WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-VA), a member of the Senate Finance Committee, joined his Senate Democratic colleagues in pressing the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) to ensure workers Congress intended to be covered by the Pandemic Unemployment Assistance Program receive the benefits they deserve. The program, which was established in the CARES Act, is intended to make sure that individuals who would normally not qualify for unemployment benefits under state law, but are currently unemployed, unable, or unavailable to work as a direct result of the COVID-19 health crisis, are eligible to receive unemployment compensation.

“[P]arts of the guidance appear narrow or ambiguous, which could make states think they need to exclude workers who Congress clearly intended to receive unemployment compensation through the Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA) program,” wrote the Senators in their letter to Secretary of Labor Eugene Scalia.

In the letter, the Senators are requesting the Department of Labor clarify its guidance pertaining to workers who have been diagnosed with COVID-19 without receiving a test, workers with COVID-19 who take time off of work, workers without child care options in summer months, workers unable to get to work due to stay-at-home orders, workers with underlying health conditions like asthma, and self-employed workers like gig workers who are unable to work due to plummeting demand for their services.

Earlier this month, Sen. Warner sent a letter to Secretary Scalia calling on the federal agency to streamline the Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA) process by issuing additional, more comprehensive guidance to states so they can quickly implement the unemployment provisions in the CARES Act and ensure that gig workers are able to access unemployment benefits in the midst of the growing economic emergency. Among other recommendations, the letter called on the Department of Labor to take the lead with innovative technological solutions for administration of the PUA that states could use in order to facilitate the process and limit the need to stand up new state-level solutions.

In addition to Sen. Warner, today’s letter was led by Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR), Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and co-signed by Sens. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Patty Murray (D-WA), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Ed Markey (D-MA), Doug Jones (D-AL), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Angus King (D-VT), Bob Menendez (D-NJ), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Ben Cardin (D-MD), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Tom Carper (D-DE), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), Tina Smith (D-MN), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Bob Casey (D-PA), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Jack Reed (D-RI), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), Jacky Rosen (D-NV), Maria Cantwell (D-WA), and Tom Udall (D-NM). 

A copy of the letter can be found here and below. A list of Sen. Warner’s work to protect Americans amid the COVID-19 outbreak is available here.

The Honorable Eugene Scalia

Secretary of Labor

U.S. Department of Labor

200 Constitution Ave. NW

Washington, DC 20210

Dear Secretary Scalia: 

Thank you for entering into agreements with states and territories and issuing some of the key guidance needed to implement new federal unemployment compensation programs on April 4 and April 5, 2020 (Unemployment Insurance Program Letter [UIPL] Numbers 15-20 and 16-20). This guidance is essential to start getting more unemployment benefits to workers across the country, including self-employed and other workers who are not covered by the traditional Unemployment Insurance (UI) program. 

We understand that the examples of covered workers provided in the guidance are not intended to be exhaustive. However, parts of the guidance appear narrow or ambiguous, which could make states think they need to exclude workers who Congress clearly intended to receive unemployment compensation through the Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA) program.

We request that the Department of Labor (the Department) issue additional guidance on the issues described below no later than Friday, April 17. Understanding that you are still working diligently to release guidance for several CARES Act programs, if you are unable to issue clarifying guidance by Friday, April 17, we request a written response to this letter providing a timeline for issuing clarifying guidance and detailing how you intend to address these issues.

1. The Department’s guidance for sections 2102(a)(3)(A)(ii)(I)(aa), (bb), and (ff) reference circumstances under which an individual testing positive for COVID-19 is a possible qualification for a person receiving PUA. In the CARES Act, Congress deliberately used language referring to a “diagnosis” rather than “tested positive”, knowing testing shortages, delays in test results, and guidance instructing people to stay home rather than travel to medical facilities could make testing-based criteria difficult to meet. Furthermore, if someone suspects they have COVID-19 but can care for themselves at home, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends they recover at home to avoid infecting others.  

We are pleased that the language in the Department’s guidance says that someone may qualify for PUA if they have tested positive or received a diagnosis, but we request that the Department make crystal clear that while a positive test would be sufficient to qualify for PUA under these provisions, a qualifying diagnosis never requires a positive test. Any diagnosis from a health care provider, including one made via phone or telehealth, is also sufficient for a person to qualify for PUA.  

2. The two examples provided in UIPL 16-20 Attachment I (C)(1)(a) of the guidance for an individual who might qualify for unemployment benefits under section 2102(a)(3)(A)(ii)(I)(aa) of the CARES Act based on their own illness both involve an individual who must quit a job. This provision of the CARES Act also covers any individual who is forced to take unpaid time off work for the reasons described, regardless of whether their employment relationship is formally severed. The guidance should be clarified to ensure that such individuals are covered. 

3. Section 2102(a)(3)(A)(ii)(I)(dd) of the CARES Act says an individual may qualify for PUA if “a child or other person in the household for which the individual has primary caregiving responsibility is unable to attend school or another facility that is closed as a direct result of the COVID–19 public health emergency and such school or facility care is required for the individual to work.” The guidance in UIPL 16-20 Attachment I (C)(1)(d) provides accurate examples of situations in which a caregiver could qualify for PUA under this provision.

However, the guidance later states that “a school is not closed as a direct result of the COVID-19 public health emergency, for purposes of section 2102(a)(3)(A)(ii)(I)(dd), after the date the school year was originally scheduled to end.” Many families rely on child care, summer camp, or other facilities (including school facilities) to care for their children in the summer and those facilities may remain closed as a result of COVID-19. The guidance should be clarified to confirm that individuals may qualify under section 2102(a)(3)(A)(ii)(I)(dd) during the summer months, for families that rely on any of those facilities.

4. Section 2102(a)(3)(A)(ii)(I)(ee) of the CARES Act says that an individual who is “unable to reach the place of employment because of a quarantine imposed as a direct result of the COVID–19 public health emergency” may qualify for PUA. The example of a quarantine provided in UIPL 16-20 Attachment I (C)(1)(e) of the Department’s guidance describes “a state or municipal order restricting travel” preventing an individual from getting to work. We are concerned that using the language of “restricting travel” may be too narrow to capture all of types of quarantine orders that are covered under this provision of the CARES Act. The guidance should clarify that such an order includes any stay-at-home, shelter-in-place, social distancing, or other order that requires individuals to stay home in quarantine to reduce the spread of COVID-19.

Similarly, UIPL 16-20 Attachment I (C)(1)(g) references a “state or municipal order restricting travel” with respect to section 2102(a)(3)(A)(ii)(I)(gg) of the CARES Act. This should also be clarified as described above.

5. Section 2102(a)(3)(A)(ii)(I)(ff) of the CARES Act says that an individual who is “unable to reach the place of employment because the individual has been advised by a health care provider to self-quarantine due to concerns related to COVID–19” may qualify for PUA. The examples specified in the Department’s guidance describe a person who suspects they are infected with COVID-19 and a person who is immune-compromised because of a serious health condition.  

The reference to a person “whose immune system is compromised by virtue of a serious health condition” in the guidance does not cover the wide range of reasons a health care provider may advise self-quarantine. For example, while the CDC considers older Americans more at risk of serious complications from COVID-19, states may not think they are covered under Department’s guidance. Furthermore, workers with certain health conditions (such as a respiratory condition) may not technically have a compromised immune system but would be at increased risk from COVID-19 and may need to self-quarantine. As we learn more about COVID-19, we may discover that there are other populations at risk too.

The Department needs to clarify that anyone advised by a health care provider to self-quarantine due to increased risk of COVID-19 should be covered by PUA, regardless of the underlying reason for their increased risk.

6. We are pleased that the Secretary established additional criteria under section 2102(a)(3)(A)(ii)(I)(kk) of the CARES Act to clarify that self-employed individuals such as independent contractors who may not have one specific place of employment are covered by PUA, in keeping with the intent of the legislation. While we believe that such workers are covered by the text of the law, we appreciate the Department’s action to eliminate ambiguity and ensure these workers receive benefits.

However, to avoid any confusion about who should qualify under UIPL 16-20 Attachment I (C)(1)(k), the Department must clarify that an independent contractor who is unable to work and forced to suspend work activities because there is reduced demand for their services also qualifies for PUA benefits. Many independent contractors have seen demand for their services dry up as a direct result of COVID-19. In the example of a ride share driver, a driver should be able to claim PUA when they are forced to suspend their work because there are too few customers seeking rides. For an independent contractor, losing many or all of their customers overnight is analogous to an employee being laid off by an employer, or, as the Department’s guidance notes, their “place of employment” being closed. Congress created the PUA program with the intent to cover workers like independent contractors and gig workers who may not have traditional employment relationships, but who have suddenly lost their livelihoods during this time of crisis. We believe that that the CARES Act definitively covers such workers, and the Department should clarify its guidance to reflect this.

7. The Department’s guidance says that “States should bear in mind that many of the qualifying circumstances described in section 2102(a)(3)(A)(ii)(I) are likely to be of short term duration.” Although we agree that some individuals may qualify for PUA for only a short period, many applicants will rely on PUA for longer periods, especially if this public health crisis persists. Furthermore, the way an individual qualifies for PUA may vary from week to week. For example, someone could first qualify if they get sick with COVID-19, then their child’s school may close as they recover, and they would qualify based on the new circumstance.

The Department’s guidance should encourage states to consider this as they create PUA application systems. It would be inefficient for both the claimant and the state workforce agency if individuals have to file a new initial application each time their qualifying circumstance changes. Individuals continue to qualify for benefits as long as they continue to meet at least one of the qualifying circumstances described in section 2102(a)(3)(A)(ii)(I), even if the precise provision under which they qualify changes.

8. We have heard conflicting reports of whether the Department’s guidance allows for the addition of the $600 federal supplement to PUA benefits in U.S. territories that do not have UI programs. The guidance the Department has issued for Federal Pandemic Unemployment Compensation and PUA is ambiguous on this matter.

Section 2102(d) of the CARES Act says that for an individual who lives in these territories, “the assistance authorized under subsection (b) for a week of unemployment shall be calculated in accordance with section 625.6 of title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, or any successor thereto, and shall be increased by the amount of Federal Pandemic Unemployment Compensation under section 2104.” This language makes clear that the “amount of Federal Pandemic Unemployment Compensation” ($600) should be included in the PUA benefit amount for anyone qualifying for PUA in any of the territories. We would appreciate if the Department would clarify this matter to facilitate the administration and payment of benefits in these territories.

In addition to the concerns we have raised above, we know that states will have additional questions as they continue to implement PUA and other CARES Act programs. We urge the Department to respond to questions from states as quickly as possible to avoid causing any delay in the processing of benefits.

Thank you for your attention to this important matter.

Sincerely,

###

WASHINGTON – U.S. Sens. Mark R. Warner (D-VA) and Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) along with U.S. Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-CA) today sent a letter to White House Senior Advisor Jared Kushner, raising questions about reports that the White House has assembled technology and health care firms to establish a far-reaching national coronavirus surveillance system. In the letter, the members of Congress expressed concerns that the White House has not been fully transparent about the effort, particularly in light of the significant data privacy issues associated with sharing Americans’ personal health information with corporations that have a checkered history when it comes to protecting patient and user privacy.

“While we support greater efforts to track and combat the spread of COVID-19 – and have been alarmed by the notably delayed response to the crisis by this Administration – we have serious concerns with the secrecy of these efforts and their impact on the health privacy of all Americans. Your office’s denial of the existence of this effort, despite ample corroborating reporting, only compounds concerns we have with lack of transparency,” the members of Congress wrote to Mr. Kushner. 

In the letter, the members noted that Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPPA), which Congress passed in 1996, failed to foresee the recent boom in health technologies allowing medical data to be shared without patient or doctor consent, enabling companies that have previously been accused of privacy abuses to handle sensitive patient data without strong privacy protections. The reported establishment of far-reaching public health surveillance infrastructure in collaboration with large technology firms, against the backdrop of these failures of HIPAA, raises important privacy concerns.

“This growing health pandemic further exacerbates increasing concerns about the role large tech firms are starting to play in our health care sector. Health care entities are increasingly entering into secret data sharing partnerships with dominant technology platforms. These partnerships have bolstered the platforms’ ability to exploit consumer data and leverage their hold on data into nascent markets such as health analytics. Contrary to the fundamental, animating principle of HIPAA, this encroachment is occurring without the knowledge or consent of doctors or patients through opaque business agreements and exceptions. We fear that further empowering technology firms and providing unfettered access to sensitive health information during the COVID-19 pandemic could fatally undermine health privacy in the United States,” wrote the members of Congress. 

Added Sen. Warner, Sen. Blumenthal and Rep. Eshoo, “Similarly, we have tragically seen that COVID-19 is following and exacerbating existing health disparities and inequalities among racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic groups. A public health surveillance system should be able capture these parameters in order to ensure our response addresses the heightened risk to these communities. Yet we must be cautious about the impact and further use of this sensitive information, which also poses fraught risk for bias and civil rights violations, as we have seen when algorithmic systems used in calculating health premiums, employment determinations, and credit evaluations have led to discriminatory outcomes.” 

The members requested responses to the following questions: 

1. Which technology companies, data providers, and other companies have you approached to participate in the public health surveillance initiative and on what basis were they chosen?
2. What measures will the Administration put into place to ensure that federal agencies and private sector partners do not misuse or reuse health data for non-pandemic-related purposes, including for training commercial algorithmic decision-making systems, and to require the disposal of data after the sunset of the national emergency? What additional steps have you taken to protect health data from their potential misuse or mishandling?
3. What is the program described in the press meant to accomplish? Will it be used for the allocation of resources, symptom tracking, or contact tracing? What agency will be operating the program and which agencies will have access to the data? 
4. When will the federal government stop collecting and sharing health data with the private sector for the public health surveillance initiative? Will the Administration commit to a sunset period after the lifting of the national emergency?
5. What measures will the Administration put into place to ensure that the public health surveillance initiative protects against misuse of sensitive information and mitigates discriminatory outcomes, such as on the basis of racial identity, sexual orientation, disability status, and income?
6. Will the Administration commit to conducting an audit of data use, sharing, and security by federal agencies and private sector partners under any waivers or surveillance initiative within a short period after the end of the health emergency?
7. What steps has the Administration taken under the Privacy Act, which limits the federal government's authority to collect personal data from third parties and imposes numerous other privacy safeguards?
8. Will you commit to working with us to pass strong legal safeguards that ensure public health surveillance data can be effectively collected and used without compromising privacy?

Sen. Warner has previously raised concerns that enforcement of existing patient privacy law has not kept up with technological advancement when it comes to the use and sharing of confidential medical data and called for updating laws, including new protections to govern collection, processing, and retention of public health surveillance data. 

A copy of the letter is available here, and the full text appears below. A list of Sen. Warner’s work to protect Americans amid the COVID-19 outbreak is available here.

April 10, 2020

Jared Kushner

Senior Advisor to the President

The White House

1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW

Washington, DC  20500

Dear Mr. Kushner: 

We write you in the wake of reports that you have assembled a range of technology firms and health care providers to establish a far-reaching public health surveillance system in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. While we support greater efforts to track and combat the spread of COVID-19 – and have been alarmed by the notably delayed response to the crisis by this Administration – we have serious concerns with the secrecy of these efforts and their impact on the health privacy of all Americans. Your office’s denial of the existence of this effort, despite ample corroborating reporting, only compounds concerns we have with lack of transparency.

In response to the spread of COVID-19, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has promulgated a number of guidance documents that attenuate or waive privacy protections normally attached to protected health information. Many of these measures, such as disclosure of a patient’s COVID-19 diagnosis to protect first responders, are warranted during this health emergency. However, we fear that – absent a clear commitment and improvements to our health privacy laws – these extraordinary measures could undermine the confidentiality and security of our health information and become the new status quo.

It is increasingly apparent that Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act’s (HIPPA) Privacy and Security rules have not aged well. We have seen numerous examples of the limits of HIPAA undermining the strong protections we have come to expect of our sensitive health information. For example, there are rumors in the press that Administration is promoting a COVID-19 screening registration tool offered by Verily, which is owned by Google’s parent company Alphabet. That site is inexplicably not covered under HIPAA. 

This growing health pandemic further exacerbates increasing concerns about the role large tech firms are starting to play in our health care sector. Health care entities are increasingly entering into secret data sharing partnerships with dominant technology platforms. These partnerships have bolstered the platforms’ ability to exploit consumer data and leverage their hold on data into nascent markets such as health analytics. Contrary to the fundamental, animating principle of HIPAA, this encroachment is occurring without the knowledge or consent of doctors or patients through opaque business agreements and exceptions. We fear that further empowering technology firms and providing unfettered access to sensitive health information during the COVID-19 pandemic could fatally undermine health privacy in the United States.

Given reports indicating that the Administration has solicited help from companies with checkered histories in protecting user privacy, we have serious concerns that these public health surveillance systems may serve as beachheads for far-reaching health data collection efforts that go beyond responding to the current crisis. Public health surveillance efforts must be accompanied by governance measures that provide durable privacy protections and account for any impacts on our rights. For instance, secondary uses of public health surveillance data beyond coordinating our public health response should be strictly restricted. Any secondary usage for commercial purposes should be explicitly prohibited unless authorized on a limited basis with appropriate administrative process and public input. 

Similarly, we have tragically seen that COVID-19 is following and exacerbating existing health disparities and inequalities among racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic groups. A public health surveillance system should be able capture these parameters in order to ensure our response addresses the heightened risk to these communities. Yet we must be cautious about the impact and further use of this sensitive information, which also poses fraught risk for bias and civil rights violations, as we have seen when algorithmic systems used in calculating health premiums, employment determinations, and credit evaluations have led to discriminatory outcomes.

Our urgent and forceful response to COVID-19 can coexist with protecting and even bolstering our health privacy. If not appropriately addressed, these issues could lead to a breakdown in public trust that could ultimately thwart successful public health surveillance initiatives. We encourage you to think seriously about these issues. To that end, we request that you respond to the following questions we have on your current effort:

1. Which technology companies, data providers, and other companies have you approached to participate in the public health surveillance initiative and on what basis were they chosen?
2. What measures will the Administration put into place to ensure that federal agencies and private sector partners do not misuse or reuse health data for non-pandemic-related purposes, including for training commercial algorithmic decision-making systems, and to require the disposal of data after the sunset of the national emergency? What additional steps have you taken to protect health data from their potential misuse or mishandling?
3. What is the program described in the press meant to accomplish? Will it be used for the allocation of resources, symptom tracking, or contact tracing? What agency will be operating the program and which agencies will have access to the data? 
4. When will the federal government stop collecting and sharing health data with the private sector for the public health surveillance initiative? Will the Administration commit to a sunset period after the lifting of the national emergency?
5. What measures will the Administration put into place to ensure that the public health surveillance initiative protects against misuse of sensitive information and mitigates discriminatory outcomes, such as on the basis of racial identity, sexual orientation, disability status, and income?
6. Will the Administration commit to conducting an audit of data use, sharing, and security by federal agencies and private sector partners under any waivers or surveillance initiative within a short period after the end of the health emergency?
7. What steps has the Administration taken under the Privacy Act, which limits the federal government's authority to collect personal data from third parties and imposes numerous other privacy safeguards?
8. Will you commit to working with us to pass strong legal safeguards that ensure public health surveillance data can be effectively collected and used without compromising privacy?  

Thank you for your prompt attention and responses to these important questions.

Sincerely, 

###

WASHINGTON – U.S. Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-VA) joines Sens. Gary Peters (D-MI), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Chris Murphy (D-CT), Tim Kaine (D-VA) and the Senate Democratic Caucus in raising serious concerns about the Trump Administration’s reliance on private companies to distribute desperately needed medical supplies during the Coronavirus pandemic. Although the President has declared a national emergency and mobilized the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to help distribute supplies, FEMA is currently relying on private companies to distribute masks, N95 respirators, gowns, gloves and other critical supplies to states, without clear guidance from the federal government on which areas or facilities should be prioritized. This practice raises serious questions about the use of taxpayer dollars, the government authorities delegated to private companies, and if their involvement could result in supplies not being delivered to the areas that need it most. 

“While we agree that the existing supply chains and unique capabilities of the commercial market should be used to the greatest extent practicable, the process the task force has decided to use is, at best, opaque and inefficient,” the Senators wrote. “We are concerned that the federal government is using taxpayer dollars to bring supplies to the United States, just to have six private distributors step in and sell those very supplies to desperate states, tribes and health care systems for a profit. In the private market, states, tribes, federal agencies, hospitals, and other entities must all compete for the same supplies, where resources are allocated according to existing commercial relationships or the highest bidder instead of greatest need.”

In a letter, the Senators expressed concern that, without sufficient oversight, the Administration’s strategy for distributing medical supplies is vulnerable to waste, fraud, and abuse. Currently, only half of the supplies procured by the federal government are distributed to areas considered to be “hotspots” by medical experts, with the other half left to commercial distributors to deliver wherever they choose. Earlier this month, the Department of Defense transferred more than 5 million desperately needed N95 respirators to FEMA, which then turned them over to private companies for distribution, rather than working with state emergency management offices to coordinate delivery to localities with the greatest need. The Senators raised concerns that private businesses’ commercial interests could lead to allocation according to the highest bidder, rather than on a basis of need.

The Senators requested detailed information on how private distributors are allocating medical supplies to Coronavirus hotspots through programs like “Project Airbridge,” and how the Administration is using its authorities under the Defense Production Act to guide distribution efforts. The Senators are also seeking information on the oversight efforts conducted by FEMA – including details on how the federal government is ensuring the delivery of supplies to communities with the greatest need and the Administration’s strategy to prevent favoritism or price gouging by private companies. 

Text of the letter is copied below and available here: 

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Today, U.S. Senators Mark R. Warner and Tim Kaine announced $21,295,240 in federal funding through the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for Virginia health centers. These grants were awarded as part of the coronavirus relief package signed into law last month.

“This federal funding will support centers who are doing life-saving work in their communities during this crisis,” the Senators said. “We’re pleased to see these federal dollars go towards supporting Virginia health centers, and we will keep working to ensure that health centers in the Commonwealth receive the help they need during this challenging time.”

The following will receive funding:

• Rockbridge Area Free Clinic of Lexington, VA will receive $638,180
• Tri-Area Community Health of Laurel Fork, VA will receive $696,800
• Blue Ridge Medical Center, Inc. of Arrington, VA will receive $671,945
• Central Virginia Health Services of New Canton, VA will receive $1,563,440
• Portsmouth Community Health Center, Inc. of Portsmouth, VA will receive $801,455
• Peninsula Institute for Community Health of Newport News, VA will receive $1,055,315
• Neighborhood Health of Alexandria, VA will receive $1,142,120
• Clinch River Health Services, Inc. of Dungannon, VA will receive $565,175
• Kuumba Community Health & Wellness Center of Roanoke, VA will receive $749,720
• St. Charles Health Council, Inc. of Jonesville, VA will receive $853,730
• Eastern Shore Rural Health System, Inc. of Onancock, VA will receive $1,152,305
• Daily Planet Health Services of Richmond, VA will receive $772,460
• Johnson Health Center of Madison Heights, VA will receive $944,165
• Highland Medical Center, Inc. of Monterey, VA will receive $545,375
• Piedmont Access to Health Services (PATHS) of Danville, VA will receive $892,430
• Southwest Virginia Community Health Systems, Inc. of Saltville, VA will receive $821,510
• Martinsville Henry County Coalition for Health and Wellness of Martinsville, VA will receive $637,205
• Harrisonburg Community Health Center, Inc. of Harrisonburg, VA will receive $840,560
• Free Clinic Of The New River Valley, Inc. of Christiansburg, VA will receive $619,490
• Greater Prince William Community Health Center of Woodbridge, VA will receive $1,012,055
• Bland County Medical Clinic, Inc. of Bastian, VA will receive $654,440
• Southern Dominion Health Systems, Inc. of Victoria, VA will receive $752,315
• Stony Creek Community Health Center of Stony Creek, VA will receive $549,560
• Loudoun Community Health Center DBA Health Works Northern Virginia of Leesburg, VA will receive $870,035
• Capital Area Health Network of Richmond, VA will receive $906,830
• Horizon Health Services, Inc. of Ivor, VA will receive $586,625

###

WASHINGTON – U.S. Sens. Mark R. Warner and Tim Kaine (both D-VA) joined their Senate colleagues in a letter calling for funding to support local journalism and media to be included in any future COVID-19 relief package. In a letter to Senate leadership and the Chair and Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Appropriations, the Senators warn that the widespread impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, which includes plummeting advertising revenue and profits, could decimate regional and local news outlets even as communities have become increasingly reliant on their reporting during the public health crisis. While news outlets across the country have reduced or eliminated print editions, Virginia newspapers have implemented pay staff cuts and furloughed staff to deal with the financial impact of COVID-19.

“The current public health crisis has made the already vital role of local news even more critical,” wrote the Senators. “Some of the most important guidance for families and businesses during this crisis has been highly localized. Local journalism has been providing communities answers to critical questions, including information on where to get locally tested, hospital capacity, road closures, essential business hours of operation, and shelter-in-place orders. During this unprecedented public health crisis, people need to have access to their trusted local news outlets for this reliable and sometimes life-saving information.” 

Last month, Gannett Co., Inc., owner of several Virginia daily and weekly newspapers such as The News Leader in Staunton, Va., The Progress-Index in Petersburg, Va., and Virginia Lawyers Weekly announced that employees making more than $38,000 must take a week of unpaid leave on a rotating basis. Additionally, Lee Enterprises, Inc.,informed its employees through a company-wide memo that they would face either a pay reduction or furlough equivalent to two weeks of salary. Lee owns newspapers in Virginia, including: the Daily Progress in Charlottesville, Va., The Free Lance-Star in Fredericksburg, Va., The Register & Bee in Danville, Va. the Herald Courier in Bristol, Va., the Martinsville Bulletin in Martinsville, Va., the News & Advance in Lynchburg, Va., the Times-Dispatch in Richmond, Va., The Roanoke Times in Roanoke, Va., the Smith Mountain Lake in Hardy, Va., the Star-Exponent in Culpeper, Va., SWVA Today, and the Franklin News-Post in Franklin County, Va. 

“Local journalists have proven themselves to be valiant first responders during this pandemic, exposing themselves to a dangerous virus in order to get the story to the people,” said PEN America's Washington director, Thomas O. Melia. “They are 'essential workers' as many executive orders on staying at home at the state and local level have explicitly noted. The sector as a whole is suffering gravely as the nationwide shutdown has accelerated their loss of revenue. This is why we at PEN America support Senator Blumenthal's initiative to urge Senate leaders to include specific targeted stimulus relief for local journalism at this critical time.”

“The COVID-19 pandemic has only increased the extraordinary value of local news outlets, which have seen huge jumps in traffic since the beginning of March. Local news stories are now among the most viewed stories in the country – even as local media fight to survive the pandemic. Without funding from the next stimulus package, we may lose one of the most important sources of information we have to navigate through this crisis,” said Lisa Macpherson, Senior Policy Fellow at Public Knowledge.

In addition to Sens. Warner and Kaine, the letter was led by Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and signed by Sens. Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Jack Reed (D-RI), Patty Murray (D-WA), Mazie K. Hirono (D-HI), Bob Casey (D-PA), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Edward J. Markey (D-MA), Angus King (I-ME), Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Tom Udall (D-NM), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) and Joe Manchin (D-WV).

A copy of the letter is found here and below.

Dear Majority Leader McConnell, Minority Leader Schumer, Chairman Shelby and Vice Chairman Leahy,

We write to ask that any future coronavirus relief package contain funding to support local journalism and media. Without this support, communities across the country risk losing one of their key sources of accurate information about what citizens need to know and do in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. 

Local news is in a state of crisis that has only been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. For over a decade, there has been a steady succession of local outlets closing down, reporters being laid off, production schedules cut, and resources tightened as the growth of social media and technology platforms has concentrated critical advertising revenue in the hands of a few. But the current public health crisis has made this problem worse. As many communities have shut down local restaurants, entertainment venues, and other non-essential businesses in an attempt to “flatten the curve,” local papers and local broadcasters have lost even more of the advertising revenue they rely on from these businesses. Communities across the country have seen the further decimation of this important industry as local publications have stopped printing and laid off staff in the last few weeks. 

Local news plays an indispensable role in American civic life as a trusted source for critical information, a watchdog for government and corporate accountability, and a building block of social cohesion. Thousands of communities across the country turn to local news for information on governance, elections, education, health, and numerous issues specific to their cities, towns, and neighborhoods. Local news sources tailored to a particular ethnic or language group, or a particular neighborhood, also play a critical role in covering a wide range of issues that impact underrepresented communities.

The current public health crisis has made the already vital role of local news even more critical. The World Health Organization has identified the existence of a “massive infodemic” about COVID-19, that is, “an overabundance of information—some accurate and some not—that makes it hard for people to find trustworthy sources and reliable guidance when they need it.” Some of the most important guidance for families and businesses during this crisis has been highly localized. Local journalism has been providing communities answers to critical questions, including information on where to get locally tested, hospital capacity, road closures, essential business hours of operation, and shelter-in-place orders. During this unprecedented public health crisis, people need to have access to their trusted local news outlets for this reliable and sometimes life-saving information.

Reliable local news and information has been critically important during the COVID-19 pandemic, yet it has become more scarce. Any future stimulus package must contain funding to support this important industry at such a critical time. Such a provision should be tailored to benefit aid recipients who make a long-term commitment to high quality local news.

Sincerely,

###

Virginia Beach, VA - Yesterday, Congresswoman Elaine Luria and Senator Mark Warner joined a tele-townhall hosted by the Eastern Shore Chambers of Commerce (ESCC). During the town hall, both elected officials and members of the Chambers of Commerce fielded questions from constituents regarding the Coronavirus epidemic and its impact on the local economy, specifically looking at tourism, seasonal businesses, and those in retirement.  

“With a booming tourism industry that runs on a seasonal schedule, many constituents had questions about the stay-at-home order what their government is doing to help them,” said Congresswoman Elaine Luria. “I appreciated this opportunity to discuss how to the CARES Act will provide support to the tourism industry and small businesses. I was thankful to be joined by Senator Warner as we learn how to best serve the Commonwealth.” 

“I want to thank the Eastern Shore Chamber of Commerce and the Eastern Shore Tourism Council for hosting us on a call today so that we could hear directly from small businesses and non-profits struggling with the economic downturn in light of the COVID-19 crisis,” said Senator Mark R. Warner. “I was grateful for the opportunity to share a little more about the relief provisions included in the CARES Act, and to listen to leaders in Eastern Shore about what Congress must do next to deal with the economic fallout from the coronavirus pandemic.” 

###

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senators Mark R. Warner and Tim Kaine, as well as Representatives Bobby Scott, Gerry Connolly, Don Beyer, A. Donald McEachin, Elaine Luria, Abigail Spanberger, and Jennifer Wexton sent a letter urging Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin to provide Virginia maximum flexibility to use funding from the coronavirus economic relief package to help address budget shortfalls and prevent harmful budget cuts to services vital to addressing the economic and health crises. 

“We are writing to request that you provide guidance on the State and Local Coronavirus Relief Fund that maximizes the flexibility state and local governments have in utilizing the funds,” the members wrote. “The nation’s governors and mayors are on the frontlines of fighting the COVID-19 pandemic, and are in the best position to know where this funding can be most useful in protecting Americans.”

“Getting the relief funding to state and local governments quickly, and with few restrictions, will allow governors and mayors to best address the crises they are facing,” the members continued.

The full text of the letter can be found here and below.

###

WASHINGTON – U.S. Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-VA), Vice Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, issued the following statement after President Trump informed the congressional Intelligence Committees of his intent to fire the Intelligence Community Inspector General, Michael Atkinson:

“In the midst of a national emergency, it is unconscionable that the President is once again attempting to undermine the integrity of the intelligence community by firing yet another an intelligence official simply for doing his job. The work of the intelligence community has never been about loyalty to a single individual; it’s about keeping us all safe from those who wish to do our country harm. We should all be deeply disturbed by ongoing attempts to politicize the nation’s intelligence agencies.”

###

WASHINGTON – U.S. Sens. Mark R. Warner (D-VA) and Tim Scott (R-SC) members of the Senate Finance Committee, led a bipartisan letter to Secretary Azar and Administrator Verma encouraging both HHS and CMS to consider solutions to protect Medicare beneficiaries from high-risk settings and ensure safe access to care as we continue to work to combat COVID-19.

“As we seek additional options for protecting the lives of those most negatively affected by the pandemic, we are writing to encourage you to continue engaging with our offices and relevant stakeholders to build upon these productive steps through effective implementation, along with additional policy levers, as needed, in order to ensure that Medicare beneficiaries can access physician-administered Part B-covered infused and injectable medicines in the home setting during the COVID-19 public health emergency,” the senators wrote.

They continued, “We ask that, as you engage with patient advocates, providers, and other stakeholders, you seek out opportunities to further close remaining gaps and, as much as possible, pursue solutions that provide for continuity and consistency in care. These solutions must ensure beneficiary access to Part B drugs, provide appropriate payment for these drugs, and sufficiently reimburse for administration services rendered when provided in the home setting.”

Sens. Scott and Warner have been joined by Sens. Mike Crapo (R-ID), Tom Carper (D-DE), Pat Roberts (R-KS), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Mike Enzi (R-WY), Bob Casey (D-PA), John Cornyn (R-TX), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), John Thune (R-SD), Ben Cardin (D-MD), Richard Burr (R-NC), Chris Coons (D-DE), Rob Portman (R-OH), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Bill Cassidy (R-LA), Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ), James Lankford (R-OK), Jon Tester (D-MT), Steve Daines (R-MT), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-MS), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Susan Collins (R-ME), Marco Rubio (R-FL), Kelly Loeffler (R-GA), Thom Tillis (R-NC), Joni Ernst (R-IA), and Cory Gardner (R-CO).

Full text of the letter can be accessed HERE.

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senators Mark R. Warner and Tim Kaine joined 33 of their colleagues in a letter to House and Senate leadership requesting robust funding for all K-12 students to have adequate home internet connectivity given school closures due to the ongoing coronavirus pandemic. The Senators expressed their disappointment with the lack of such funding in the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act that recently passed Congress, despite their repeated call for resources dedicated to distance learning. The lawmakers urged leadership in both chambers of Congress to support $2 billion in E-Rate funding in the next coronavirus relief package for students to learn at home.

“Children without connectivity are at risk of not only being unable to complete their homework during this pandemic, but being unable to continue their overall education,” wrote the lawmakers in their letter to Senate and House leadership. “Congress must address this issue by providing financial support specifically dedicated to expanding home internet access in the next emergency relief package so that no child falls behind in their education.”

In their letter, the lawmakers specifically request at least $2 billion in E-Rate funds for schools and libraries to provide Wi-Fi hotspots or other devices with Wi-Fi capability to students without adequate connectivity at their home.

The coronavirus pandemic has shined a bright light on the “homework gap” experienced by the 12 million students in this country who do not have internet access at home and are unable to complete their homework — at a time when more than 70 percent of educators assign schoolwork that requires internet access. Research has shown that the homework gap affects students in both rural and urban areas and disproportionately affects lower-income students and students of color. Students without internet access at home consistently score lower in reading, math, and science. Without Congressional action, this existing inequity will only be exacerbated by the high number of schools that are suspending in-person classes and have transitioned to remote learning over the internet to protect the health of students, faculty, and staff.

A copy of the letter can be found HERE.

Last month, Warner and Kaine called on Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos to provide clear guidance for school districts and institutions of higher education, as well as families and students, following widespread school closures across the country due to the spread of the coronavirus. In their letter, they highlighted that many students cannot access online learning because they do not have a computer or internet access.

###

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senators Mark R. Warner and Tim Kaine (both D-VA) joinedSenators Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Sherrod Brown (D-OH), and 37 of their colleagues in a letter to Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin and Social Security Administration Commissioner Andrew Saulto call for Social Security recipients to receive their direct cash payment without having to file a tax return. While the CARES Act that Congress passed last week ensured that the Treasury Department had the authority to send automatic direct cash assistance to Social Security beneficiaries regardless of whether they file taxes or not, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) released contradictory guidance earlier this week stating that Social Security beneficiaries would need to file tax returns in order to receive direct payments. 

Warner & Kaine joined their colleagues in expressing alarm over this guidance and calling for the Treasury Department and Social Security Administration to ensure that all Social Security beneficiaries will automatically receive the direct assistance included in the CARES Act without having to file tax returns.

“This [IRS] filing requirement would place a significant burden on retired seniors and individuals who experience disabilities, especially given the current unavailability of tax filing assistance from Volunteer Income Tax Assistance and Tax Counseling for the Elderly programs during the COVID-19 crisis,” wrote the Senators. “We strongly urge you to ensure that economic stimulus payments are automatically sent to vulnerable seniors and individuals who experience disabilities, without these individuals needing to file a tax return.”

In addition to Warner, Kaine, Hassan, and Brown, the letter was also signed by Senators Bob Casey (D-PA), Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Thomas R. Carper (D-DE), Michael F. Bennet (D-CO), Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), Benjamin L. Cardin (D-MD), Richard J. Durbin (D-IL), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Jacky Rosen (D-NV), Doug Jones (D-AL), Jack Reed (D-RI), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Edward J. Markey (D-MA), Gary C. Peters (D-MI), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Bernard Sanders (I-VT), Mazie K. Hirono (D-HI), Tom Udall (D-NM), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Angus S. King, Jr. (I-ME), Tina Smith (D-MN), Christopher A. Coons (D-DE), Patty Murray (D-WA), Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Chris Murphy (D-CT), and Maria Cantwell (D-WA).
 
Read the full letter here and below:

Dear Secretary Mnuchin and Commissioner Saul:

The COVID-19 public health emergency is taking a massive economic toll on families across the country. To provide immediate financial assistance to struggling individuals during this crisis, Congress passed and the President signed the bipartisan Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act. This legislation directly provides most Americans with stimulus payments to help cover necessary personal expenses.

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) will automatically send stimulus payments to eligible taxpayers who filed a 2018 or 2019 tax return. However, many Social Security beneficiaries, including retired seniors and individuals who experience disabilities, typically do not file tax returns. To ensure that these vulnerable individuals automatically receive stimulus payments, the CARES Act explicitly provides the Treasury Department with the authority to provide payments to seniors receiving Social Security retirement benefits and to individuals receiving Social Security disability benefits, even if these individuals do not file tax returns.

Unfortunately, on March 30, the IRS published guidance indicating that the agency may require recipients of Social Security retirement and disability benefits to file 2019 tax returns to receive stimulus payments. This filing requirement would place a significant burden on retired seniors and individuals who experience disabilities, especially given the current unavailability of tax filing assistance from Volunteer Income Tax Assistance and Tax Counseling for the Elderly programs during the COVID-19 crisis.

Along with colleagues on the House Ways and Means Committee, we strongly urge you to ensure that economic stimulus payments are automatically sent to vulnerable seniors and individuals who experience disabilities, without these individuals needing to file a tax return.

Sincerely,

###

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senators Mark R. Warner and Tim Kaine announced $52,292,406 in federal funding to support access to safe and affordable housing throughout Virginia. The funding is part of the first allocation of grants from the coronavirus relief package signed into law last week.

“We’re pleased to see significant funding go directly towards supporting Virginians with affordable housing during this pandemic,” said the Senators. “We will continue fighting to ensure people across the Commonwealth get the federal assistance they need.”

The United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) awarded the funding through three grant programs – the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program, the Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG) program, and the Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS (HOPWA) program.

The funding will be awarded as shown below.

The Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program provides annual grants on a formula basis to states, cities, and counties to develop viable urban communities by providing decent housing and a suitable living environment and expanding economic opportunities, principally for low- and moderate-income persons. The following localities will receive funding through the CDBG program:

The Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG) program provides annual grants to state, local, and private entities to assist people in quickly regaining stability in permanent housing after experiencing a housing crisis and/or homelessness. In addition to rapid re-housing and homelessness prevention, the ESG program also provides limited funding for street outreach as well as for improving the quality and number of emergency homeless shelters. The following localities will receive funding through the ESG program: 

The Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) program provides housing assistance and related supportive services to local units of government, states, and non-profit organizations for projects that benefit low-income persons medically diagnosed with HIV/AIDS. The following localities will receive funding through the HOPWA program:

###