up the name plates, ill start to introduce first scott sanders. Mr. Sanders is executive director of the National Association of state work force agencies. Thats an organization of state work force system administrators. It goes by the acronym. He served on the commission of the Indiana Department work force development. Next, we hear from an iowan, Beth Townsend. Ms. Townsend is director of work force development, confirmed by the iowa senate march 24th, 2015. Previous to that, she was director of the iowa civil rights commission. Prior to that, she worked as an attorney in west des moines, iowa, in civil rights and employment law. Ms. Townsend also served as judge advocate general corp. Of the u. S. Air force. She retired from the air force reserve after 21 years of both active and reserve duty. Third is jose rodriguez. Mr. Rodriguez is a member of the Florida Senate representing the 37th district including coral gables, pine crest, key bis bain, and downtown miami, and hes been in the senate since 2016. He previously served two terms in the Florida House of representatives. Next, les neely, president of the neely Company Goods in pittsburgh, pennsylvania. He runs a familyowned business which produces residential awnings and tarps for commercial trucking and other uses, been able to bring all his employees back to work, which he will tell us about doing that. Then we hear from michelle evermore. Ms. Evermore is a senior policy analyst for the National Employment law project. Ms. Evermore joined that organization 2018. Prior to that, she worked in congress for a decade in the senate and also was a staff person for the House Committee on education and the work force. In those roles, ms. Evermore worked to advance worker protections, organizing rights, and to improve Retirement Security in a variety of private Pension Plans designs as well as social security. Im sure the staff has informed everybody that if you have longer than ten minutes i mean longer than fiveminute statement that you want put in the record, it will be put in the record. And i will start with mr. Sanders, then ms. Townsend well, kind of the way i introduced you. So, lets go with mr. Sanders. Chairman grassley, Ranking Member wyden, and members of the committee. On behalf of the National Association of state work force agencies, thank you for the opportunity to testify and discuss states efforts to provide essential Unemployment Insurance benefits to workers who have lost their job due to the pandemic. Member of our association are state leaders of the publicly funded work force system, including the Unemployment Insurance program. We serve as an advocate for state work force policies, liaison and partners, we are not nonpartisan and our membership includes all 50 states, the district of columbia, guam, puerto rico, and the virgin islands. During the Great Recession, the peak number of claimants was 12. 1 million. For comparison, a year ago for the weekending may 11, 2019, states only paid 1. 6 million claims. In sharp contrast, for the weekending may 16, 2020, states paid a total of 30 million claims which includes 10. 7 million claimants in a new Pandemic Unemployment Assistance Program. These phenomenal increases in claims explain some of the extraordinary implementation challenges states have faced in processing and paying claims. No entity, public or private, would have contingency plans in place for these scenarios. Yet our agencies continue to work through these overwhelming work loads tirelessly and with great dedication. It has not only been the scope of the challenge but simultaneously implementing several programs to address it. Our members charged to address including the federal pandemic Unemployment Compensation which provides an additional 600 to each pay ee. This was implemented in all states by the end of april. The Pandemic Unemployment Assistance Program is much more challenging because it requires individuals to selfemployed on a statewide basis, something never done before. All states implemented this program by the end of may. Against this backdrop, i will highlight three key things states are experiencing during this crisis. Our members work hard to promote integrity in the Unemployment Insurance program. Through our integrity center, states receive back practices, and recently states are accessing the integrity data hub. It plays an integral role with email domains and ip addresses. Multistate cross machg and fraud alert. States are acting quickly to utilize its toll. Its cross collaborative efforts will continue to enhance abilities is to promote. Trust is a second major issue for states. During the Great Recession, 36 states depleted their trust funds resulting in cumulative borrowing of 51 billion of federal revenue. Trust fund values are rapidly depleting. They totalled 76 billion at the end of 2016 and dropped to 52 billion. Since march, states have seen trust Fund Balances decline. Adding to this concern, states have approximately 65 of their tax revenue for 2020. For the remainder of the year, benefits paid with far exceed deposits, exacerbated trust Fund Balances. With drastically lower trust Fund Balances, businesses can expect significant increases in ui tax rates. There are two potential options for congress to consider in inverting this impending trust fund crisis. Congress could enact legislation to forgive trust fund lenders, this year or next. Or congress could direct a federal payment to state trust funds that could be send by distribution which was done after 9 11. Finally, states need additional administrative funding for operationss i. T. Systems. States have new call centers, hired staff, and purchased or modified i. T. Systems to address the pandemic. However, the cumulative years of underfunding has affected states abilities to maintain staff and make Capital Investments specifically in i. T. Resources. We urge congress to provide funding for i. T. Operations and update the basic methodology of the administrative funding process. In closing, our members look forward to continuing to work with you on these important issues. Thank you for providing this opportunity. Thank you, mr. Sanders. Now Beth Townsend of iowa. Thank you, chairman grassley, Ranking Member wyden and members of the community for the opportunity to share with you a boots on the ground view on a state work force agency. I have included written information regarding the facts and figures behind the response to the pandemic. A few key points i would like to highlight include generous Unemployment Program. We range from 87 to 591 per week depending on claimants wages and number of dependents. The average weekly benefit during the pandemic is approximately 300 per week. Iowa ban began reopening in may. In order to keep employees safe in the workplace, employers are taking necessary steps to protect employees. Still be eligible for Unemployment Benefits. Additionally, who provides benefits for those who are in or caring for individuals in a highrisk category, have lost child care or transportation. We have strongly encouraged open communication as the first step in helping employers and employees to determine who, how, and when employees can return to work safely. In addition to providing for the safely of employees in the workplace, employers are dealing with the collateral consequences of the payments. A review of our claim shows that when our state benefits are combined with the 600 per week, 79 of iowans who received Unemployment Benefits since march 15th have earned more on unemployment than our average weekly wage. This is not an issue of low wages in iowa. It is the impact of the additional money. Iowans who receive a maximum state benefit of earning the equivalent of 30 an hour on unemployment. Even the average weekly benefit of 300 results in the equivalent of 22. 50 an hour. This has resulted in very awkward conversations between employers and employees. We have heard that they are being asked not to recall their employees until the end of july. Employees are asked to be laid off in order to collect the benefits. Employers who have been able to remain partially open have received complaints from employees who continue to work because they see its unfair that they are working and their peers are not and they are staying home and earning more in ui benefits. Employers who take advantage of the Paycheck Protection Program often receive complaints from employees who did not want to be recalled because they were making more on unemployment. While employers understood and agreed with the reasons to pay a flat rate for the entire country at the time the c. A. R. E. S. Act was passed, i urge you to take the time now to consider the impact of such payments and find a path that provides a net with the recovery is slower but not a drag on states recovering faster. Employers are telling us in iowa that the benefits should be allowed to expire to make sure they are able to quickly recall and restart operation. If benefits are extended, i urge you to craft legislation that is not one size fits all. It goes much further in states where the cost of living is higher. Please consider timing the availability of benefits to the states availability rate so once they fall below the rate, the benefits end. Weve limited the calculations to stay off federal benefits. A flat rate for all those eligible for a Single Program is absolutely essential to be able to implement the program quickly and efficiently regardless of the age of the uses, these are all new programs that have to be developed and tested before plans can be paved. Time trying to implement a percentage of wages as a percentage of benefits received would require individual review of each claim. I would ask you to consider a benefit like a payroll type holiday which would be easier to implement, would benefit everyone in the work force including those who remain in the work force throughout, and would not run through the work force system. It would provide an incentive to those returning to the work force by allowing employees to de keep more of their wages. If the new Unemployment Benefit Program is created, please consider the date of implementation. This would give time to provide necessary guidance to state work force agencies and time to develop the program and manage expectations of people receiving payment. In closing, i recognize iowa is a smaller state that does not have as many challenges as other states in assisting those that have lost their jobs due to the pandemic. However, i also think iowa is unique in that were a state that knows the value and we are stronger together. From the beginning we have benefitted from Governor Reynolds strong, steady leadership. I also want to thank the team members who have worked so hard, have been so dedicated and professional and have remained committed to helping the citizens of iowa. Thank you senator and member of the committee for the opportunity to share this information with you. Thank you, beth. Now senator rodriguez. Chairman grassley, Ranking Member wyden, i address you as the state legislature in the Florida Senate. These unprecedented times with the c. A. R. E. S. Act you have done a great deal of good and for that i thank you on the behalf of the constituents i serve back home. Florida entered this crisis one of the most unprepared unemployment systems no. State provides the fewer number of weeks, were near the bottom with benefits and have major gaps availability. We have Payment System infamous for failures and how persistent the failures are having indured unchanged through several gubernatorial terms, successive audits, and federal intervention. The c. A. R. E. S. Act lifted my constituents with the florida system alone would not have. Adds 600 a week. It goes right to out of work americans who spend it in their communities for necessities. It is benefit in florida. Ricardo, 56, a Hotel Bellman for 8 and a half years before his lay off and a diabetic who loses Health Insurance this month. He wants to get back to work in an industry that has not returned and wanted me to tell you, quote, the 600 is necessary for me to survive including to pay for medications. I have paid my taxes since i was 14, been working for decades, and never collected unemployment. This is not a luxury. Its a necessity. Karen, 30, worked in marketing at a casino for nine years and hopes to return but looks for work in the meantime. She wanted me to tell you, quote, my fear is that me and my 9yearold daughter will end up homeless without this. I waited over a month to receive floridas unfloimt and 275 a week is not enough. The federal aid is to help us. Randy, 47, mother of an 8yearold boy and 5yearold girl, owned her own business and needs the economy to recover for work. Was able to file in late march but only just received payment last week. She wanted me to tell you, quote, the 600 has become vital to my family for basic needs like food and utilities and finally being able to buy my daughter a toy. Seems simple but weve been quarantined since march and i havent been able to buy my children anything. Businesses want to do the right thing and often need help like bernie, a Small Business owner we assisted employed 17 people before the crisis and should avo avoid lay offs under that program. Florida system continues to be small, unreliable, and inept in general. And in its deployment of the c. A. R. E. S. Act in particular, the department administers unemployment. For hundreds of thousands of floridians, deo system was unaccessible for at least the first half of the crisis punctuated by unmet, everchanging goals, and seemingly mishaps. So bad florida was the only state paying out less than it received during this period. Leah, 63, worked part time for an airline. A recent survivor of lung cancer who could not do her job remotely. Were it not for assistance from our office, she would have lost over a month of benefits. The ordeal is like the ancient military punishment of running the gauntlet. Many, many thousands still have not made it through, no response, no reasons, no assistance from deo. Floridas failures work a special hardship on people adding needless anxiety to economic pain. A bipartisan bulk of us field the bulk of the calls. We hear things like, quote, im struggling to maintain a positive attitude and my wife is afraid this could be the death of me. Please help, im desperate. Florida remains an outlier in deploying the c. A. R. E. S. Act. Only about 1 4 end up qualifying for the catchall pua program, a rate far below other states. It also appears the state of florida has only paid out about half of the 600 weekly benefit available to floridians. This experience should serve as a lesson to other states, states that shrink, starve, and ignore their unemployment systems may have their state legislatures delivering such remarks. Federal insight is needed along with resources to modernize infrastructure. C. A. R. E. S. Act should remain in place until it reaches all sectors. Otherwise communities like mine i fear it will set us back in our path to recovery. Thank you. Thank you, senator. Mr. Neely. Good evening, chairman grassley, Ranking Member wyden, and other distinguished members of the committee. Thank you for the invite for allowing me to be here this evening. It is an honor and privilege for me to represent Small Business owners across our great country and to express my experiences regarding the extra 600 per week compensation as part of the c. A. R. E. S. Act bill. I know im not alone as countless other Small Business owners have had similar experiences. My name is les neely, president and majority owner, we are located in pittsburgh, pennsylvania where we manufacture tarps for trucking and industrial use and we also make, install, and Service Commercial and residential fabric awnings. We have a total of 11 part time and fulltime employees between our two locations between pittsburgh and maryland. Our employees make between 14 and 21. 25 per hour in addition to the benefits i described in my full written testimony. With the passage of the c. A. R. E. S. Act, the extra 600 a week amounts to 15 an hour based on a 40hour week. That alone pays our lowest pay employee more than they make working a 40hour week, and all they had to do was sit at home. Pennsylvania Governor Wolf announced the shutdown of all nonessential businesses march 15th effective immediately. Since the Trucking Industry is essential, we were able to continue operating. But due to lack of orders, we laid everyone off march 23rd. We had enough orders to call two employees back to work for monday april 6 and able to call two additional employees back later that week. On april 24th, two employees asked to see pay stubbs as all employees are paid by direct deposit. They stated their co, woers at home laid off were making more than those employees who were working and that doesnt fair. One of those individuals told me that they and their spouse were going back on unemployment and the couple didnt show up for work on april 27th and 28th. The other individual asked if it was possible to have a rotating schedule with the employees who were still laid off so everyone could participate in getting the extra 600 per week instead of their coworkers who were laid off the entire time. They stated they knew i was trying to run a business and understood i had to make tough decisions but they were mising out on the extra money the federal government mandated and they wanted to share in the pot of gold. We applied for the paycheck protection loan and the money was depositived on april 28th. Once the money hit, i called the laid off employees and told them to report to work. The couple discovered they were not eligible for two days of unemployment and partial of 600 a week, costing them two days of wages which is another ramification of this bad policy. We instituted a 20 per dabo day bonus for each day the employees worked retroactive to when we called back the first employees. We did this in attempt to ease the resentment of the people who worked versus the laid off employees. Since everyone was called back to work, employee morale has seemed to be improving. May i suggest as a Business Owner and someone like many other Small Business owners have experienced similar situations, do not pay someone more money than they make in a 40hour week. Pay the lay off workers the full amount they make in a week to make them whole. Paying someone more than they make is rewarding them for being laid off and penalizing an employee who is helping the Company Survive and move forward because they are working. Owning a Small Business is hard enough on a daily basis without having to deal with situations created by congress that puts Business Owners in a position to mitigate resentment between employees, employees who are working to keep the business aploet feel frustrated and angry that their laid off workers. Less than 10 of them own or operate a business and understand the ramifications it has created. Thank you for allowing me to express my experiences regarding the extra 600 per week Unemployment Compensation. I appreciate the opportunity to appear in front of the Senate Finance committee representing Small Business owners, and i hope you consider my testimony when contemplating future legislation to the extent the c. A. R. E. S. Act compensation and the amount paid to workers on a weekly basis. I will happy to answer questions. Thank you, now we go to ms. Evermore. Good evening. Im grateful youve had the opportunity to testify today and as a fellow iowan particularly thankful for chairman grassleys great work on this issue. Im a Senior Researcher and analyst with the law project. In this moment in history its easy to focus on the ways in which our lives, the world, and the National Economy feel out of control as gaps in benefits for unemployed workers have taken center stage, lets remember that the c. A. R. E. S. Act you enacted is having a positive effect on tens of million of people out of work, particularly for work rs paid low wages. These benefits are saving lives. The Unemployment Crisis is affecting communities of color most dramatically. A Washington Post poll showed that 16 of black workers reported being laid off as well as 20 of latinx workers. At the same time, 11 of white workers and 12 of workers from other racial groups reported being laid off. Pandemic unemployment assistance is helping both middle class, selfemployed workers and lower paid workers often misclassified as independent contractors to whether a storm that has left them stranded in a shutdown economy. Pandemic Unemployment Compensation is an essential in this moment because so many states lowering benefit levels. They no longer provide stabilization during a recession. Please refer to my written testimony for many example was ohow this benefit is making a huge difference to workers. It doesnt create a disincentive to work as we have seen with the reke recent decline in unemployment workers. For so many people, theres more to a job than a paycheck and these are uncertain times. Works want stability and their jobs may be the source of health care, benefits, and Retirement Security. Finally, reemployment bonuses are not the answer. Theyre based on the premise that workers arent looking hard enough for work r. Not just any job. Employers who want to bring workers back part time as they start back up should consider work sharing to bring workers back but still allow them to get benefit. Policy makers need to learn the lesson of the Great Recession. Many families and communities never recovered. The response to the last recession didnt inject enough money. A Robust Program will keep workers in place and ready to resume employment once its safe. We cannot pretend that health and Economic Conditions will just disappear in a few months. For all its potential to help workers and stabilize the economy, the system does face challenges. It doesnt reach enough workers or provide enough wages. With only 27 of workers getting benefit. Black workers were on average 13 less likely than white workers to receive benefits and latinx were 4 less likely. And all states struggled to get programs up and running. How could a program that does so much good struggle so much. In 2020 federal funding for ui was 2. 14 billion. Back in 2001, that funding was 2. 21 billion. Given increases in the cost of living and the growth in the working population, that represents a big reduction. At the same time, the highest number of new claims for any week in history before this crisis was 495,000 in october of 1982 as the secretary mentioned. Thats in contrast to new claims of 3. 3 million for the weekend in march 21, 6. 6 million the following weeks, and initial claims in the mills every week since. The fact that systems did not collapse entirely under the weight of the demand is a testament to the dedication of the staff across the states but substantial funding will be necessary. Since the last recession, states cut benefits by reducing duration and adding barriers to access. Systems have been calibrated earned benefits causing denials and false front accusations. That slows benefit payments in a crisis. Finally, any steps taken to reopen the economy must ensure that Worker Health and safety are paramount. Workers receiving ui suitable work and continue to get benefits. However, workers are allowed to review unsuitable work. Should make it clear how federal requirements ensure suitable work does not include unsafe work. We need to establish a way to increase benefit duration rather than rely on ad hoc extensions for states to continually reprogram systems and end abruptly. Proposed a good way to scale benefits as have senators reed and bennet. I look forward to working with you to meaningfully help the people most hurt by the economic crisis this pandemic created. Thank you for your testimony. This is how we will finish the day out. First of all, i believe that it would just be senator wyden and my having questions. Senator wyden wanted two rounds, so ill give him the last ten minutes of the meeting. But since other people arent here, just in case you arent accustomed to how the congress works, a lot of members they cant be here submit questions for answer in writing. So, if you get those, i would ask you to respond in writing and as quickly as you can after you receive those questions. So, my i think ill probably just use five minutes. Ms. Townsend, in your testimony you noted iowa has worked with employers to prevent lay offs by promoting the iowa volunteer shared work program. This Program Allows employers to reduce hours instead of lay people off and those with reduced hours can receive a partial ui check. Couple of questions. What are some of the things your agency has done in iowa to make businesses aware of this opportunity . Then ill follow that up with another question. Sure, thank you, senator. Yes, we have been working hard from the very beginning to educate employers about the availability of the voluntary shared work program as we call it here in iowa. When we started the pandemic, we only had ten employers with about 800 employees taking advantage of the program. Were currently at over 183 employers covering over 8,400. We started having webinars that we recorded started march 17th with question and answer and information about the program. It wasnt the only thing we talked about in the program, but it was a share about program. We posted those videos online. We had a few other webinars that also discussed the voluntary shared work program. We also provided training to our staff who were answering calls and working with employers about the program so they can also answer questions and promote the program as well. We have a very robust covid19 web page, and we have provided a fact sheet about the program on the covid19 web page for the information. My deputy ryan west has been giving interviews and talking to Economic Developers across the state and providing information and education taabout the programs. Weve done a lot to educate the employers about the benefit of the program. I think youve answered my second question, but let me ask it anyway. And you can say you dont have anything to add if you dont. It goes beyond iowa. How can we make sure more employers across the country take advantage of the opportunity to keep more workers in their job . I think its the matter of just providing more outreach and education through the different state agencies. Okay. Thank you. Now, mr. Neely, thanks for sharing what its like to be a Small Business owner right now. Your Family Business has weathered a lot since it began in 1940. And you engs manimentioned some challenges in your testimony. Its great to hear about the pay and benefits you offer to your employees including daily bonus you pay to support them as they return to work. Question, you make a powerful point in your testimony saying the 600 payments are penalizing quote, penalizing an employee who is helping the Company Survive, end of quote. Some might say you should just call the state ui agency and report them so that they lose unemployment. What kind of a spot does that put you in . Others say wait before you answer that question. Others say you should simply double your wages. That isnt easy thats real easy for them to say. Kind of a question to you. Right . If this 600 were continued to next year, how do you think that would affect your business, other businesses like yours . Well, first of all, as far as the unemployment situation goes, fortunately i didnt have to make that decision because all of our employees did come back to work once i called them to let them know that we got the ppp money. As far as doubling wages, you know, our business is down about 35 right now so i dont know how anyone could just make that type of a statement without knowing the goings on and how Business Climate is for the country. Some businesses are doing very well that do the ppptype products, and other businesses are, you know, struggling as we are. So, i feel that weve offered competitive wages and plus the benefits and to try to increase those wages substantially in this current economic time is not feasible at this time. Ms. Evermore, i dont have a question for you, but where did you go to high school in iowa . Fort dodge senior high. No kidding. Well, welcome to im sure you go home a lot. Excuse me, chairman i thought you were done. No, there was one other question you had that i didnt address yet. As far as the 600 being continued until the end of the year, i cant say whether that would affect us or not. There is the possibility due to the current downturn in our business with the pandemic situation that if the business does not increase that we may end up having to lay off employees once the ppp money pp. So it would be good for the employee that is laid off but again its not good for the rest of the people continuing to work or not benefiting from that. So we might have to look at a shared work program where theres rotations. This is something that i could consider in the future. Now senator, for two terms. I wont go a full two rounds mister chairman. Thank you for your courtesy. Thank you all for your patience. About three and a half hours ago or something along those lines, i made the point that i think is very critical. That is that Everybody Wins when workers can go back to see for workplaces. And so what were trying to do is think through how to do that, and let me if i might start with scott sanders, and mr. Sanders youre somewhere out in cyberspace. Is that right . Thats correct. You represent the association of state officials who handled these unemployment issues, and the central question in the 600 dollars a week debate as we have been thrashing through here for hours on and, is that i and others on our side wanted 100 wage replacement. Thats what we called for, and thats always been our first choice. Secretary scalia said the states cannot do that. So after days of being at an impasse, we came up with this idea of rough justice. Now all through the afternoon, when secretary scalia was here, he was zigging and zagging on the question of what the states were capable of actually doing. Since youre the point person for the states, i thought it would be helpful if you could give me a direct answer to the question, isnt it still the case that it would be difficult for most states to implement 100 wage replacement for each worker . So this may sound like a bureaucratic answer but its a reality under the current state of the systems across the u. S. So any change would take time, it would also affect the retroactive activity of claims processing. The other challenge that Earnings Data legs that comes through state agencies. You dont know youre replacing for each worker. I also dont know how you could do that with self employed individuals. Also, i think even a simple change without adequate time for states to design tests and implement will be challenging. You also have the challenge of communicating this change to the public. So implementation of Something Like this would vary greatly from sea to state, but i believe that any change, a flat dollar amount would be the easiest thing to do. Okay, so it would still be very difficult for states with all of those factors that you described, it would be very difficult still for most states to implement 100 wage replacement. Im not going to ask you to take us through the nuances of the law again. Thank you for all the terrific advocacy work that youve done, and i have a couple of questions for you. If you look at what congress did in the cares act to superchurch Unemployment Benefits. In your view, with there have been a quicker and more efficient way to get this desperately needed relief to the people who need it . No the Unemployment Insurance system was really the best system in place to quickly ramp up benefits and get them out the door. This is assistance that is designed to respond to recessions. There was no other existing system in place that could have gotten benefits out the way that it did. And i would like for the record because you have these years of expertise on various kinds of reform proposals to get your thoughts on the trigger idea. This idea of tying future benefits to actual Economic Conditions in real world markets. One of the reasons i was interested in it, as ive seen the various republican leaders, and one of my colleagues, senior republican, member of leadership, wrote an oped in the heel publication saying that the basic proposition of sort of tapering off benefits, as the economy got better, was the kind of thing that might be appealing as a way to break the gridlock. Ive been interested in, this senator bennetts been interested in, this we have colleagues who have pursued various approaches to this notion of tying the benefits to conditions on the ground. Whats your thinking on that . I think that youre proposal, as well as reed and minutes proposals are very logical, i think they make a lot of sense. In part because these benefits should be tied to a economic trigger rather than ad hoc proposals. Given the Current Crisis there extra important. Its very important to have automatic triggers right now, because what we really cant have with this level of unemployment is for systems to be turning on and off and turning on and turning off as Congress Makes sort of ad hoc decisions. The Computer Systems are already as stressed as they could possibly be. I think that makes the equity case, and the efficiency case along the lines of exactly what i want to do, because this is obviously a complicated area. I feel the secretary i would be interested in some of the ideas of trying to have a more flexible federal role with respect to administering benefits, but a trigger based on what you just responded to my question with, is something that would make sense that we could go to fairly quickly, and i really appreciate that. Answer mr. Rodriguez, thank you for your leadership. Congress woman, i know told me about your expertise, and i can see why it looks to me like you have all had these problems down there for years. And im just curious, in the 14 months between when government, the santos was worried about the pandemic, what was done to prevent the systems failure if anything . Senator thank you for your question. Thank you for recognizing representative laylas leadership in our area as well. The simple answer is nothing. Willful meaning none of the flaws in the system, and there are a rate of flaws in the system were hidden. It was a subject of a number of department of labor audits back in 2013 and 2014. There was a department of labor intervention. There was audit after audit, and the most recent one in 2019 was on the governors desk, and we recently also learned that on his way into office, Governor Desantis was advised of the stretchy this teaching threat of our employment system that the de eo it posed to the state of florida. If i will i will mention specifically, i spoke to constituents in the miami area and how theyve been impacted by the failures of the system. But there are other aspects of this as well. Employers whove had to lay off workers are horrified watching their former employees face eviction once our Eviction Moratorium is lifted. The last thing that i will mention is that the state of florida is leaving millions of dollars on the table. We are implementing the pua program. How many dollars in your estimation are you guys leaving on the table . Its hard to estimate. If i could quickly repeat a picture with regards to the pua, which protects the selfemployed, our rates of bringing people to the program when theyre ineligible for typical unemployment, are very. Low less than a quarter, about 20 . That is far below most states. The other thing to look at, the state has been awarding the minimum benefit level as a default, and created a extremely cumbersome system for employees, excuse me, not employees, people who are 1099 workers to establish how much theyre owed him up above the minimum. So cumbersome that they are literally encouraging people to facts in documents. This is 2020, they just came out with the process in the last couple of days with regards to how good workers could prove up the benefits theyre owed in addition to the 1 25. In addition to not bring people into the program as much, the status also defaulting to about half of the benefits level, so were probably leaving three dollars in washington for every dollar we drop down. Thank you mr. Rodriguez, youve been a excellent panel. Were at close to four hours at this point. I would only say as we wrap up mister chairman, then i hope the big take away from this discussion is that most americans want to work. They understand that that is the path to climb up the economic ladder. Ive been visiting with a lot of unemployed, people and they all come back and say i can have a much better life if im in the work force. There is a dignity and appreciation of what it means to be able to work for a paycheck. Lets get this help. Were going to be after july 31st for people who genuinely otherwise cant be, rent and pay for groceries, and id like to find a path to do that in a bipartisan way. Ive disagreed with the secretary, the first thing the secretary did after we passed the bill is go to the fox business. I was going to see what he had to say about our new legislation. He said our new concern is that Unemployed People would be dependent on government help. I dont agree with that. I hope that every member of the committee will see that the overwhelming number of americans appreciate, work have a strong work ethic and see it as the path to get, ahead and i know that weve talked about that in the past. I hope that can be the foundation of our work Going Forward. I told you we were done when senator biden was, done senator portman will be on tv for five minutes. Senator portman. Can you see me on tv . Yes, there you are. First of all i appreciate you allowing me to join you virtually. I was there with you for a couple of hours and i enjoyed the back and forth. I think that everything that the senator just said it is consistent with us figuring out a way to move forward here when were not providing, people on Unemployment Insurance to as we know from the studies it looks like that is 60 to 70 of people on the Unemployment Insurance are making more than they would if they want to work. The personal Budget Service says that moving forward thats going to be and even larger percentage, 80 percentage are getting more. We have to figure this out. One thing that i thought was interesting in your testimony and id like you to expand on briefly if you could, this is a problem, under the employment insurance systems in some states, you cant stay on Unemployment Insurance if your employer offers you a job because you have to, there is a search for work requirement. Scalia has talked about that in the past. The reality is if you have employees making a lot more on Unemployment Insurance then at work as an employer you may not want to ask them to come back to work. I think you just talked about this in your testimony. Can you talk about this incentive makes it hard for an employer to ask them to come back to go back to work and potentially hurt the relationship with their employee . There were historic low Unemployment Rates up until very recently. Now we are in a different situation. Can you talk about why this disparity might be a big problem . Senator portman, the 600 dollars extra obviously all employees on unemployment were happy to be on unemployment at the time because they were getting the extra money that was helping with whatever expenses they had. I didnt really feel any bad feelings about calling people back because theyre now coming off of unemployment and getting 600 dollars, i called them back because of the ppe requirements, if you keep people on unemployment than your employment rules and favorable wont be as high as they could be. Then you would end up having to pay the money back as a loan, as opposed to possible forgiveness of the money. Because of that i didnt have an issue in calling people back. I was happy that no one refused to come back. Everyone when i talked to them was in agreement and said fine well see you tomorrow. So it was a bit of a relief that i didnt have any pushback from any of them. You also said in your testimony people came back to ui because they could make more money under ui. Thats correct. One of the married couples talk to me at the time, and they just arbitrarily thought that they could go back on unemployment. Unfortunately in the conversation that we were happening, i missed that comment, and when they didnt come to work on the monday into tuesday following payday that friday, and they didnt call off, i was a little bit concerned. I had no idea what was going on. I found out later that they thought they could go back on unemployment, declare themselves as unemployed and tried to participate and get some of that 600 dollars per week. Let me just say in talking to employers, particularly employers having a tough time routine ink employees in the economy that was very different than the current one. Im certainly hearing that. The situation with people not wanting to come back because they could make more. About 200 dollars per week compared to wages. So there is a disparity there. I would also like to talk with miss townsend about whether a flat benefit unmanned is the only option. That seems to be what we are hearing from many in ohio. My offices across the country. I asked the question and got the response of were not sure from the secretary. What is your response to that . You mentioned that the flat benefit amount would be absolutely essential. How long do you think it would take you to have a individualized calculation where you would do a customized calculation . We want a wage replacement. Would that be possible for you to do in a efficient and quick manner . Im sorry senator i had a very tough time hearing the question. I think you are asking how long it would take us to be able to implement a Payment Program that was based on personal finances. Thats correct. Based on the testimony it sounds like youre saying a flat benefit like 600 dollars is all you can do. Thats correct. As opposed to a customized benefit that would relate to people getting their full wage replacement. Thats correct. This has been extended. The amount has changed. It would be a fairly simple change to go from 400 to 600 and probably no delay in getting those benefits. It has changed through wage replacement. For those individuals there would have to be an independent review. Probably what would happen is on the 1st of august payments would. And wed continue to pay the regular state benefits. Then we would take a few months to develop and implement the program. You answered my question. Thats great. For the next seven or eight weeks youre going to have countless people trying to reopen. If you have 700 dollars going to be tough. What happens after july 31st is up in the air. I think its a argument for a back to work. Bonus a flat rate. It cant be done as a practical matter. Scott sanders and isnt responding. If you had a flat rate, a bonus of hundred 50 dollars, what do you think of that mr. Sanders . Could that be administered to . No. Mr. Sanders, i cant hear you. Can you hear me . Mischance and why dont you answer that question for iowa . Sure. What i would say he is that would be a new program. To pay a bonus to the people who remain in the work force, the question is if that would be a new program if youre talking about paying people who go back to work . 600 dollars now federal. Go back to work and take some of that with them. The amount im talking about is 40 50 dollars. Whatever manages it would be a flat. Rate with that would be possible . When you answer that can you sum up senator portman . Yes but i think it would take a couple of weeks if not a couple of months in order to implement. Thank you mister chairman. Appreciate it. The cares act has provided unprecedented to help to American People in these challenging times. Many of the policies are still ramping up. We have yet to see the full impact of what was passed a few months ago. Im thankful to our witnesses including the secretary of labor for the information they provided about the cares act ui provisions. As a result i think we have a better understanding of what has and hasnt worked. The clear messages ive heard is that any future legislation thats considered has to be focused on getting people reconnected with work. I would surely think that that would be a compromise between what senator portman and wyden are talking about. We have the best economy weve had since before covid19. We should try to return to that situation as fast as possible. We should also coordinates our efforts. There are many policies other than ui that congress has passed to help people affected by the pandemic. We have to keep a close eye of the economy. We are seeing signs of improvement and we hope that continues. We hope that we can avoid more risk. The risk of more business closures and more long term unemployment. We tend to learn about the pandemic and economy affected by it every day. Were learning more about how to prevent, treat, and curate. As we do i know that all americans will Work Together to get our economy growing again. Thank you all very much. Needing adjourned. Tonight on American History tv starting at eight eastern. On july 23rd, 1860, seven detroit erupted in five days of rioting and violence sparked by police raid on eight illegal bar. The w. Xyz tv and abc was there to record at the event as they unfolded. This half hour documentary is courtesy of the archives of michigan. Watch the archives tonight and over the weekend on cspan 3. The spans washington journal. Every day were taking your calls live on the air. On the news of the, day and will discuss policy issues that impact. You coming up wednesday morning, he discusses the prosecution of former security official michael flynn. The House Judiciary Committee holds a permit me on racial profiling and Police Brutality in the wake of the death of george floyd while in police custody. Watch live on wednesday 10 am eastern on cspan. Online at cspan. Org, or listened live on the free cspan radio app. No treasury secretary Stephen Mnuchin and Small Business administrator need a corona testify on the cares act. Watch live wednesday 10 am eastern on cspan. Three or listened live on the free cspan radio app. John Charles Fremont brought the Pacific Coast into the United States. At the beginning of the story the United States and have a Pacific Coast. There was a territory in oregon that was disputed with britain. And there was california that was belonging to california, they took part in the conquest of california, just in charge in time of the conquest. He played a real role in changing the map of the United States. Next a look at u. S. Copyright law, with, musicians, authors and photographers on their view of the millennium copyright act. It at length takedown procedures for website hosts. Held by the