Today, U.S. Senators Mark R. Warner and Tim Kaine joined a bipartisan group of more than 30 colleagues to request that any future legislation to address COVID-19 include support for victims and survivors of domestic violence and sexual assault. The Senators expressed concern that service providers are reporting that abusers are using COVID-19 to isolate their victims, withhold financial resources, and refuse medical aid; rape crisis centers are seeing increased need for services; and many local law enforcement agencies are receiving an increased number of domestic violence-related calls.

“We appreciate that the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act provided $45 million for domestic violence services funded through the Family Violence Prevention and Services Act and $2 million for the National Domestic Violence Hotline,” the Senators wrote. “While this funding provides critical resources, the legislation did not include any additional support for sexual assault or domestic violence-related programs funded through the Department of Justice. These programs deliver essential support that is particularly needed at this time, including support for sexual assault service providers, law enforcement, and transitional housing programs, as well as for organizations that address the needs of communities of color and underserved populations.”

The letter, led by Senators Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), and Bob Casey (D-PA), was also signed by Senators Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Cory Booker (D-NJ),  Sherrod Brown (D-NJ), Chris Coons (D-DE), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NM), Mike Crapo (R-ID), Steve Daines (R-MT), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Joni Ernst (R-IA), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Kamala Harris (D-CA), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Angus King (I-ME), Ed Markey (D-MA), Bob Menendez (D-NJ), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Chris Murphy (D-CT), Jack Reed (D-RI), Jacky Rosen (D-NV), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ), Tina Smith (D-MN), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), Jon Tester (D-MT), Thom Tillis (R-NC), Tom Udall (D-NM), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), and Ron Wyden (D-OR).

The letter is supported by the following groups: Alaska Native Women’s Resource Center; Asian Pacific Institute on Gender-Based Violence; Break the Cycle; California Coalition Against Sexual Assault; Casa de Esperanza: National Latin@ Network for Healthy Families and Communities; Futures Without Violence; Jewish Women International; Legal Momentum; National Alliance to End Sexual Violence; National Coalition Against Domestic Violence; National Council of Jewish Women; National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges; National Domestic Violence Hotline; National Indigenous Women’s Resource Center; National Network to End Domestic Violence; National Organization of Sisters of Color Ending Sexual Assault; National Resource Center on Domestic Violence; StrongHearts Native Helpline; Tahirih Justice Center; Ujima, Inc.: The National Center on Violence Against Women in the Black Community; YWCA USA.

###

WASHINGTON – U.S. Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-VA) issued a statement today on the passing of Bishop Gerald O. Glenn:

“Bishop Glenn was my great friend for more than 20 years. He was an extraordinary spiritual and community leader, and we will all miss him very much.”

Bishop Glenn, founder and pastor of New Deliverance Evangelistic Church, delivered a prayer of invocation at Warner’s 2002 gubernatorial inauguration in Richmond.

###

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, 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 – Today, U.S. Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-VA) was joined by Sens. Mike Rounds (R-SD), Thom Tillis (R-NC), Bob Menendez (D-NJ), Tim Kaine (D-VA), Jerry Moran (R-KS), and Tim Scott (R-SC) in calling for Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC) to take urgent and immediate action to avoid an impending crisis in the housing finance system due to the economic fallout of the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak. In a letter to Sec. Steven T. Mnuchin, the Senators asked the FSOC to help avert instability in the broader mortgage market by providing temporary liquidity to mortgage servicers. Many servicers face an impending cash crunch as more Americans affected by the COVID-19 crisis are forced to seek economic assistance on their mortgages due to economic damage and job loss caused by the health crisis.  

“Given the magnitude of the economic stress that many Americans will face as a result of the virus, and the early numbers we are seeing from lenders across the country, it is likely that many families will be unable to make their payments as scheduled, triggering widespread participation in the program, with potentially up to 25% of borrowers seeking assistance. While this is a reminder of the program’s importance, it also presents a challenge,” wrote the lawmakers, who also pointed out that servicers could see as much as $100 billion in mortgage payments forborne. “To put this in perspective, according to Moody’s Analytics, last year servicers had total net profits of less than $10 billion.  The institutions that normally provide servicers with their liquidity will be unwilling to provide this unprecedented level of support, at least at a rate that many servicers could possibly afford.  This will leave many servicers with no way to cover the growing obligations.  Since this liquidity need was created by the CARES Act’s entirely appropriate, but extraordinary, requirement to provide widespread forbearance, measures should be taken to ensure that the businesses required to execute on that commitment can survive to see it through.”

The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act provides much-needed protections for homeowners, allowing any homeowner experiencing financial hardship to receive up to 6 months’ forbearance on their mortgage payments, as long as their mortgage is insured or guaranteed by the federal government. Up to 25 percent of borrowers are expected to rely on this program, leaving mortgage servicers with the responsibility of paying investors on behalf of borrowers. 

In their letter, the Senators emphasized that non-bank mortgage servicers – which currently account for half of the $7 trillion market for agency mortgages – will likely be unable to remain solvent in the near future due to limited liquidity, and the repercussions of their collapse will severely affect homeowners and the broader mortgage market.   

“While we understand that some nonbank lenders may have adopted practices that made them particularly susceptible to constraints on their liquidity during a severe downturn, imposing a broad liquidity shock to the entire servicing sector is not the way to go about reform,” they continued.  

Noting the systemic consequences of allowing mortgage servicers to fail – which include the devaluation of mortgage servicing rights (MSRs), the subsequent financial deterioration of healthy nonbank lenders and the skyrocketing costs and risks associated with providing mortgages in the future – the Senators urged the Sec. Mnuchin, the FHFA and the GSES to work through FSOC to take action in order to ensure that the unfolding crisis does as little damage to the economy as possible.

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

The Honorable Steven T. Mnuchin

Chair

Financial Stability Oversight Council

U.S. Department of the Treasury

1500 Pennsylvania Avenue NW

Washington, D.C. 20220 

Dear Chair Mnuchin: 

Thank you for your ongoing work to help stabilize the U.S. economy and provide assistance to businesses and workers during the unprecedented health emergency caused by the onset of the novel coronavirus (COVID-19).  We applaud recent efforts by regulators to consider and address liquidity constraints in the U.S. housing market, including the formation of a taskforce within the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC) that is appropriately focused on these matters.  We believe urgent action is required to avoid a critical strain on liquidity for certain home mortgage servicers.  Failure to quickly address the liquidity challenges facing servicers could have much broader, systemic implications for our economy.  

As you know, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act provides much-needed protections for most homeowners.  Any homeowner with a mortgage that is insured or guaranteed by the federal government who is experiencing financial hardship is eligible for up to 6 months’ forbearance on their mortgage payments, with a possible extension for another 6 months.  These provisions will provide substantial relief to homeowners and will reduce the risk that reductions in homeowners’ income caused by this public health crisis will trigger a housing crisis in the months ahead.  

Given the magnitude of the economic stress that many Americans will face as a result of the virus, and the early numbers we are seeing from lenders across the country, it is likely that many families will be unable to make their payments as scheduled, triggering widespread participation in the program, with potentially up to 25% of borrowers seeking assistance.  While this is a reminder of the program’s importance, it also presents a challenge.  As you know, the companies to which borrowers would normally make these payments, mortgage servicers, are obligated to pass those amounts on to investors, whether borrowers make them or not.  Thus, as borrowers participating in this program don’t send in their payments, the mortgage servicers will have to step in to pay investors on their behalf.  

Given that we could see as much as $100 billion in mortgage payments forborne through this program, it presents an existential threat to these companies, and thus to the broader mortgage market.  To put this in perspective, according to Moody’s Analytics, last year servicers had total net profits of less than $10 billion.  The institutions that normally provide servicers with their liquidity will be unwilling to provide this unprecedented level of support, at least at a rate that many servicers could possibly afford.  This will leave many servicers with no way to cover the growing obligations.  Since this liquidity need was created by the CARES Act’s entirely appropriate, but extraordinary, requirement to provide widespread forbearance, measures should be taken to ensure that the businesses required to execute on that commitment can survive to see it through.

While it may be sustainable, if not difficult, for servicers that are part of banks, which have other business lines and also access to bank-centric sources of liquidity to remain solvent, it is likely especially unsustainable for non-bank mortgage servicers, which are typically monolines and currently account for fully half the $7 trillion market for agency mortgages.  At some point in the not-too-distant-future, the strain on these nonbank mortgage servicers will become too much for many institutions to bear, and we fear that the repercussions of their failure to homeowners and the market will be severe. 

While we understand that some nonbank lenders may have adopted practices that made them particularly susceptible to constraints on their liquidity during a severe downturn, imposing a broad liquidity shock to the entire servicing sector is not the way to go about reform.  Stated differently, even if there are servicers whose thin capital and poor risk management structure make them inappropriate for assistance, ignoring the broader liquidity strain on the market right now would risk stress well beyond these companies. 

The reasons for acting are systemic.  First, as weaker nonbank mortgage servicers begin to struggle they may be forced to unload their mortgage servicing rights (MSRs) to stay afloat.  This will drive down the value of MSRs generally, reducing the value of the assets of all other nonbank lenders.  This will deteriorate the financial position of healthier nonbank lenders so that they face some of the same risks that forced the less healthy nonbank lenders into a sell-off.  At best, we are disabling a large swath of previously healthy lenders at the worst possible time.  At worst, we may be risking a downward spiral. 

Moreover, when these nonbank lenders fail, regulators will be forced to find a home for their servicing at a time when there will be very few parties interested in absorbing these obligations.  MSR values will be declining, the costs and risks of servicing will be skyrocketing, nonbank lenders will be weakened, and we fear that banks will still be reticent to get into servicing for many of the same reasons they have stayed away in recent years. 

As we are learning again in this crisis, it takes time for programs to be established and for the assistance to reach the necessary parties.  Therefore, we are calling for immediate action to avoid an impending crisis in the mortgage servicing sector, that could further threaten the mortgage market.

The CARES Act includes an appropriation of $455 billion for purposes of economic stabilization activities under Section 4003.  Congress made these resources available to the Federal Reserve in order to address the types of liquidity challenges we expect mortgage servicers to encounter in the coming days and weeks.  Thus, action in accordance with this Section would be entirely appropriate under the circumstances.  Moreover, we also believe that the FHFA and the GSEs should ensure their policies mitigate, not increase, the liquidity demands facing servicers, consistent with the GSE’s mandate to serve all markets at all times. 

When workers are able to return to their jobs and millions of households can resume making the payments they intended to make, we must all take the opportunity to examine the many challenges, successes and failures of our current regulatory regime, including whatever steps are needed to strengthen the servicing sector going forward.  While some servicers entered this crisis with too much exposure to liquidity constraints, the focus now should not be on longer-term reform, but on ensuring that the crisis now unfolding does as little damage to the economy as possible. 

We appreciate your continued efforts to help sustain the American economy and our housing finance system during these challenging times and look forward to working together to protect homeowners during the COVID-19 pandemic.  Thank you for your consideration.   

Sincerely, 

###

WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-VA) sent a letter to Social Security Administration (SSA) Commissioner Andrew Saul urging the agency to consider freezing Social Security garnishment actions and focus on providing timely responses to those who are having their Social Security payments withheld during the COVID-19 pandemic. SSA operates a network of more than 1,200 offices around the country, which have been closed since March 17.

“I write today to urge the Social Security Administration to offer leniency and accommodations during the ongoing public health crisis caused by the spread of COVID-19. Local Social Security offices have been closed to in-person visits since March 17. This has limited access for vulnerable Americans. Many Americans cannot use online services either because they do not have an internet connection at their residence or they lack access to public internet services because most non-essential businesses across the country are closed,” wrote Sen. Warner in his letter to Commissioner Saul.

While services have continued through the agency’s toll-free line and website, Sen. Warner’s office has heard from a number of Virginians who are unable to receive timely assistance from SSA due to the lack of in-person services. When offices are not closed, SSA fields 33 million calls annually through its National 800 Number and long wait times are typical. In Fiscal Year 2019, SSA’s offices were fully open and phone lines were still busy 14 percent of the time.

“Many report having filed reconsiderations and appeals before March 17 with no word from their local office that the paperwork has been received, let alone that it is being processed. Others report that their previously scheduled hearings with Administrative Law Judges have been canceled. At a time when businesses are laying off workers, these individuals will struggle to find even supplemental employment while they wait for their applications to be adjudicated,” continued Sen. Warner.

In his letter, Sen. Warner calls on the agency to issue a temporary emergency suspension of garnishment actions that would allow SSA to protect its employees while ensuring Americans dependent on SSA decisions are not adversely affected by the COVID-19 crisis.

Last week, Sen. Warner successfully pushed the U.S. Treasury to ensure that all Social Security beneficiaries will automatically receive the direct payment assistance included in the CARES Act without having to file tax returns.

A copy of the letter is found here and below. A comprehensive list of Sen. Warner’s work to protect Americans amid the coronavirus outbreak is available here.

The Honorable Andrew Saul

Commissioner

Social Security Administration

6401 Security Boulevard

Baltimore, MD 21235

Dear Commissioner Saul:

I write today to urge the Social Security Administration (SSA) to offer leniency and accommodations during the ongoing public health crisis caused by the spread of COVID-19. Local Social Security offices have been closed to in-person visits since March 17. This has limited access for vulnerable Americans. Many Americans cannot use online services either because they do not have an internet connection at their residence or they lack access to public internet services because most non-essential businesses across the country are closed.

My office has heard from a number of Virginians who, through various circumstances, are having their Social Security payments withheld and are unable to receive timely assistance from SSA due to the lack of in-person services. Many report having filed reconsiderations and appeals before March 17 with no word from their local office that the paperwork has been received, let alone that it is being processed. Others report that their previously scheduled hearings with Administrative Law Judges have been canceled. At a time when businesses are laying off workers, these individuals will struggle to find even supplemental employment while they wait for their applications to be adjudicated.

As we all take steps to limit the spread of COVID-19, I urge you consider freezing garnishment actions until SSA’s usual services can resume and assist those Americans who are relying on timely decisions for their applications. During this crisis, we need to ensure the federal government is a helping hand, rather than a hurdle for Americans struggling to deal with the impacts of the virus.

Thank you in advance for your prompt response and attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

###

WASHINGTON – A week after Congress responded to the coronavirus pandemic with a $2.2 trillion package designed to provide economic relief to workers and businesses that for the first time provided unemployment benefits to gig workers and the self-employed, states are struggling to implement in its provisions and swiftly provide financial aid to Americans who are part of the “gig economy.” Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-VA), a longtime national leader on labor issues affecting contractors and the contingent workforce, today called on the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) to issue better guidance to states allowing them to quickly implement the provisions in theCoronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act allowing these workers to access unemployment benefits in the midst of a growing economic emergency. Though DOL issued initial guidance on the CARES Act to states late yesterday, it failed to address several key issues, leaving many states flailing in their efforts to quickly make the new unemployment benefits accessible to Americans who need it, and ensuring that it may be weeks before some workers can access the financial relief as Congress intended.

“The CARES Act directs states to stand up a new program, the Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA) Program, to disburse benefits to workers who would normally not be eligible for unemployment assistance, such as gig workers or freelancers. Unfortunately, we are already hearing reports from unemployment officials from around the country that it will likely take weeks to stand up a new program and disburse benefits to these newly eligible workers,” Sen. Warner wrote in a letter to Secretary of Labor Eugene Scalia. “In the middle of the COVID-19 pandemic, with unemployment claims overwhelming state systems, there is no time to waste. While I appreciate the initial round of guidance that was released yesterday, the Department of Labor should have already issued more comprehensive guidance to states this week.”

In order to enable the rapid implementation of the CARES Act, Sen. Warner urged DOL to issue guidance on several problems that were missing from its release yesterday. Sen. Warner called on DOL to: streamline the Pandemic Unemployment Assistance process by removing burdensome regulatory barriers limiting worker participation; require states to accept electronic documentation and allow them flexibility to make determinations on eligibility for the program on a case-by-case basis; take the lead on contracting innovative technologies to implement the program and avoid all 50 states having to each “reinvent the wheel”; and increase flexibility for states to calculate and disburse weekly benefits. 

In early March, Sen. Warner successfully called on leading gig worker platform companies to commit that independent contractors who deliver their services will not be penalized for following recommended health procedures to protect the public from further spread of the coronavirus. For years, Sen. Warner has championed legislation to establish portable benefits systems that would allow gig workers, independent contractors, and the self-employed to access benefits and protections that are commonly provided to full-time employees, such as paid leave, workers’ compensation, skills training, unemployment insurance, tax withholding and tax-advantaged retirement savings.

Following the March 18 passage of the Families First Coronavirus Response Act, Sen. Warner also led several of his colleagues in urging state governors and workforce administrators to implement its provisions easing restrictions on emergency unemployment benefits as swiftly as possible.

A copy of today’s letter is available here and below. A list of Sen. Warner’s work to protect Americans amid the coronavirus outbreak is available here.

April 3, 2020

The Honorable Eugene Scalia

Secretary of Labor

U.S. Department of Labor

200 Constitution Ave, NW

Washington, DC 20210

Dear Secretary Scalia,

Yesterday, the Department of Labor released the latest number of unemployment claims around the country. The numbers are unprecedented: 6.6 million new unemployment claims this past week in addition to the 3.3 million from the week before. In a span of two weeks, more workers filed unemployment claims than the entirety of the 8.7 million jobs lost during the Great Recession. In light of the record-breaking unemployment numbers and the tremendous pressure this places on state unemployment agencies, I write to urge the Department of Labor to issue additional, more comprehensive guidance to states on implementation of the unemployment provisions of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, Public Law No. 116-136, as quickly as possible.

The CARES Act directs states to stand up a new program, the Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA) Program, to disburse benefits to workers who would normally not be eligible for unemployment assistance, such as gig workers or freelancers. Unfortunately, we are already hearing reports from unemployment officials from around the country that it will likely take weeks to stand up a new program and disburse benefits to these newly eligible workers.  In the middle of the COVID-19 pandemic, with unemployment claims overwhelming state systems, there is no time to waste. While I appreciate the initial round of guidance that was released yesterday, the Department of Labor should have already issued more comprehensive guidance to states this week. 

To enable the rapid implementation of the CARES Act, the Department of Labor should issue guidance on the following issues that were missing from DOL’s release yesterday: 

1. As others have stated, the Pandemic Unemployment Assistance process should be streamlined as much as possible. Streamlining could include the removal of burdensome regulatory barriers normally applicable under the Disaster Unemployment Assistance program that limit worker participation.
2. Given the present Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s public health recommendation urging individuals to stay home, states should be required to accept electronic documentation submissions and have the flexibility to make determinations on eligibility for the program on a case by case basis.
3. The Department of Labor should be taking the lead on innovative technological solutions that relieve the burden on states to recreate the wheel on their own. As others have noted, vendors with cloud-based solutions for PUA processing could streamline the process for state unemployment agencies.
4. States should have increased flexibility to calculate weekly benefit calculation for part-time workers in a way that takes into consideration the expansion of part-time work in the gig economy. They should also be given the flexibility to determine wages using alternative forms of wage information other than state tax returns and be encouraged to disburse benefits while processing documentation.

Ensuring swift, and effective, implementation of section 2102 of the CARES Act will require that both the federal government and states to be nimble, and act swiftly, to shore up the critical social safety net for all American workers. It is paramount that people who normally would fall through the cracks of the current system, like gig workers and freelancers, get needed support as quickly as possible as the country weathers the economic downturn caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. I’m hopeful that, long-term, we will learn something from this about supporting worker benefits in ways that can improve our public health and make our economy more resilient. 

Again, I urge you to issue more comprehensive guidance on the implementation of the CARES Act as quickly as possible. Thank you in advance for your prompt attention to this matter. I look forward to working with you on your next steps.

Sincerely, 

###

WASHINGTON – U.S. Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-VA) asked the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to issue needed direction for consistent implementation of a section in the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act that provides relief to the contractor community supporting many critical national security missions. In a letter to Acting Director Russell Vought, Sen. Warner stressed the importance of promptly issuing clear direction to agencies and contracting officers in order to assure continuity in the contractor community and avoid agencies issuing their own guidance, creating a confusing patchwork for industry.

“Without such overarching directive, I fear that agencies and their contracting officers will take disparate approaches, leading to uncertainty and instability in the contractor industrial base, if not a permanent loss of capability,” wrote Sen. Warner. “In addition, I want to avoid draconian cutbacks that may create significant counterintelligence risks.”

Section 3610 of the CARES Act allows government agencies to continue to pay contractors if they cannot perform their work because of coronavirus-related restrictions, such as the closure of federal or contractor facilities and/or the inability to telework. Such restrictions disproportionately affect contractors who perform classified work that cannot be undertaken outside of a secure facility.

In his letter, Sen. Warner noted that agencies are already issuing implementation memoranda that potentially diverge from one another. He also requested that any directive: 

• Fully endorses and supports contractors teleworking or otherwise working remotely, and payment therewith, consistent with mission requirements, law, and Office of Personnel Management memorandum M-18-20, “Managing Federal Contract Performance Issues associated with the Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19)”;

• Applies equally to contractor work conducted at government or contractor facilities or sites, whether they support unclassified or classified work;
• Provides a fair cost reimbursement methodology that allows for reasonable direct and indirect costs and in-progress payments for work normally paid on a lump-sum basis;
• Provides standard contract modification language, preferably made available within 15 days of issuance of OMB guidance, to maintain ready state (on-call) contractor capability, reflects dependencies on subcontractors and suppliers whose performance may be impaired by COVID-19, and adjust contract performance issues, including reductions in scope or schedule changes due to COVID-19;
• Allows expedited consideration of extensions in periods of performance and adjustments in contract ceiling values to minimize unnecessary disruption in contract execution for the duration of the emergency; and
• Applies to contractor work done for all government agencies to the greatest extent practicable to promote consistency for existing and new work.

A copy of the letter can be found here and below.  

The Honorable Russell Vought

Acting Director

Office of Management and Budget

Washington, D.C.  20503

Dear Acting Director Vought:

I write to ask that you promptly issue a directive so that government agencies consistently implement Sec. 3610 of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, which provides relief to the contractor community supporting many critical national security missions.  Without such overarching directive, I fear that agencies and their contracting officers will take disparate approaches, leading to uncertainty and instability in the contractor industrial base, if not a permanent loss of capability.  Agencies are already issuing memoranda on this topic that potentially diverge from one another.  In addition, I want to avoid draconian cutbacks that may create significant counterintelligence risks.

Specifically, I request you issue a directive that: 

• Fully endorses and supports contractors teleworking or otherwise working remotely, and payment therewith, consistent with mission requirements, law, and Office of Personnel Management memorandum M-18-20, “Managing Federal Contract Performance Issues associated with the Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19)”;

• Applies equally to contractor work conducted at government or contractor facilities or sites, whether they support unclassified or classified work;

• Provides a fair cost reimbursement methodology that allows for reasonable direct and indirect costs and in-progress payments for work normally paid on a lump-sum basis;

• Provides standard contract modification language, preferably made available within 15 days of issuance of OMB guidance, to maintain ready state (on-call) contractor capability, reflects dependencies on subcontractors and suppliers whose performance may be impaired by COVID-19, and adjust contract performance issues, including reductions in scope or schedule changes due to COVID-19;

• Allows expedited consideration of extensions in periods of performance and adjustments in contract ceiling values to minimize unnecessary disruption in contract execution for the duration of the emergency; and

• Applies to contractor work done for all government agencies to the greatest extent practicable to promote consistency for existing and new work.

Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.  If you have any questions, please contact Jon Rosenwasser of the Committee staff at (202) 224-1700.

Sincerely, 

###

WASHINGTON – U.S. Sens. Mark R. Warner and Tim Kaine (both D-VA) today expressed concern with the health and welfare of military personnel aboard the USS Theodore Roosevelt – an American aircraft carrier that has been reported to have more than 100 sailors aboard who have tested positive for the novel coronavirus (COVID-19). In a letter, the Senators questioned Secretary of the Navy Thomas B. Modly about the conditions aboard the vessel and about any actions being taken to ensure the health and safety of sailors and other military personnel.

“We are writing about the recent developments aboard the USS Theodore Roosevelt (CVN-71) due to coronavirus (COVID-19) infections, so we can better understand the Navy’s plans for safeguarding its personnel and what Congress can do to assist your efforts,” wrote the Senators.“As you are aware, there are countless Virginians with family members serving aboard Navy warships who are all concerned about the health and well-being of their loved ones.  We share these concerns for all our personnel serving in the military at this challenging time.” 

On Monday, in a letter to senior military officials, Capt. Brett Crozier detailed the USS Theodore Roosevelt’s deteriorating conditions, noting that the ship’s environment is especially conducive to the spread of the disease due to the large number of confined sailors and the sharing of resources and facilities, among other things. The vessel – which is currently docked in Guam – has more than 4,000 crew members onboard, including the more than 100 sailors who have tested positive for COVID-19.

In their letter to the Navy, the Senators – who have heard directly from the relatives of servicemembers aboard the ship – requested answers to the following questions: 

1. Has the Navy developed new measures and policies to ensure critical components are managed by crew that are known to be free of COVID-19?   How many COVID-19 tests would the Navy require to implement such a policy?  How many tests do you currently possess?
2. Does the Navy have an adequate number of berthing barges to house crewmembers for nuclear vessels that require daily maintenance of critical components while those ships are cleaned/decontaminated?  
3. Does the Navy have an adequate number of berthing barges to house crewmembers for vessels slated for deployment in the next 120 days while they are cleaned and decontaminated?
4. Is there any plan, similar to those being pioneered by the US Transportation Command for military airlift pilots, to effectively “cocoon” ships’ crews to avoid new contamination from outside sources?
5. What measures are in place to safely re-supply currently deployed ships without unnecessarily exposing the crew to COVID-19?
6. Is there any requirement to extend personnel slated for retirement or separation to safely operate Navy vessels?  Can Congress provide additional incentive pay for Navy personnel whose separations, retirements, deployments or working conditions have been impacted by COVID-19?
7. Have you been in contact with the Department of Energy about the lessons learned from the COVID-19 outbreak on the USS Roosevelt for dissemination amongst nuclear power plants operating in the U.S.?
8. Are there any other authorities or resources the Navy requires to better secure the health and safety of Navy personnel & their families during this crisis? 

Text of the letter is available here and below. 

April 1, 2020       

The Honorable Thomas B. Modly

Secretary of the Navy 

1000 Navy Pentagon 

Washington, DC 20350-1000  

Dear Acting Secretary Modly: 

We are writing about the recent developments aboard the USS Theodore Roosevelt (CVN-71) due to coronavirus (COVID-19) infections, so we can better understand the Navy’s plans for safeguarding its personnel and what Congress can do to assist your efforts. 

As you are aware, there are countless Virginians with family members serving aboard Navy warships who are all concerned about the health and well-being of their loved ones.  We share these concerns for all our personnel serving in the military at this challenging time. 

In an effort to ensure Congress is best assisting the Navy in meeting the challenges posed by the coronavirus, we ask that you provide a response to the following in an appropriate format, as we understand that details affecting readiness are sensitive and potentially classified: 

1. Has the Navy developed new measures and policies to ensure critical components are managed by crew that are known to be free of COVID-19?   How many COVID-19 tests would the Navy require to implement such a policy?  How many tests do you currently possess?
2. Does the Navy have an adequate number of berthing barges to house crewmembers for nuclear vessels that require daily maintenance of critical components while those ships are cleaned/decontaminated?  
3. Does the Navy have an adequate number of berthing barges to house crewmembers for vessels slated for deployment in the next 120 days while they are cleaned and decontaminated?
4. Is there any plan, similar to those being pioneered by the US Transportation Command for military airlift pilots, to effectively “cocoon” ships’ crews to avoid new contamination from outside sources?
5. What measures are in place to safely re-supply currently deployed ships without unnecessarily exposing the crew to COVID-19?
6. Is there any requirement to extend personnel slated for retirement or separation to safely operate Navy vessels?  Can Congress provide additional incentive pay for Navy personnel whose separations, retirements, deployments or working conditions have been impacted by COVID-19?
7. Have you been in contact with the Department of Energy about the lessons learned from the COVID-19 outbreak on the USS Roosevelt for dissemination amongst nuclear power plants operating in the U.S.?
8. Are there any other authorities or resources the Navy requires to better secure the health and safety of Navy personnel & their families during this crisis? 

Thank you for your time and consideration. 

Sincerely, 

###