WASHINGTON – Following concerns about worker safety in Virginia, U.S. Sens. Mark R. Warner and Tim Kaine (both D-VA) joined Senator Tammy Baldwin and 32 of their Senate colleagues in a letter to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer calling for any future coronavirus response legislation to include a requirement that the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) issue an Emergency TemporaryStandard (ETS) to guarantee protections for all essential workers.

“We write to request that any future COVID-19 pandemic legislation include language that ensures proper training and protection for workers on the front lines fighting this virus, and those working to provide the essential supplies and services for all of us during these unprecedented times.  The single best way to do this is to require the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to issue an Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS) requiring employers to develop and implement a comprehensive plan to protect their workers.  We feel strongly that employees need enforceable standards in place to be safe at work and for those they serve to be safe as well,” wrote the Senators in their letter to Senate leadership.

An ETS from OSHA would require all employers nationwide to implement a comprehensive plan to ensure proper training and protections for those workers who must continue going to work during the pandemic, including with personal protective equipment and access to hand sanitizer or adequate facilities to wash their hands.

“Millions of Americans are bravely going to work every day, helping in the direct response to COVID-19 and providing essential services to keep our country running. These frontline workers are doctors, nurses, and health care staff in our hospitals, emergency responders, grocery store workers, farmworkers, meat and poultry processing plant workers, construction workers, transit workers, and many more,” the Senators wrote. “Many of these workers are working shoulder to shoulder yet lack necessary personal protective equipment (PPE), access to hand sanitizer, or the facilities to wash their hands with warm water and soap as recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). We feel strongly that the federal government has an obligation to protect employees during this public health emergency. There is a current lack of consistency surrounding the monitoring of symptoms, sanitation practices, social distancing, personal protective equipment standards, and communication requirements that must be addressed.”

The Senators highlighted the fact that the United Food and Commercial Workers union—which represents 1.3 million retail, food package/processing, and grocery workers—is reporting that at least 30 grocery store workers have died, and at least 3,000 have symptoms or have been exposed to COVID-19.  Major meat processing companies such JBS USA in Colorado, Smithfield Foods in South Dakota, and Tysons Food Inc. in Iowa have temporarily shut down certain operations due to COVID-19 cases among employees and concerns that it may spread.

In addition to Warner, Kaine, and Baldwin, the letter was signed by Senators Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Patty Murray (D-WA), Richard J. Durbin (D-IL), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Edward J. Markey (D-MA), Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Jack Reed (D-RI), Cory A. Booker (D-NJ), Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Robert P. Casey, Jr. (D-PA), Benjamin L. Cardin (D-MD), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Thomas R. Carper (D-DE), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), Kamala D. Harris (D-CA), Angus S. King, Jr. (D-ME), Jeffrey A. Merkley (D-OR), Tina Smith (D-MN), Bernard Sanders (I-VT), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Jacky Rosen (D-NV), Michael F. Bennet (D-CO), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Chris Murphy (D-CT), and Gary Peters (D-MI).

The full letter is available here.

###

WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-VA) urged the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to take immediate action to ensure that individuals all across the country have access to broadband, as more Americans are forced to rely on the internet for telework, telehealth, and online learning amid the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak. According to the FCC’s latest figures, more than 20 million Americans continue to lack access to meaningful broadband service, with at least 770,000 Virginians currently unserved.

“Under the current circumstances, this lack of broadband access threatens to greatly – and potentially lastingly – exacerbate disparities in health, education, and economic equity,” wrote Sen. Warner. “On nearly a daily basis, I hear from Virginians who are struggling to engage in telework, supervise their children’s online learning, and engage in telehealth over antiquated DSL connections that make even a single one of these activities virtually impossible.”

“While I applaud a number of the steps the Commission has taken to improve service and widen access, including encouraging spectrum leases to utilize underutilized spectrum, temporarily waiving the E-Rate and Rural Health Care gift rules, and (after encouragement from offices such as mine) releasing a public notice clarifying that community use of E-Rate supported Wi-Fi networks is permitted, much more work remains to be done,” he continued. “While a number of preexisting broadband programs, such as the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund, will help close the broadband gap in the long-term, I encourage you to take action that can enable expanded coverage now.” 

Specifically, Sen. Warner urged the FCC to make it easier for wireless providers to increase existing signal contours, such as by temporarily increasing relevant power limits for Wireless Internet Service Providers (WISPs) in rural and exurban areas and by relaxing current antenna height restrictions. He also encouraged the Commission to help facilitate backhaul options in unserved and underserved areas such as by clarifying that currently underutilized, E-Rate supported connections can be leveraged to support backhaul connections by fixed and mobile wireless providers during this health emergency.

In the letter, Sen. Warner also encouraged the FCC to work with the National Telecommunications and Information Administration and the Department of Defense to reduce the size of exclusion zones that prevent many WISPs from taking advantage of the emergency Special Temporary Authority (STA) that allows unlicensed access to the 5850-5895 MHz band. In Virginia, for example, the 75-kilometer exclusion zones have prevented use of this spectrum in large areas, including the vast majority of the Eastern Shore.

Sen. Warner has been a longtime advocate of expanding broadband in rural and underserved areas. Earlier this week, he wrote to the FCC, encouraging the Commission to reform service rules to bring broadband to rural areas.

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

Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary

Federal Communications Commission

Office of the Secretary

445 12th Street, SW

Washington, DC 20554

Dear Chairman Pai, 

Across the nation, Americans are struggling with the new reality of COVID-19 social distancing, with an unprecedented number of Americans reliant on internet connectivity for telework, telehealth, and online learning. For too many Americans, however, even this challenging new status quo is unattainable: according to the latest figures from the FCC, over 20 million Americans still lack access to meaningful broadband service, with at least 770,000 Virginians currently unserved.  Many accounts suggest that even these figures tend to underestimate the broadband gap.   

This digital divide impacts nearly every aspect of life for Virginians living without access to broadband, as it has become a precondition to meaningful participation in the digital economy. This contrast has become more stark in the last month, with an unprecedented number of Americans now heavily reliant on broadband access for telework, telehealth, and online education.

Even in normal times, lack of broadband access prevents students from achieving their full potential, denies seniors and veterans access to telemedicine solutions that can improve care and reduce costs, prevents farmers from accessing innovative precision agriculture tools, and limits the economic potential of too many rural communities. Under the current circumstances, this lack of broadband access threatens to greatly – and potentially lastingly – exacerbate disparities in health, education, and economic equity. On nearly a daily basis, I hear from Virginians who are struggling to engage in telework, supervise their children’s online learning, and engage in telehealth over antiquated DSL connections that make even a single one of these activities virtually impossible. 

While I applaud a number of the steps the Commission has taken to improve service and widen access, including encouraging spectrum leases to utilize underutilized spectrum, temporarily waiving the E-Rate and Rural Health Care gift rules, and (after encouragement from offices such as mine) releasing a public notice clarifying that community use of E-Rate supported Wi-Fi networks is permitted, much more work remains to be done. While a number of preexisting broadband programs, such as the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund, will help close the broadband gap in the long-term, I encourage you to take action that can enable expanded coverage now.

For instance, the FCC should facilitate actions by wireless providers to dramatically increase existing signal contours, such as by temporarily increasing relevant power limits for Wireless Internet Service Providers (WISPs), particularly in rural and exurban areas where the risk of degradation to other users is lower, and by relaxing current antenna height restrictions. Similarly, the Commission should look to help facilitate backhaul options in under- and unserved areas, such as by clarifying that currently underutilized, E-Rate supported connections can be leveraged to support backhaul connections by fixed and mobile wireless providers during this health emergency. E-Rate supported schools and libraries often possess robust connections in many rural areas that lack meaningful home broadband options. 

Lastly, while grant of emergency Special Temporary Authority (STA) to allow unlicensed access to the 5850-5895 MHz band should certainly help, in states like Virginia the 75 kilometer exclusion zones have prevented use of this spectrum in large areas, including the vast majority of the Eastern Shore. I encourage you to work with the National Telecommunications and Information Administration and the Department of Defense to reduce the size of these exclusions zones during this public health emergency. 

I believe Congress erred when it failed to include funding for home broadband in the CARES Act. I fear that, absent immediate action by the FCC, the persistence of the broadband gap could go down as one of the major reasons our economy was not well-positioned to respond to COVID-19. What we do in the next weeks and months will be pivotal.

Sincerely,

###

SPRINGFIELD – As our nation continues to grapple with the COVID-19 pandemic, U.S. Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-VA) joined Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL), Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Immigration Subcommittee, and 26 of their Senate colleagues in a letter to President Donald Trump urging him to automatically extend work authorizations for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and Temporary Protected Status (TPS) recipients and other impacted immigrants.

More than 200,000 DACA recipients are working in occupational areas the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) identifies as part of the “essential critical infrastructure workforce.”  TPS recipients, like DACA recipients, are vital contributors to our economy and health care workforce, with more than 130,000 TPS holders serving as “essential critical infrastructure workers.”

“This simple measure, which is well within your executive authority, will save American lives and avoid further disruptions to our economy,” the Senators wrote.  “By contrast, going ahead with your Administration’s efforts to deport more than a million DACA and TPS recipients would be needlessly cruel and greatly weaken our nation’s essential workforce.”

An estimated 41,700 DACA recipients and approximately 11,600 TPS recipients work in the health care industry, including physicians and physicians in training, intensive care nurses, paramedics, respiratory therapists, nursing assistants, and health technicians.  Additionally, an estimated 14,900 DACA recipients are teachers, many of whom are distance educating American children during the pandemic.

With U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) offices closed to the public, and many USCIS services suspended, it is likely that Employment Authorization Documents (EADs) for many immigrants will expire.  EAD renewals are already backlogged and additional processing delays are inevitable due to COVID-19 disruptions.  Additionally, with hundreds of millions of Americans under stay-at-home orders, and hundreds of thousands infected with COVID-19, it will be difficult for many immigrants to collect the required information and submit renewal applications and fees within the required timeframe.

Along with Sens. Warner and Durbin, today’s letter is also signed by Senators Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Patty Murray (D-WA), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Jack Reed (D-RI), Tom Carper (D-DE), Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Bob Menendez (D-NJ), Ben Cardin (D-MD), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Bob Casey (D-PA), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Tom Udall (D-NM), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Kirstin Gillibrand (D-NY), Chris Coons (D-DE), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Chris Murphy (D-CT), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Angus King (I-ME), Tim Kaine (D-VA), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Ed Markey (D-MA), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Kamala Harris (D-CA), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), Tina Smith (D-MN), and Jacky Rosen (D-NV). 

Full text of the letter is available here and below:

 April 15, 2020

Dear President Trump: 

As our nation grapples with the COVID-19 pandemic, we strongly urge your Administration to automatically extend work authorizations for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and Temporary Protected Status (TPS) recipients and other impacted immigrants.  This simple measure, which is well within your executive authority, will save American lives and avoid further disruptions to our economy.  By contrast, going ahead with your Administration’s efforts to deport more than a million DACA and TPS recipients would be needlessly cruel and greatly weaken our nation’s essential workforce. 

DACA provides temporary relief from deportation to immigrants who arrived in the United States as children if they register with the government, pay a fee, and clear criminal and national-security background checks.  These young people, known as Dreamers, are American in every way except for their immigration status.  More than 800,000 Dreamers have come forward and received DACA, which has allowed them to contribute more fully to their country and their communities in myriad ways.  More than 200,000 DACA recipients are working in occupational areas the Department of Homeland Security identifies as part of the “essential critical infrastructure workforce.”  An estimated 41,700 DACA recipients work in the health care industry, including physicians and physicians in training, intensive care nurses, paramedics, respiratory therapists, nursing assistants, and health technicians.  Additionally, an estimated 14,900 DACA recipients are teachers, many of whom are distance educating American children during the pandemic.

TPS currently provides safety in the United States to approximately 411,000 people from 10 countries, the majority of whom have lived in the United States for more than two decades.  Like DACA recipients, TPS recipients must register with the government, pay a fee, and clear criminal and national-security background checks.  Collectively, more than 90 percent of TPS recipients are nationals of El Salvador, Honduras, and Haiti, three of the six countries for which your Administration has attempted to terminate TPS.  TPS recipients, like DACA recipients, are vital contributors to our economy and healthcare workforce.  More than 130,000 TPS holders are “essential critical infrastructure workers,” including 11,600 health care workers.

With U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) offices closed to the public, and many USCIS services suspended, it is likely that Employment Authorization Documents (EADs) for many immigrants will expire.  USCIS’s recent decision to process renewals using previously submitted biometrics means that EAD renewals can be adjudicated without a new biometric appointment. However, EAD renewals are already backlogged and additional processing delays are inevitable due to COVID-19 disruptions.  Additionally, with hundreds of millions of Americans under stay-at-home orders, and hundreds of thousands infected with COVID-19, it will be difficult for many immigrants to collect the required information and submit renewal applications and fees within the required timeframe.

Your Administration can immediately ease burdens for thousands of American families, and prevent further, unnecessary economic disruptions during this public health emergency by automatically extending employment authorizations for DACA and TPS recipients and other impacted immigrants.  As Jesus Contreras, a DACA recipient paramedic in Houston who is on the frontlines of the fight against COVID-19, says, “We’re not only going to have to worry about this pandemic, but we’re going to have to worry about our immigration status and deportation.”  Similarly, Aldo Martinez, a DACA recipient paramedic in Fort Myers, Florida who is responding to calls from COVID-19 patients, says that losing work authorization would “create more chaos in an already chaotic situation.”  Dr. Manuel Bernal Mejia, a resident in the emergency room at Advocate Christ Medical Center in Chicago, says DACA is “letting me treat and care for patients that are facing this deathly pandemic right now.… If you take away DACA. . . it is at least one doctor less to take care of a patient who is critically ill with this virus.”

You can order DHS to immediately ensure that Jesus, Aldo, Manuel, and hundreds of thousands of others in our essential workforce are not forced to stop working when the need for their services has never been greater.  We urge you to prioritize our nation’s health, safety, and economic wellbeing as we grapple with the COVID-19 pandemic. 

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,    

###

WASHINGTON – U.S. Sens. Mark R. Warner and Tim Kaine (both D-VA) applauded more than $156 million in federal funding through the U.S. Department of Education to support Virginia students. The federal funding was made possible through the Higher Education Emergency Relief Fund established under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act to support students, colleges, and universities as they cope with the immediate effects of the novel coronavirus (COVID-19).

“This critical funding will help colleges and universities provide Virginia students with the support they need during this unprecedented time,” said the Senators. “We are pleased to see these resources go towards helping provide emergency financial aid for Virginia students, and we will keep fighting for the additional resources our educational institutions need in a future package.”

The CARES Act established a nearly $14 billion Higher Education Emergency Relief Fund. Of this amount, approximately $12.6 billion is allocated for Direct Grants to Institutions of Higher Education. Of this amount, half must be used “to provide emergency financial aid grants to students for expenses related to the disruption of campus operations due to coronavirus.” The U.S. Department of Education has made available the first half of the $12.6 billion that must go directly to students attending colleges and universities nationwide.

Of the total $312.9 million in funding that Virginia institutions will receive in Direct Grants to Institutions of Higher Education, this initial $156.5 million must go directly to students in the form of emergency financial aid grants to help cover costs associated with the closures of Virginia’s institutions due to COVID-19, including course materials, food, health care, technology, housing, and other basic essentials. 

This funding will be distributed as follows:

###

WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Sens. Mark R. Warner and Tim Kaine (both D-VA) applauded $309,729,392 in federal funding from the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act to provide economic relief to 47 airports across the Commonwealth. 

“The COVID-19 crisis has affected every aspect of our economy and our airports are no exception. In fact, the necessary precautions we have taken to slow the spread of the virus have hit our airports especially hard,” said the Senators. “That’s why we’re glad to know that airports across Virginia will be able to count on some economic relief so that they can continue critical safety projects. These funds will also help make sure that once this crisis is over, airports can safely resume serving Virginians and individuals traveling in and out of the Commonwealth.”

The CARES Act, which was supported by Sens. Warner and Kaine, includes $10 billion in funds for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)’s Airport Improvement Program (AIP) to provide relief for eligible U.S. airports affected by the prevention, preparation, and response surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic.

The funding will be distributed as follows:

CARES Act funding will allow airports to meet ongoing needs including retaining workers, managing operation and maintenance, and paying for cleaning supplies in the midst of severe financial challenges brought on by COVID-19. Sens. Warner and Kaine have long fought for increased investments to infrastructure, including for Virginia’s airports, and have pushed back against the Trump Administration’s suggested budget cuts to the U.S. Department of Transportation.

###

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,

###

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. 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: 

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.” 

###