diff --git "a/data/CHRG-117/CHRG-117hhrg43964.txt" "b/data/CHRG-117/CHRG-117hhrg43964.txt"
new file mode 100644--- /dev/null
+++ "b/data/CHRG-117/CHRG-117hhrg43964.txt"
@@ -0,0 +1,4072 @@
+
+ - MORE THAN A SHOT IN THE ARM: THE NEED FOR ADDITIONAL COVID-19 STIMULUS
+
+[House Hearing, 117 Congress]
+[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+ MORE THAN A SHOT IN THE ARM: THE NEED
+ FOR ADDITIONAL COVID-19 STIMULUS
+
+=======================================================================
+
+ VIRTUAL HEARING
+
+ BEFORE THE
+
+ COMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL SERVICES
+
+ U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
+
+ ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
+
+ FIRST SESSION
+
+ __________
+
+ FEBRUARY 4, 2021
+
+ __________
+
+ Printed for the use of the Committee on Financial Services
+
+ Serial No. 117-1
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+ _________
+
+ U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
+
+43-964 PDF WASHINGTON : 2021
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+ HOUSE COMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL SERVICES
+
+ MAXINE WATERS, California, Chairwoman
+
+CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York PATRICK McHENRY, North Carolina,
+NYDIA M. VELAZQUEZ, New York Ranking Member
+BRAD SHERMAN, California ANN WAGNER, Missouri
+GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma
+DAVID SCOTT, Georgia BILL POSEY, Florida
+AL GREEN, Texas BLAINE LUETKEMEYER, Missouri
+EMANUEL CLEAVER, Missouri BILL HUIZENGA, Michigan
+ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado STEVE STIVERS, Ohio
+JIM A. HIMES, Connecticut ANDY BARR, Kentucky
+BILL FOSTER, Illinois ROGER WILLIAMS, Texas
+JOYCE BEATTY, Ohio FRENCH HILL, Arkansas
+JUAN VARGAS, California TOM EMMER, Minnesota
+JOSH GOTTHEIMER, New Jersey LEE M. ZELDIN, New York
+VICENTE GONZALEZ, Texas BARRY LOUDERMILK, Georgia
+AL LAWSON, Florida ALEXANDER X. MOONEY, West Virginia
+MICHAEL SAN NICOLAS, Guam WARREN DAVIDSON, Ohio
+CINDY AXNE, Iowa TED BUDD, North Carolina
+SEAN CASTEN, Illinois DAVID KUSTOFF, Tennessee
+AYANNA PRESSLEY, Massachusetts TREY HOLLINGSWORTH, Indiana
+RITCHIE TORRES, New York ANTHONY GONZALEZ, Ohio
+STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts JOHN ROSE, Tennessee
+ALMA ADAMS, North Carolina BRYAN STEIL, Wisconsin
+RASHIDA TLAIB, Michigan LANCE GOODEN, Texas
+MADELEINE DEAN, Pennsylvania WILLIAM TIMMONS, South Carolina
+ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ, New York VAN TAYLOR, Texas
+JESUS ``CHUY'' GARCIA, Illinois
+SYLVIA GARCIA, Texas
+NIKEMA WILLIAMS, Georgia
+JAKE AUCHINCLOSS, Massachusetts
+
+ Charla Ouertatani, Staff Director
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+ C O N T E N T S
+
+ ----------
+ Page
+Hearing held on:
+ February 4, 2021............................................. 1
+Appendix:
+ February 4, 2021............................................. 69
+
+ WITNESSES
+ Thursday, February 4, 2021
+
+Anthony, Clarence E., CEO and Executive Director, National League
+ of Cities...................................................... 4
+Johnson, Derrick, President and CEO, National Association for the
+ Advancement of Colored People (NAACP).......................... 7
+Murguia, Janet, President and CEO, UnidosUS...................... 6
+Spriggs, William E., Chief Economist, the American Federation of
+ Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO)....... 9
+Strain, Michael R., Economist, American Enterprise Institute..... 10
+
+ APPENDIX
+
+Prepared statements:
+ Anthony, Clarence E.......................................... 70
+ Johnson, Derrick............................................. 74
+ Murguia, Janet............................................... 77
+ Spriggs, William E........................................... 88
+ Strain, Michael R............................................ 111
+
+ Additional Material Submitted for the Record
+
+Waters, Hon. Maxine:
+ Written statement of the Credit Union National Association
+ (CUNA)..................................................... 131
+Hill, Hon. French:
+ Letter from various undersigned organizations................ 134
+
+
+ MORE THAN A SHOT IN THE ARM:
+ THE NEED FOR ADDITIONAL
+ COVID-19 STIMULUS
+
+ ----------
+
+
+ Thursday, February 4, 2021
+
+ U.S. House of Representatives,
+ Committee on Financial Services,
+ Washington, D.C.
+ The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:10 a.m., via
+Webex, Hon. Maxine Waters [chairwoman of the committee]
+presiding.
+ Members present: Representatives Waters, Sherman, Meeks,
+Scott, Green, Cleaver, Perlmutter, Himes, Foster, Beatty,
+Vargas, Gottheimer, Gonzalez of Texas, Lawson, San Nicolas,
+Axne, Casten, Pressley, Torres, Lynch, Adams, Tlaib, Ocasio-
+Cortez, Garcia of Illinois, Garcia of Texas, Williams of
+Georgia, Auchincloss; Wagner, Lucas, Posey, Luetkemeyer,
+Huizenga, Stivers, Barr, Williams of Texas, Hill, Emmer,
+Zeldin, Loudermilk, Mooney, Davidson, Budd, Kustoff,
+Hollingsworth, Gonzalez of Ohio, Rose, Steil, Gooden, Timmons,
+and Taylor.
+ Chairwoman Waters. The Financial Services Committee will
+come to order.
+ Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare a
+recess of the committee at any time.
+ I want to remind Members of a few matters, including some
+required by the regulations which established the framework for
+remote committee proceedings. First, I would ask all Members to
+keep themselves muted when they are not being recognized by the
+Chair. This will minimize disturbances while Members are asking
+questions of our witnesses. The staff has been instructed not
+to mute Members, except when a Member is not being recognized
+by the Chair and there is inadvertent background noise.
+ Members are also reminded that they may only participate in
+one remote proceeding at a time. If you are participating
+today, please keep your camera on, and if you choose to attend
+a different remote proceeding, please turn your camera off.
+ If, during the hearing, Members wish to be recognized, the
+Chair recommends that Members identify themselves by name so as
+to facilitate the Chair's recognition. I would also ask that
+Members be patient as the Chair proceeds, given the nature of
+the online platform the committee is using.
+ With that, I yield myself 5 minutes for an opening
+statement.
+ Today, this committee convenes for our very first committee
+hearing of the 117th Congress. Today's hearing is entitled,
+``More Than a Shot in the Arm: The Need for Additional COVID-19
+Stimulus.'' Our focus today is on the urgent need for Congress
+to provide additional stimulus to address the COVID-19 pandemic
+crisis.
+ Following his decisive victory in the November election,
+President Biden has a mandate to move on his agenda and lead
+the nation out of this crisis. Finally, we have real leadership
+in the White House to provide a serious, comprehensive response
+to this virus.
+ From his first day in office, President Biden has been
+moving efficiently and effectively to right the ship and clean
+up the mess that his predecessor created. The stimulus package
+that Congress passed at the end of last year was the very first
+step, and served as an emergency stop gap to help individuals
+and families in distress, but it was clear then, and remains
+clear now, that much, much more relief is needed. President
+Biden has put forth a sensible and well-designed proposal,
+called the American Rescue Plan, to provide $1.9 trillion in
+essential funding and relief to individuals, families, and
+communities across the country.
+ The American Rescue Plan provides additional direct
+stimulus payments, rental assistance, unemployment assistance,
+and emergency assistance for local, State and Territory
+Governments, as well as other critical relief and measures to
+respond to the crisis. Leading economists agree that it is
+critical for Congress to pass another large stimulus package.
+Federal Reserve Chairman Powell has also noted that, ``Support
+from fiscal policy will help households and businesses weather
+the downturn as well as limit lasting damage to the economy
+that could otherwise impede recovery.''
+ According to the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the
+Biden stimulus plan would boost United States output by 5
+percent over 3 years. Last year, the United States economy
+shrank by the largest amount since 1946. Around 1.2 million
+small businesses closed between February and June of last year,
+and communities of color continue to be the very hardest hit.
+According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, of all job losses
+in December where jobs were held by women, women of color
+suffered the most job losses. These are not statistics that
+warrant a wait-and-see approach. These realities demand urgent
+action. They demand the American Rescue Plan.
+ This committee has played and will continue to play an
+essential role in providing much of this relief. The
+Administration needs critical funding to prioritize the
+development and production of desperately-needed medical
+supplies under the Defense Production Act (DPA). Renters need
+additional assistance, including emergency housing vouchers, to
+ensure that people in rural and suburban and urban communities
+can remain stably housed. More funding is needed for persons
+experiencing homelessness, who face even greater health risk as
+a result of the pandemic. We must also address the reality that
+homeowners across America face a foreclosure crisis if Congress
+does not step in to support modifications before the pandemic
+ends.
+ And this committee will also need to come to the aid of
+businesses and their workers who are barely staying afloat,
+including small businesses, minority-owned businesses, and
+sectors hit hard, like the airlines. Finally, with new, more
+contagious, and potentially more deadly variants of the virus
+from the U.K., Brazil, and South Africa, all having now been
+detected right here in the United States, we need to mobilize
+the multilateral system and its institutions. And it is very,
+very clear that this pandemic cannot be defeated until it is
+defeated everywhere. And so, I look forward to hearing from our
+distinguished panel of witnesses on the need for relief, and
+the proposal that the Biden Administration has put forward.
+ I will now recognize Congressman Hill, who will be standing
+in for our ranking member, Mr. McHenry, for an opening
+statement. Mr. McHenry has an emergency and cannot be with us
+right now. Mr. Hill, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
+ Mr. Hill. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. Thank you for
+convening this hearing today.
+ Let's start with the facts. To date, Congress has provided
+$3.5 trillion to support the economy. This included direct
+payments to individuals, assistance for small businesses,
+rental assistance, and support for frontline workers, among
+many other strategies. This was a tremendous and often
+bipartisan effort that has provided a bridge for Americans
+reeling from this dual health and economic crisis. Now, thanks
+in large part to Operation Warp Speed and Congress' actions,
+vaccines are being distributed. To be clear, we are not out of
+the woods yet, but we are on the right path.
+ Today, we are discussing what our economy needs to fully
+recover. I think the answer is clear: The best way to support
+the economy now is to reopen it safely. No amount of stimulus
+can replace open businesses, available jobs, and kids in the
+classroom. We should continue to be thoughtful and deliberate.
+ I think we can all agree that the Coronavirus Aid, Relief,
+and Economic Security (CARES) Act was the right response at the
+right time. We were all facing an enemy that we knew nothing
+about. Since then, Congress has come together on five separate
+occasions to support families, individuals, workers, and small
+businesses. In fact, at the end of December, just over a month
+ago, we came together and put nearly $1 trillion in additional
+relief through the Congress, which was signed into law. This
+$900 billion package, money to be spent across our country, has
+yet to be spent. Just 1 month later, that money has not yet
+seen its full impact in our economy and for our families.
+Today, unlike 10 months ago, we have the benefit of real data,
+and the facts guide us in driving better policy outcomes.
+ Last Tuesday, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that
+despite the surge in positivity rates throughout the summer and
+fall, States that were open, and open safely, had better
+employment rebounds than those States that were locked down. In
+fact, employment increased in 15 open States. California, in
+comparison, lost more than 52,000 jobs. Michigan lost more than
+64,000 jobs. In my own home State of Arkansas, our unemployment
+rate fell to 4.2 percent in December, from the peak in May of
+10.8 percent. Our tax revenues are up.
+ What does the data tell us? It tells us that States can
+reopen safely. It tells us that if States aren't open,
+businesses cannot operate. If there are no businesses, there
+will be no jobs for individuals to come back to. Our focus
+should be on how best to safely reopen our economy. That means
+more testing and faster vaccine distribution to keep our
+communities healthy. It may mean more funding to ensure that
+frontline workers have the supplies they need to stay safe. At
+the same time, we need to make sure that additional funding
+will have an impact on Americans who need it the most. There
+are families and individuals who are hurting from the
+lockdowns. We should be targeting assistance to get them back
+into the workforce, not just creating more bureaucracy and
+throwing money at this critical problem.
+ We should mirror the bipartisan compromise and serious
+legislating that went into the CARES Act and the other four
+bills that were enacted last year, and not spend time
+deliberating a partisan, wasteful, not targeted, $1.9 trillion
+stimulus bill. The data is pointing us towards what the economy
+needs. Now, let politics get out of the way and let us get to
+the work of providing the targeted help we need.
+ Again, let me thank the Chair for holding this hearing. I
+yield back the balance of my time.
+ Chairwoman Waters. Thank you very much. And Members, I am
+so pleased that we have a President with a plan.
+ I want to welcome today's distinguished witnesses to the
+committee: Clarence Anthony, CEO and executive director of the
+National League of Cities; Derrick Johnson, president and CEO
+of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored
+People (NAACP); Janet Murguia, president and CEO of UnidosUS;
+Dr. William Spriggs, the chief economist at the American
+Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations
+(AFL-CIO); and Dr. Michael Strain, an economist at the American
+Enterprise Institute.
+ Each of you will have 5 minutes to summarize your
+testimony. You should be able to see a timer on your screen
+that will indicate how much time you have left, and a timer
+will go off at the end of your time. I would ask you to be
+mindful of the timer and quickly wrap up your testimony if you
+hear the timer, so that we can be respectful of both the
+witnesses' and the committee members' time. And without
+objection, your written statements will be made a part of the
+record.
+ With that, Mr. Anthony, you are now recognized for 5
+minutes to present your oral testimony.
+
+ STATEMENT OF CLARENCE E. ANTHONY, CEO AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,
+ NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES (NLC)
+
+ Mr. Anthony. Good morning. Thank you, Chairwoman Waters,
+Congressman Hill, and members of the committee. I am Clarence
+Anthony. I am CEO and executive director of the National League
+of Cities, and a former mayor of South Bay, Florida, for over
+24 years. The National League of Cities is the nation's
+foremost resource and nonpartisan advocate for municipal
+governments and their leaders, representing 19,000 cities,
+towns, and villages, many in your districts. Today, I am
+speaking on behalf of all of those local governments that have
+gone above and beyond to overcome the COVID-19 emergency.
+ Local government employees are truly on the front lines of
+enforcing measures that protect residents from catching and
+spreading COVID-19. Local community and economic development
+departments are stabilizing households and small businesses
+harmed by losses from the COVID-19 pandemic. Local elected
+officials are making painful budget cuts to preserve essential
+day-to-day operations that sustain cities as economic engines
+and places of opportunity. Residents are relying more than ever
+on the safety net programs that local governments are
+responsible for putting into action.
+ We are grateful for the funding provided in prior emergency
+relief packages, but the fact remains that local budget
+revenues are far below normal collections. Municipal
+governments are alone facing a $90 billion shortfall on 1-year
+revenues. This does not include the losses facing County,
+State, Tribal, or Territory Governments. NLC supports the $350
+billion for emergency intergovernmental relief.
+ Local leaders in your district will tell you this is not a
+bailout. Our local communities need a partnership, and we are
+fighting every day. Labor market data shows that local
+governments are still cutting jobs to offset revenue losses and
+unexpected expenses related to COVID-19. The December job
+reports from the Bureau of Labor Statistics state that 32,000
+jobs have been cut. Public sector employment is down by more
+than 1 million jobs, compared to February 2020.
+ Emergency funding has provided aid to the private sector,
+to residents harmed by COVID. SBA Treasury programs provided
+businesses with access to credit. HUD programs provided funding
+to help homeless residents, renters, and small businesses. The
+role of local government in these programs is to connect
+emergency resources to those in need, and that required drawing
+up new programs lifting up our residents through creating
+operations that help small and minority-owned businesses
+overcome obstacles.
+ There is no question that additional housing stability is
+important, and the National League of Cities (NLC) has
+reflected that in our Homeward Bound programs that focus on job
+security and health. As a result, however, of these layoffs and
+operation decline, many local governments are less able to
+enact this kind of guidance that they are immediately
+responsible for after the CARES Act was passed. The new
+Emergency Rental Assistance Program is a reasonable response to
+the emerging economy-killing eviction cliff.
+ Roughly 1 out of every 5 people is in a rental in America.
+Forty million people are at risk. Local governments are the
+ones that implement these initiatives. We need support. Local
+governments are running out of ways to paper over dramatic
+losses, and even when that happens, declines will not stop the
+new programs from needing to be implemented.
+ So, we are asking that these principles ensure that local
+governments are connected and engaged in the next bill: one,
+emergency funding should be fair and appropriate for each and
+every local government, with no minimum population threshold
+for eligibility; two, allocations of aid should be built on
+familiar and proven government revenue-sharing programs like
+the Community Development Block Grants; three, funding should
+be separate for States, counties, and municipalities; and four,
+eligible expenditures should be targeted to the widespread
+health and economic consequences of COVID-19, including
+unavoidable revenue shortfall.
+ In conclusion, on Monday CBO warned that unemployment is
+likely, so we are asking for our shot as local governments.
+Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
+ [The prepared statement of Mr. Anthony can be found on page
+70 of the appendix.]
+ Chairwoman Waters. Thank you very much, Mr. Anthony. Ms.
+Murguia, you are now recognized for 5 minutes to present your
+oral testimony.
+
+ STATEMENT OF JANET MURGUIA, PRESIDENT AND CEO, UNIDOSUS
+
+ Ms. Murguia. Good morning. Thank you, Chairwoman Waters and
+Ranking Member McHenry, for inviting me to testify today. My
+name is Janet Murguia, and I am the president and CEO of
+UnidosUS, the largest Hispanic civil rights and advocacy
+organization in the United States. For more than 50 years, and
+in partnership with our affiliate networks, we have worked to
+advance opportunities for Latino families across the country so
+they can achieve economic security and build wealth. Chairwoman
+Waters, thank you especially for leading this committee's work
+to address income inequality and racial wealth disparities.
+ As I begin, I would note that inadequate recovery efforts
+from the last recession, when Latinos lost 66 percent of their
+wealth, contributed to the fragile economic status of the
+Latino community prior to the COVID-19 outbreak. As a result, a
+pre-pandemic 2020 poll found that most Latinos were already
+concerned about high housing costs, and said they struggled to
+make ends meet.
+ And social, economic, and health disparities, coupled with
+systemic barriers to safety net assistance and relief, have
+disproportionately impacted Latinos and devastated our
+families. More than 70 percent of Hispanic workers are
+essential workers, which is why we are twice as likely to get
+sick and 3 times as likely to die from COVID-19.
+ Latinos were also deeply impacted by job losses in hard-hit
+industries like hospitality, including those that did not allow
+telework, and Latino small businesses have struggled to stay
+open. Our polling shows that more than half of Latinos surveyed
+have lost job wages or businesses due to the pandemic, and
+these job and earnings losses put Latinos especially at risk of
+losing their homes to eviction and foreclosure.
+ While the pandemic has placed financial pressure and strain
+on many Americans, the experience of Latinos in accessing
+Federal relief has been especially difficult, since many
+Hispanic immigrants in mixed-status families have been excluded
+from emergency Federal relief and aid. For example, the CARES
+Act excluded millions of mixed-status families, including more
+than 5 million children and spouses who are either U.S.
+citizens or green card holders, from stimulus payments. While a
+partial fix was enacted in December, millions of U.S. children
+and their families remain blocked from Federal relief.
+ The President's American Rescue Plan is a huge improvement.
+Latino workers and their families will benefit from extended
+unemployment insurance, and housing protections and aid to
+prevent eviction. The plan's aid to State and local governments
+will help our local affiliated, community-based organizations
+and help them serve their hard-hit communities. But it is
+outrageous and immoral to continue denying aid to families and
+children in need during a national emergency simply because of
+their parents' immigration status, especially when they are
+experiencing hunger and food insecurity. So, Congress must
+include all of our neighbors and essential workers in emergency
+pandemic relief.
+ We then would suggest some additions to the Biden plan,
+such as: ensure that HUD and Treasury assistance reaches the
+hardest-hit communities, including mixed-status families and
+immigrant workers; provide $700 million in support for housing
+counseling organizations to help homeowners and renters at risk
+of losing their homes; expand foreclosure protection, extending
+aid to all homeowners, and establish a homeowner assistance
+fund; set aside a portion of small business aid for impacted
+minority-owned business; and use the Community Reinvestment Act
+(CRA) to ensure that the hardest-hit communities can access
+available aid.
+ A true American rescue plan is one that ends the cruel
+exclusion of families and includes everyone in relief. But to
+truly rebuild our economy better, we must also protect
+essential workers by finally updating our immigration system
+and providing a path to citizenship for immigrant workers and
+their families. We must do this now to stand up for the people
+who have been standing up for us, including through budget
+reconciliation if necessary. A real robust and lasting economic
+recovery depends on it. Thank you.
+ [The prepared statement of Ms. Murguia can be found on page
+77 of the appendix.]
+ Chairwoman Waters. Thank you very much. Mr. Johnson, you
+are now recognized for 5 minutes to present your oral
+testimony.
+
+ STATEMENT OF DERRICK JOHNSON, PRESIDENT AND CEO, NATIONAL
+ ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COLORED PEOPLE (NAACP)
+
+ Mr. Johnson. Good morning, and thank you, Chairwoman
+Waters, for your leadership, and Ranking Member McHenry. Thank
+you for the invitation to testify on this timely, important
+topic: the need for additional support for COVID-19 relief. I
+am excited about your leadership, Chairwoman Waters, at this
+crucial time as we look forward to working with you in ensuring
+that our communities are protected from this unfortunate health
+crisis. On behalf of the million activists who make up the
+NAACP from across the country in 47 States and 2,200 units,
+NAACP is the nation's oldest civil rights organization, this
+month at 112-years-old.
+ Much of what I want to talk about will highlight the need
+as we have observed it on the ground across the country. Before
+I do that, I do want to recognize: Representative Ayanna
+Pressley for helping us in December to highlight the need for
+student loan indebtedness; the new Chair of the Congressional
+Black Caucus and member of this committee, Representative
+Beatty, for using her platform to continue to amplify the call
+for justice, equity, and equality; and former CBC Chairman
+Cleaver, who has been sounding the alarm on testing and racial
+disparities in this moment.
+ As we look at this current crisis in the stimulus packages,
+we really want to focus on critical workers, and many of those
+critical workers are straddled with student indebtedness. In
+fact, if you look at the student loan crisis, African Americans
+and Latinos are disproportionately impacted because many of
+them are first-generation college students, but in total we are
+looking at about $1.7 trillion in student loan indebtedness.
+ If we consider discharging much of this, if not all, it can
+be seen as an economic stimulus. Much of the funds that are
+used to pay back these loans could infuse capital back into our
+economic system and caboose our GDP. In fact, there are tools
+that are currently in place to provide support for critical
+workers under the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program,
+where many of our citizens participate in ensuring that our
+society keeps moving. These are government workers, our
+teachers, and others who have to go to work every day to ensure
+that we are provided the necessary resources for which our tax
+dollars pay.
+ Far too many of them are underemployed and over-indebted
+because of the student loan burden. The tools in the toolbox
+through the automatic discharge after 10 years could be
+accelerated and it could be immediate. We celebrate the
+forbearance that the new Administration just called for, but if
+we really look closely at how to stimulate our economy, this is
+an effective tool. We have given more away in tax breaks and
+other stimulus to corporations. In fact, if you look at the
+ongoing tax break that was provided over the last 4 years on
+top of the stimulus packages for corporations, it more than
+doubled the amount of student loan indebtedness.
+ It is the right thing to do in this moment of crisis. It is
+a way to boost our economy, and it is a way to ensure that
+those individuals who are on the front line providing support
+for us, and municipal governments and State governments, and
+our teachers in the classrooms will be cared for in ways in
+which it could pay dividends for our economy.
+ In Houston, as we begin to look at the eviction crisis,
+many people have to be on the front lines to prevent evictions
+as a result of some of the deadlines about to expire. We
+partner with BeyGOOD, Beyonce's group and we created a program,
+and we were overwhelmed with the need of individuals who are on
+the verge of being evicted. In fact, it was so overwhelming
+that we had to shut down the program within 48 hours, because
+37,000 families, over 50,000 applications, came in so quickly
+that we had to shut the program down.
+ It is clear that there is a crisis. This committee can
+continue to hold businesses and banks accountable to ensure
+that in this moment of economic transition, evictions are
+stalled and we are able to put our economy right, and people
+can fully participate. And when you look at the vaccine and the
+disparity in which the vaccines are being deployed, we have to
+make sure those who are most impacted are provided with the
+necessary support.
+ This COVID moment has impacted African Americans to where 1
+out of 660 Black persons in this country are dying because of
+COVID, and the vaccine deployment has not been equitable. In
+the City of New York, we found that high-wealth individuals
+were going to Latino communities to get the vaccines, although
+the vaccines were placed there for the Latino community to
+receive. We have to have a better approach of deploying the
+vaccine. So, when we look--
+ Chairwoman Waters. Thank you, Mr. Johnson. Your time has
+expired.
+ Mr. Johnson. Thank you.
+ [The prepared statement of Mr. Johnson can be found on page
+74 of the appendix.]
+ Chairwoman Waters. And let me just take a moment to thank
+Mr. Anthony and Ms. Murguia for their very fine testimony. Dr.
+Spriggs, you are now recognized for 5 minutes to present your
+oral testimony.
+
+STATEMENT OF WILLIAM E. SPRIGGS, CHIEF ECONOMIST, THE AMERICAN
+ FEDERATION OF LABOR AND CONGRESS OF INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATIONS
+ (AFL-CIO)
+
+ Mr. Spriggs. Thank you. Thank you, Chairwoman Waters. I
+appreciate your leadership and this opportunity to speak to
+your committee on the issues of our nation's crisis. I am happy
+to offer this testimony on behalf of the AFL-CIO, America's
+house of labor, representing the working people of the United
+States, and based on my expertise as a professor in Howard
+University's Department of Economics.
+ My testimony today will discuss the immediate challenge our
+nation faces of a severely damaged labor market and the need to
+conduct an all-out, coordinated Federal, State, and local
+Government fight to tame the COVID virus. We will need to have
+in place a full fiscal response to coordinate with current
+monetary policy to ensure our economy can emerge with a robust
+and sustainable growth path by addressing inequality. That
+means we need policies to address the damage of the virus to
+economic activity, ensuring all of our efforts to reduce the
+incidence of the virus, and to regain American leadership
+globally to heal the global economy as the United States did at
+the end of World War II.
+ Despite improvements since April 2020, when our nation lost
+the greatest number of payroll positions since World War II,
+through December, we were still down 9.8 million payroll
+positions since February 2014. In March, Congress acted rapidly
+to pass several key economic supports, but the efficacy of
+those policies began to show weakening and waning job gains
+since July, after key provisions, like the $600 in additional
+weekly unemployment compensation, phased out, so in December,
+we were again losing jobs. Today, our labor market is missing
+almost 1.8 million more jobs from its peak than we stood at the
+depth of the Great Recession in September 2010, compared to
+that labor market's peak in January of 2008.
+ Despite congressional efforts to put substantial sums into
+the economy in the second quarter of last year to make up for
+lost jobs, slower business, and to help develop a vaccine, in
+the 4th quarter of last year, the economy grew at a
+significantly slower rate than the 3rd quarter, and we began
+this year with an economy that is smaller than it was in the
+2nd quarter of 2018. This is a dire situation. Our situation is
+complicated because our job losses stem from a failure to
+control the spread of the virus.
+ Individuals living in high-income areas have drastically
+reduced their consumption of services, especially personal
+services--restaurants, brick and mortar retail consumption, and
+travel--in response to the prevalence of the virus, not in
+response to health orders to limit business activity, and this
+is a vital portion of consumption that is shrinking our
+economy.
+ To tackle the source of our economy's woes, we need a
+coordinated effort by the Federal Government with State and
+local government partners, but State and local employment
+levels are depleted. Through December, we had 373,000 fewer
+State Government workers and a little more than 1 million fewer
+local government workers. We cannot bring all of the public
+resources to bear on this crucial fight with so many fewer
+public sector workers. To get ahead of this rapid virus, we
+need congressional action now, because we failed in December to
+have the money for State and local workforces.
+ It is important to also look at the important things that
+were missing. We need the $400 in unemployment compensation
+added back that was key to what was happening in the 3rd
+quarter recovery. We need the pandemic relief payments of
+$1,400 because that was key for what was making the economy
+expand in the 3rd quarter. And we need to increase the Federal
+minimum wage to ensure that we will have wage growth coming out
+of this recovery and to ensure racial equity as wages recover.
+We know that there will be excess monopsony power that will get
+in the way of restoring the wage growth that we need for our
+economy to recover.
+ We need to have the United States back special drawing
+rights at the International Monetary Fund (IMF) so that all
+world governments will be our partner in defeating this virus.
+No one will be safe until all countries can win this war.
+ [The prepared statement of Dr. Spriggs can be found on page
+88 of the appendix.]
+ Chairwoman Waters. Thank you, Dr. Spriggs. Dr. Strain, you
+are now recognized for 5 minutes to present your oral
+testimony.
+
+STATEMENT OF MICHAEL R. STRAIN, ECONOMIST, AMERICAN ENTERPRISE
+ INSTITUTE
+
+ Mr. Strain. Thank you, Chairwoman Waters and Ranking Member
+McHenry for the invitation to testify today. And thank you,
+Congressman Hill and members of the committee. It is an honor
+to be here.
+ Two ways to assess the need for economic support are top
+down and bottom up. The top-down approach attempts to assess
+the amount by which the economy is underperforming and
+determine how much government spending would be required to
+bring the level of economic activity back to where it should
+be. More precisely, the quantity of goods and services that
+could be sustainably produced given the economy's underlying
+technology and labor and capital resources is determined and
+compared to the economy's actual production. The difference
+between the economy's underlying potential and actual
+performance is called the output gap. The size of the output
+gap can be used to determine the appropriate size of an
+economic stimulus package.
+ Alternatively, Congress can take a bottom-up approach. This
+way of crafting economic support would pay less attention to
+the size of the output gap and more to the specific needs
+facing the economy. Today, those needs clearly involve
+increasing the nation's capacity to distribute the vaccine and
+to test people for COVID-19. Of course, in practice, applying
+both a top-down and bottom-up approach makes the most sense,
+but judged by either criteria, President Biden's proposed $1.9
+trillion American Rescue Plan is too large and too wide in
+scope.
+ According to my calculations based on Congressional Budget
+Office (CBO) data, the 2021 output gap will be around $420
+billion. This calculation includes the effects of the $900
+billion law Congress passed just 6 weeks ago. The policy debate
+seems to have all but forgotten that Congress appropriated
+around $900 billion just a month and a half ago, but factoring
+that in, the output gap will be around $420 billion for the
+current year. From a macroeconomic top-down perspective, the
+President's proposal would fill the 2021 output gap several
+times.
+ It is commonly argued that the risk from spending too
+little is larger than the risk for spending too much. I agree,
+but this is not the same as arguing that the size of an
+additional stimulus package should be untethered to estimates
+of the underlying economic need. Any assessment of the right
+size for another stimulus should start with a good estimate of
+the output gap, and given the [inaudible] calculating that gap
+and the balance of risks, it is prudent to err on the side of a
+slightly larger package.
+ The future paths of gross domestic product to the output
+gap and consumer prices are very uncertain. Congress should
+recognize the many risks from spending too much and
+[inaudible]. From this macroeconomic perspective, the
+President's $1.9 trillion proposal is clearly too large. While
+the proposal contains several important components that
+Congress should enact, from a bottom-up microeconomic
+perspective, many major components of the plan are either
+unnecessary or will hold the recovery back.
+ For example, direct checks to households earning a six-
+figure incomes that have not experienced employment loss are an
+unnecessary and imprudent use of government spending. The
+proposed $400 Federal supplement through September to standard
+State-provided unemployment insurance benefits would prolong
+the period of labor market weakness by incentivizing unemployed
+workers to remain unemployed. Raising the Federal minimum wage
+to $15 an hour [inaudible] workers in many States. As a moral
+proposition, a bill that would destroy jobs for low-wage
+workers while handing out checks to employed upper-middle-class
+households is deeply problematic.
+ A bill that was more focused and that did not contain these
+harmful or unnecessary provisions would also be more aligned
+with the overall macroeconomic need and would better address
+our specific economic challenges. A bill that provided adequate
+funding for vaccine distribution to strengthen the social
+safety net and provide needed relief to State and local
+governments would be reasonable and advisable. It would cost
+under $750 billion, would be focused on current economic and
+social need, [inaudible] gap. Thank you.
+ [The prepared statement of Dr. Strain can be found on page
+111 of the appendix.]
+ Chairwoman Waters. Thank you, Dr. Strain. I now recognize
+myself for 5 minutes for questions.
+ This is the first week of Black History Month. While there
+is so much to celebrate and honor, we know that this pandemic
+has taken a particular toll on both renters and homeowners of
+color. According to the latest Census data, renters and
+homeowners of color are significantly more likely to be behind
+in paying their rent or mortgage, putting them at greater risk
+of eviction and foreclosure. Before the start of the CDC's
+eviction order, researchers estimated that up to 40 million
+renters could face eviction. More recently, Moody's Analytics
+estimated that renters owe more than $57 billion in back rent,
+utilities, and additional fees. In the second quarter of 2020,
+mortgage arrears totaled an estimated $16.3 million.
+ Since the pandemic began, it has been my top priority to
+ensure that families remain in their homes, and last year, I
+successfully sought to secure $25 billion in emergency rental
+assistance. But as I have said, that was just the first step,
+and there is much more work to be done, and now is the time to
+do it.
+ Mr. Spriggs, without taking further action to protect
+renters and homeowners, we could see a wave of foreclosures and
+evictions in 2021. Can you tell us, based on your research, how
+such a wave of evictions and foreclosures would impact the
+American economy, both in the short term and the long term?
+ Mr. Spriggs. Thank you, Chairwoman Waters. Yes, this is a
+vital problem to address, and thank you for your leadership on
+this issue. It will complicate things, which is why we have the
+urgency of acting now. People, as you mentioned, are in
+arrears. The moratorium only means they will not be evicted
+now, and the $600 that they received at the beginning of
+January has already been spent because they got behind from the
+period of July through December, when Congress refused to
+respond to the Health and Economic Recovery Omnibus Emergency
+Solutions (HEROES) Act that the House passed, thanks to the
+leadership.
+ Those dollars are gone. Those households are in desperate
+need of assistance and rental assistance so that when we get
+out of this situation, they will be able to stay in their
+homes. If we allow people to become homeless, we will have
+scarring that we cannot solve. It will be more expensive. This
+is not the time to be penny wise and pound foolish because
+people are already behind, and that is why we must do this now.
+We do not have months to wait. We already know their situation.
+We need to act now.
+ Chairwoman Waters. Mr. Johnson and Ms. Murguia, can you
+tell us about the current housing instability that Black and
+Latinx communities are experiencing across the country, and how
+it compounds existing socioeconomic inequities?
+ How can resources, like emergency rental assistance or
+housing vouchers, help stabilize the hardest-hit communities?
+Thank you.
+ Mr. Johnson. Sure. At the NAACP, we tried to provide some
+support. We opened up a portal to help home renters. Within 48
+hours, our system crashed because we had over 37,000 people
+apply, literally. That is on top of the many workers,
+particularly in the southern States, who are underpaid, who
+work in critical areas, and they are making the necessary
+support, in addition to the exposure that they are bringing
+home to their families in this COVID moment. Your actions and
+your efforts could help support those families to become sturdy
+in this moment as we rebuild our economy.
+ Many southern States underpay their State and local
+workers, including teachers. A lot of these teachers are home
+renters. So, we are asking teachers under economic stress and
+duress to teach our young people for a future when they cannot
+be in a comfortable position in this present. Your assistance
+is desperately needed in this moment.
+ Chairwoman Waters. Thank you very much. My time has
+expired. I now recognize Mr. Hill for 5 minutes of questions.
+ Mr. Hill. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and I thank our
+witnesses for the really useful information.
+ Something that is so important to Congress, particularly
+for Republicans, is assessing, after nearly $4 trillion in
+appropriated funds plus the strong support of the Federal
+Reserve System during 2020, how much more targeted relief and,
+directly, where is our challenge? So Dr. Strain, I really
+appreciated you sort of assessing that output gap issue, though
+when you look at the underlying potential and you look at the
+actual performance and find that gap, based on CBO's, something
+that the Congress studies quite closely, long-term economic
+analysis that was released on Monday, is there an appropriate
+spectrum of stimulus that Congress should consider? In other
+words, is President Biden's proposal of $1.9 trillion right, or
+should it be something smaller? Reiterate that point. Let me
+give you a minute to talk about that.
+ Mr. Strain. Thank you, Congressman. It is really an
+excellent question. The policy debate seems to have forgotten
+that Congress just appropriated $900 billion 6 weeks ago, and
+that money hasn't fully been spent. It is still making its way
+through the system, and it is going to have a big impact on the
+economy. That is a larger appropriation than Congress
+appropriated following the Great Recession that began with the
+2008 financial crisis.
+ There is a risk of Congress appropriating more money than
+the economy needs and pushing the economy above its sustainable
+level of production. This risk is amplified by significant
+growth in the money supply. It is amplified by supply chain
+disruptions. It is amplified by diminishments and the
+productive capacity of the economy. It is amplified by the fact
+that households are sitting on over $1 trillion of unspent
+savings. And it is amplified by the possibility that when the
+vaccines are in wide distribution in the second half of the
+year, households are going to go on a spending spree.
+ Congress is correct, I think, to be thinking about the
+economic need, but that needs to be scaled to reflect both the
+risks of doing too little and the risks of doing too much, and
+there are real risks of doing too much.
+ Mr. Hill. Thank you. That is something we talked about in
+the Congressional Oversight Commission of the CARES Act with
+the Federal Reserve and the Treasury, precisely that,
+particularly as it relates to State and local governments,
+because we don't always count that a great deal of that $4
+trillion in appropriated money goes to support our State and
+local government activities. Thank you for that.
+ I want to switch subjects briefly. There has been reference
+to the minimum wage here. I wonder if you agree with former
+economic adviser to President Clinton and President Obama,
+Larry Summers, when he says that more Economic Impact Payment
+(EIP) is not the best use of the economic stimulus at this
+time. He even cites that it is not effective, and you just
+referenced that there is $1 trillion out there in additional
+unspent savings. Can you address that for me?
+ Mr. Strain. Yes. I think that almost any use of half a
+trillion dollars would be better than giving checks to
+households who are in six-figure incomes and who haven't
+suffered any employment loss. More than that, I think a bill
+that both would increase the Federal minimum wage to $15 an
+hour, and that gives checks to households who earn six-figure
+incomes and haven't experienced unemployment loss, really has
+some moral problems as well. The President's plan would destroy
+low-wage jobs while boosting middle-class incomes. I don't
+think that is what Congress should be doing, particularly in a
+period of labor market weakness.
+ Mr. Hill. Thank you, Dr. Strain. Let me say that all of
+this combined, this work, is over 20 percent of GDP, which is a
+tremendous amount of stimulus. Mr. Spriggs referenced the
+support for our poor, struggling countries in the world facing
+the pandemic, and referenced the use of special drawing rights
+from the International Monetary Fund. Madam Chairwoman, I would
+like to submit my op-ed in the Wall Street Journal for the
+record, with your permission.
+ Chairwoman Waters. Without objection, it is so ordered.
+ And the gentleman's time has expired.
+ Mr. Hill. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
+ Chairwoman Waters. We will move on. The gentleman from
+California, Mr. Sherman, who is also the Chair of our
+Subcommittee on Investor Protection, Entrepreneurship, and
+Capital Markets, is now recognized for 5 minutes.
+ Mr. Sherman. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. As I pointed out
+in the Democratic Caucus, Madam Chairwoman, you preside as Full
+Committee Chair over a committee today of Full Committee
+Chairs. I will be the only one out of the first six Democratic
+questioners who does not preside over, of course, our Financial
+Services Committee, the House Oversight and Reform Committee,
+the House Small Business Committee, the House Foreign Affairs
+Committee, or the House Agriculture Committee.
+ Madam Chairwoman, I thank you for mentioning that we are
+not safe until we defeat this disease everywhere. There are
+those who are focusing only, and we should focus on,
+vaccinating all Americans, but until all 7 billion-plus people
+in the world are vaccinated, we haven't met our moral
+responsibility. The world economy is still suffering from this
+disease, but perhaps most importantly, there are billions and
+billions of people outside the U.S. who can be infected. That
+is where the disease will replicate. Whenever it replicates, it
+mutates, and some of those mutations can lead to more virulence
+and more contagious disease, and perhaps worst of all, a
+version of this disease that cannot be dealt with by the
+vaccines we have developed.
+ Speaking of vaccines, we did a great job in this country of
+developing three vaccines, but we initially were throwing away
+Pfizer vaccines after five dosages came out of a bottle that
+held almost seven dosages. We threw it away due to the FDA.
+Now, we are still throwing away vaccine when we could get half
+a dose out of one bottle and a half out of another. We are
+manufacturing the vaccine as quickly as we can in the factories
+of the company that invented it, but no company has licensed
+one of its competitors to create vaccine in their own factory.
+And we have just begun testing lower dosages to see their
+effectiveness, although the bulk of available medical science
+shows that much lower dosages would be effective, particularly
+in those under age 55. We have started those studies 8 months
+late.
+ I want to thank Mr. Anthony for being here and for pointing
+out that our municipalities are losing about $90 billion in
+revenue, that we have a million public sector jobs, and I know
+there is a study from the Economic Policy Institute that
+estimates that by the end of this year, we could be losing 5.3
+million public sector jobs. Now, that is, of course, a problem
+for the person who loses their job. It is bad for the economy
+in that those people aren't able to spend. But I want to focus
+on the services we lose when we don't have those people working
+for us. Looking at Los Angeles as one municipality, it spends
+roughly one-third of the money, more than one-third on public
+safety, so using that as an example, we are looking at $30
+billion less spent for public safety.
+ So my question, Mr. Anthony, is, if someone in Congress
+votes against providing revenue to municipalities, are they, in
+effect, voting to defund our police, because obviously any city
+that spends a third of its money on public safety, and my city
+does and most cities do, is going to have to make cuts in all
+of its functions. And if those cuts are pro rata, we are
+looking at a $30 billion dollar defunding of our police. Is
+that a real, practical effect of voting against this bill?
+ Mr. Anthony. Congressman, thank you so much for that
+question. Local governments have to balance their budgets, and
+as Congressman Cleaver, a former mayor, knows very well, we
+will have to look at all of our programs, including our
+permitting process, and our housing programs. And, in fact, we
+will have to look at our public safety, fire and police, if we
+don't get additional funding, because it is essential that we
+balance our budget. We are not like other levels of government,
+so we will have to look at that, and I believe that would
+probably be a difficult thing for us to do, but we would have
+to look at all of the programs.
+ Mr. Sherman. I would hope that those who vote against this
+bill will go to the House Floor and say that they are in favor
+of defunding those municipal services and that they stand by
+the votes to defund the police. I yield back.
+ Chairwoman Waters. Thank you very much. The gentlewoman
+from Missouri, Mrs. Wagner, is recognized for 5 minutes.
+ Mrs. Wagner. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and I thank our
+witnesses for being with us today.
+ I am going to get straight to it, and I would like folks to
+keep their answers as brief as possible.
+ Dr. Strain, in early March, economic data directly pointed
+to the need for congressional action to support the economy,
+and by the end of the summer, our economy had stabilized, but
+small businesses and their hard-working employees needed
+additional support as they continued to face lockdown measures.
+Congress acted and provided approximately $3.5 trillion in
+response to the COVID-19 pandemic, and in the late fall,
+economic data indicated a downward trend.
+ In December, Congress, again, acted to provide relief.
+Today, I am still hearing daily from my constituents who have
+yet to receive their stimulus checks or who have been unable to
+apply for the next round of Paycheck Protection Program (PPP)
+or Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) loans. If my
+constituents haven't even gotten access yet to the funds we
+provided in December, the nearly trillion dollars, $900
+billion, how can we expect that useful economic data exists
+about whether or not another new round of relief funding is
+even required?
+ Dr. Strain, do you agree that Congress should rely on
+quality economic data to identify the weak points in fiscal
+relief efforts?
+ Mr. Strain. Yes, of course. I agree with that, and I think
+that there have been some problems in getting CARES Act funds
+to the households and businesses who need them. The
+overwhelming majority of the time, those processes work, but
+there are times when they haven't. And we do know that
+households have received checks. We know that unemployed
+workers have received unemployment benefits. We know that
+businesses have received PPP. But those processes haven't been
+perfect, I agree with you.
+ Mrs. Wagner. The problem here is we are not really getting
+quality economic data to identify, I think, the weak points in
+our fiscal relief efforts.
+ Other witnesses today have focused on the positive impacts
+of further economic relief, but data shows that there can be
+negative outcomes, as well, from excessive and mostly
+untargeted stimulus spending.
+ Can you please address what specific negative economic
+impacts may occur, should too much untargeted stimulus be
+placed into the economy, Dr. Strain?
+ Mr. Strain. There is a risk of the economy overheating.
+There is a risk of economic demand outpacing growth and
+economic supply, which can lead to price inflation. That risk,
+I think, is much more concerning in the second half of this
+year when people are vaccinated, and they are out there
+spending money.
+ Mrs. Wagner. The Penn Wharton budget model yesterday
+released a study estimating that nearly three-quarters of
+economic stimulus checks will go toward savings and will not be
+used to stimulate the economy.
+ Are you able to quickly address this study and its results?
+ Mr. Strain. Yes, as a general matter, I think the evidence
+suggests that if you look at households with income above, say,
+$75,000, they save the overwhelming majority of the checks they
+receive, and that savings is kind of a double-edged sword,
+because it reduces concern about economic overheating, but it
+amplifies concern about Congress prudently spending money.
+ There is just no reason, in my view, for Congress to write
+checks to six-figure households who haven't suffered any
+employment loss so they can pay down credit card bills or make
+advance payments on other debts.
+ Mrs. Wagner. It is certainly not stimulating the economy.
+And I want to make the point clear and reiterate again that
+currently, there is more than $1 trillion of previously-enacted
+stimulus funding remaining to be spent. These remaining funds
+include: SBA's PPP program, $280 million; health spending, $239
+billion; EIDL loans, $172 billion; unemployment insurance
+expansion, $172 billion; education funding, $59 billion; State
+and local aid, $58 billion; stimulus checks, $52 billion; food
+stamps, $33 billion; Childcare and Development Block Grants,
+$10 billion; and agriculture, $29 billion.
+ Should Congress see positively where more targeted support
+is needed before passing another large stimulus package, that
+is my main concern here.
+ I believe I am out of time, and I yield back.
+ Chairwoman Waters. Yes, the gentlewoman's time has expired.
+ I now recognize the gentleman from New York, Mr. Meeks, who
+is also the chairman of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs,
+for 5 minutes.
+ Mr. Meeks. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and thank you to
+all of the witnesses for your testimony today.
+ I am going to start out with Mr. Anthony. I heard Mr. Hill
+state that essentially, we faced an enemy we knew nothing about
+in the beginning. And I know that my State of New York was one
+of the hardest-hit States first, and it seemed to me at that
+particular point, the then-President of the United States
+basically underplayed what should and what could be done at
+that particular time, as well as aid to States, I know to New
+York and to States that were initially hit.
+ So, my question is, if you had a State like New York, which
+was hit at a time when no one knew what the pandemic was and
+how to deal with it, and the States had to take on that burden
+themselves, can you speak to the budgetary needs of the first-
+hit States that now need this money, as far as aid to cities
+and States, as far as them being able to benefit from already,
+and other States learning from them and the practices that they
+had to undergo, being one of those first States and earlier
+States hit?
+ Mr. Anthony. Yes. Thank you very much, Congressman Meeks,
+for that question.
+ All of us have indicated that this is a pandemic that none
+of us was prepared for, and so when we received the CARES Act,
+as Congress knows, those first dollars went to States and
+cities with populations of 500,000 or more. And what local
+governments under 500,000 had to do was to go begging State
+Governors and others for those dollars to address the problems
+that they were facing in terms of the implementation of the
+response.
+ Cities, the mayors, the councilmembers, rural cities, small
+and large cities, as you said, Congressman Meeks, as well as
+States, had to put an infrastructure system together. We did,
+but yet, we spent money at the city level that we did not have,
+to respond to the needs, and now we are at $90 billion,
+estimated, that we have lost, plus all of the employees,
+32,000, up to a million employees, we have had to lose, because
+we don't have the reserves, we don't have the budget dollars.
+ So, we are just asking that $350 billion be provided to
+State and local governments to continue helping America return
+to creativity and jobs and recovery. So, that is the bottom
+line. We weren't prepared. America wasn't prepared, but we want
+some additional dollars.
+ Mr. Meeks. Thank you for that.
+ And Dr. Spriggs, many economists have argued that our
+recovery from the 2008 financial crisis was so slow and drawn
+out because we did too little with respect to economic
+stimulus; accordingly, certain communities were
+disproportionately impacted and lost wealth unnecessarily. So,
+in your opinion, what is riskier, doing too little by way of
+stimulus or doing too much?
+ Mr. Spriggs. It is far riskier in this situation that we do
+too little. We must think big.
+ The fear of inflation that we heard about, that will occur
+if we don't do enough. Because if we don't keep workers intact
+and whole so that their employers can find them, if we let
+workers become homeless, it will be harder to reconnect workers
+and reignite the economy.
+ We have to take care of the workers who are most directly
+impacted now with adequate support for their rent, adequate
+support for their income, adequate support for those who fall
+through the cracks because their unemployment insurance needs
+drastic modernization.
+ So, my fear is not that we are going to do too much, it is
+that we will do too little, and the outcome will be that it
+will be too difficult to put our labor market back together.
+ Mr. Meeks. Thank you so much.
+ I am out of time, so I will yield back.
+ Chairwoman Waters. Thank you so very much, Chairman Meeks.
+ The gentleman from Florida, Mr. Posey, is recognized for 5
+minutes.
+ Mr. Posey. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and Mr. Ranking
+Member. It is good to be back here on the Financial Services
+Committee again in this new Congress, and thank you for holding
+this hearing today.
+ The events of last year have been like nothing we have ever
+experienced in our lifetimes. The pandemic has brought
+intolerable suffering and lasting economic harm.
+ In this time of pain, Congress has to help so many
+Americans, and Congress has enacted over $3.5 trillion in
+relief for people who, through no fault of their own, faced
+unemployment, shutdowns, and the inability to pay rent, put
+food on the table, and hold their businesses together.
+ I know all of the Members have worked very hard to help
+people access COVID relief programs, and I am proud to be able
+to help my constituents figure it out. But as I have said, we
+have spent $3.5 trillion on COVID relief since last spring.
+During Fiscal Year 2020, our deficit was $3.1 trillion. Since
+October 2019, the Federal debt held by the Federal Reserve has
+grown from $2.4 trillion to nearly $4.9 trillion by the end of
+the third quarter of last year.
+ That means that during this period, the Fed monetized about
+$2.5 trillion of added debt spending. We have been financing up
+to two-thirds of our debt by running printing presses. Since
+new relief spending will come at the expense of borrowing money
+from the Fed, I support proposals to moderate the next round
+and target such spending on families and workers who need it.
+ I am particularly concerned about initiatives to provide
+extraordinary assistance to State and local governments, and I
+would like to ask Dr. Strain if it would be fair to replace
+COVID-19-related revenue losses of all of the States, dollar-
+for-dollar? Wouldn't it be unfair to the States that have a
+more balanced approach to government and its size?
+ Mr. Strain. Thank you, Congressman.
+ I think that it is appropriate for Congress to help State
+and local governments with revenue losses, but that help should
+be tied to pandemic-related revenue losses. So, Congress should
+not bail out States that misuse rainy-day funds. And Congress
+certainly shouldn't bail out mismanaged pension funds.
+ But I think an amount close to $100 billion would be
+appropriate for Congress to give to States and localities, many
+of whom really are in need. My concern is that not doing so
+will act as a drag on the national economic recovery, because
+States and localities won't be able to hire back workers they
+have laid off.
+ Mr. Posey. Thank you very much for that answer.
+ How do you think we should go about determining the amount
+of the distribution?
+ Mr. Strain. A formula could be created that looked at where
+State revenues were on the eve of the pandemic, and then
+attempted to estimate how States actually fared, relative to
+reasonable projections that, again, focused on pandemic losses.
+ Some States wouldn't need much money at all. Some States
+have seen sales taxes recover, and have good income tax
+revenue. But there are some States, particularly States that
+rely a lot on tourism or that rely on more in-person services,
+that have taken a big hit as a consequence of the pandemic, and
+I think it is appropriate for Congress to help, if for no other
+reason than to support the overall national recovery.
+ Mr. Posey. I agree, and I thank you for that.
+ What do you think the major items should be and how should
+we estimate them, do you have any thoughts on that?
+ Mr. Strain. Congress has already appropriated several
+hundred billion dollars to States and localities. Much of that
+funding is for specific programs, for example, for the Medicaid
+program. I think what is needed now is to give States more
+discretion so they can fill in the holes that are unique to
+their States and localities.
+ Mr. Posey. Thank you very much.
+ Madam Chairwoman, I yield back.
+ Chairwoman Waters. Thank you very much.
+ The gentleman from Georgia, Mr. Scott, who is also the
+chairman of the House Committee on Agriculture, is recognized
+for 5 minutes.
+ Mr. Scott. Thank you very much, Madam Chairwoman.
+ This is a great hearing. Let me just sort of get right to
+the point here.
+ Earlier on, Chairwoman Waters had asked me to kind of zero
+in on helping with the HEROES Act and the preceding stimulus
+packages on the housing relief for homeowners. And so, we put a
+package together that would get, I think initially, I forgot
+the figure now, but right now, that figure is at $25 billion
+for rental assistance. We started out with some higher numbers.
+ We also wanted to get money in to help with utilities. So,
+right now, it is $5 billion for aid to help keep the water and
+the lights and the electricity on.
+ But then when we got down to the mortgage assistance, we
+are still in a process of trying to get that in. So, Mr.
+Anthony, I want you to comment on how important it is.
+ And we also have to understand one of the reasons is that
+Chairwoman Waters and I were here back during the time, and I
+think it was 2008 when they had the Wall Street breakdown, and
+we put the Hardest Hit Program, which dealt with keeping folks
+in their homes. This is critical, but right now, we don't have
+anything there.
+ I wanted to share with the committee what the progress is
+on that right now. Our House Financial Services Committee, the
+Senate Banking Committee, and the White House right now are
+trying to get language in.
+ So, I wanted to get your opinion, Mr. Anthony, because,
+even with some of the money that we have gotten in this area,
+even back in 2008, 2010, it went to the State to be able to
+implement it down to the cities to get that help. But I got
+inundated with calls, and still am, because there is a failure
+of the State working effectively with our cities in terms of
+getting the money to our cities. And as I understand it, part
+of that money was even left on the table because there was a
+deadline put on that money because of the population
+thresholds. Only three governmental units in Georgia were able
+to get that money--Cobb and Fulton Counties, and the City of
+Atlanta--because of that population threshold.
+ So, my point is, give us an update on how tragic this is to
+get money down to give to the cities and towns. I represent 48
+cities and towns and we are having difficulty in getting that.
+ Can you tell us what we need to do to correct that problem
+and make sure we are getting that money out to our cities and
+municipalities?
+ Mr. Anthony. Yes, thank you very much, Congressman Scott,
+for that question.
+ The issue was that the dollars, again, went to cities of
+500,000 or more population. And it was very challenging to get
+through the bureaucracy of working to get it down to the people
+from the State, and then to the county, and then to those
+cities.
+ And some of these cities in some States, for example, Iowa,
+had no cities that qualified for direct funding. And then there
+are other States that may have had one. South Carolina had one
+city, Columbia, South Carolina. And we had other States, again,
+that may have had two cities.
+ But the issue is, these cities, small and medium-sized
+cities, can, in fact, use the Community Development Block Grant
+formula to get direct funding so they can get it out and solve
+some of these issues.
+ The rental assistance program had like 40 million people
+right now that are on the brink of eviction. So, I will stop
+there, Congressman.
+ Mr. Scott. Yes, thank you very much.
+ In my remaining seconds, I want everybody to know, also,
+that we have a food shortage. We have a hunger problem here. As
+chairman of the Agriculture Committee, I want you to know that
+we are going to be in a bit of a fight, because we want to
+raise the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)
+allocation to 20 percent, 15 to 20 percent. I feel very
+strongly we are going to need that, and I just hope everybody
+is ready to fight that battle.
+ We will be having a hearing on it, on food insecurity in
+about 3 weeks.
+ Chairwoman Waters. The gentleman's time has expired.
+ Mr. Scott. Thank you, ma'am.
+ Chairwoman Waters. You're welcome.
+ The gentleman from Michigan, Mr. Huizenga, is now
+recognized for 5 minutes.
+ Mr. Huizenga. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I appreciate
+that. And I am sorry if I am going back over a little territory
+here with Dr. Strain, but I want to just make sure that we are
+covering this.
+ Dr. Strain, what actions do we need to take here that could
+best provide a boost to the economy? Is it direct payments? Is
+it additional unemployment insurance? Is it ultra-low interest
+rates, which we are seeing? What is it that would actually
+provide the biggest boost?
+ Mr. Strain. Thank you, Congressman.
+ I think the direct payments would be a mistake and an
+imprudent use of government spending. The unemployment benefits
+the President is proposing actually would hold the recovery
+back by keeping people unemployed for longer.
+ The $15-an-hour minimum wage would significantly reduce
+employment opportunities. The Congressional Budget Office
+estimates that it would reduce employment by over 1 million
+jobs for low-wage workers.
+ The best things that Congress can do in my view are to make
+sure that we can actually get vaccines into people's arms, to
+make sure that we can test people for COVID-19, to make sure
+that households that really are in need, vulnerable households
+that really have suffering, can get the help that they need,
+not households with six-figure incomes who haven't had any
+employment loss, and I think that it would be appropriate for
+Congress to help States and municipalities to the tune of
+around $100 billion.
+ Mr. Huizenga. How would you do that for those families, how
+would you determine those families who do need that economic
+help and support, that safety net?
+ Because I tend to agree with you, I think there are a
+number of families who are doing just fine, who are going to be
+receiving these payments.
+ Mr. Strain. We could use the mechanisms that we already
+have in place to help low-income families. The food stamp
+program is very well-targeted. The Earned Income Tax Credit is
+very well-targeted on low-income households. Making the Child
+Tax Credit fully refundable for 2021, I think, would be
+perfectly appropriate.
+ So, the existing programs that we have that target low-
+income households, I think, can be utilized in this instance.
+ Mr. Huizenga. Okay. You brought up the unemployment
+insurance situation, and Dr. Spriggs from AFL-CIO, the last
+time he appeared here, I brought up the $600 payment, that
+kicker, that Federal kicker that was brought up. He had made
+the claim, 3 claims kind of spaced out, that that was the only
+way that people were able to pay their bills at that time. It
+may or may not be true.
+ He then moved on to the fact that, and said that, I believe
+the term he used was this was about racial inequality or
+inequity that had been present in the economic system that we
+were dealing with.
+ And then the third thing that he said was that employers,
+and this was the word he used, ``refused'' to keep their
+employees safe in work conditions.
+ And so, Dr. Spriggs, I am just curious, do you stand by
+those statements now, a number of months later?
+ Mr. Spriggs. I don't stand by your characterization of my
+words, but I stand by my words and I will put them in testimony
+again.
+ Mr. Huizenga. I am not sure--
+ Mr. Spriggs. It is still the case that because of the
+racial wealth gap, Black and Latino households have no
+liquidity. And in a situation where they lose jobs--
+ Mr. Huizenga. Reclaiming my time--
+ Mr. Spriggs. --if you give them unemployment insurance--
+ Mr. Huizenga. Reclaiming my time--
+ Mr. Spriggs. --they will rapidly try and gather up
+precautionary savings--
+ Mr. Huizenga. Madam Chairwoman?
+ Mr. Spriggs. --and the $600 is still necessary--
+ Mr. Huizenga. Can you--
+ Mr. Spriggs. --to make up for that inequality.
+ Mr. Huizenga. Reclaiming my time, so, do you stand by the
+fact that employers refuse to keep their employees safe in the
+workspace?
+ Mr. Spriggs. My statement didn't say that. It said that
+they were not safe.
+ Mr. Huizenga. No, you--
+ Mr. Spriggs. My statement said that they were not safe and
+the evidence is clear. I provided in my written testimony that
+the disparities that are going on for low-income workers--
+ Chairwoman Waters. The time belongs to--
+ Mr. Spriggs. --specifically in California--
+ Chairwoman Waters. Mr. Spriggs, the time belongs to--
+ Mr. Davidson. A point of order, please, Madam Chairwoman?
+ Chairwoman Waters. --Mr. Huizenga.
+ The time belongs to Mr. Huizenga. Please continue, Mr.
+Huizenga.
+ Mr. Hill. Can we put 10 seconds more back on the clock,
+Madam Chairwoman?
+ Chairwoman Waters. Yes, we can. We will. No problem.
+ Mr. Huizenga. Madam Chairwoman, that was the word that he
+used, ``refused,'' so he may or may not stand by those
+statements.
+ But I am curious, if $600 a month wasn't enough, the AFL-
+CIO supported the last package, to my understanding, that had
+$300 through the end of March. It is now going to be $400 if
+the Democrats move ahead with the Biden-only plan through the
+end of the year.
+ And I am curious, if $600 wasn't enough a couple of months
+ago, how in the world could the AFL-CIO support something that
+is less than that now? It seems to me, that is politics.
+ So, Dr. Spriggs, I don't know if you care to respond, but
+now I will give you the time.
+ Chairwoman Waters. Thank you.
+ The time has expired.
+ The gentleman from Texas, Mr. Green, who is also the
+chairman of our Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations,
+is recognized for 5 minutes.
+ Mr. Green. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I greatly
+appreciate your opening comments, because I would like to
+associate myself with this issue that assistance is something
+that is of paramount importance. We have circumstances wherein
+persons who are about to be evicted are about to be evicted by
+properties that are owned by mom-and-pop landlords, people who
+don't necessarily have a mortgage, but they need the income to
+sustain themselves. The rent must be paid.
+ The best way to deal with these issues associated with
+eviction would be for the rent to be paid. It obviously
+benefits the tenant, because the tenant maintains a home, but
+it also benefits those mom-and-pop landlords who need this
+income to sustain themselves. The rent must be paid.
+ The $25 billion that we have proposed that is in this
+package is another down payment. It is a continuation of what
+must be done.
+ I don't know what the duration of the pandemic will be, but
+the duration of the suffering is still at the level it was
+previously, notwithstanding our efforts to help, because, as
+has been indicated today, some 40 million may be on the brink
+of eviction. Nobody knows what the real number is; I have heard
+numbers higher, and I have seen some lower. But the point is,
+people are on the edge. They are living on the margins, and we
+must pay the rent.
+ Having said this, I do want to concern myself now with the
+$1.4 trillion-plus package or tax cuts in 2017: $1.4 trillion
+went to some of the wealthiest people in this country. There
+were no hues and cries about, we are paying them too much and
+they are getting too much money in their pockets.
+ They were not suffering. Their rent was paid. There was no
+pandemic. Their car notes were paid. But they were not persons
+who needed to have some infusion of cash for some specific
+reason. We never heard from people who were complaining about
+this from the other side.
+ My dear friends, if there is a moral question about someone
+who is getting a six-figure income and we are talking about
+maybe $150,000 for them, too, where is the moral issue
+associated with putting millions upon millions in the pockets
+of persons who are wealthy, who did not express a need for it?
+ In fact, many of them said, don't do this, I don't need the
+money. Many of them did, but we did it, notwithstanding their
+hues and cries.
+ So, I just believe that at some point, we have to
+understand that it is not a sin for people in the working class
+to get help, because it wasn't a sin, by some standards, for
+people who are in the upper class to get help.
+ So, Mr. Strain, my question to you is this: What was your
+position on the wealthy class, the healthy class, what was your
+position when they were getting these tax breaks in the
+millions?
+ Mr. Strain. Thank you, Congressman.
+ My position on the 2017 tax law is that the corporate
+provisions, I think, were very good. I have some issues with
+the individual-side provisions. So, I don't think I am--
+ Mr. Green. I have been doing some research, and I haven't
+been able to read where you expressed those concerns.
+ Do you have a White Paper that you have written that
+expressed those concerns?
+ Mr. Strain. I believe that I expressed those concerns a bit
+in commentary and in media interviews, certainly behind-the-
+scenes, as well. I don't think I am the forefront--
+ Mr. Green. I can appreciate behind-the-scenes, but a lot of
+what we have to do to have an impact has to be open and
+notorious. You are here, openly and notoriously, expressing
+your concerns about the morality associated with working-class
+people getting some help. I didn't see that in my research,
+openly and notoriously, for the wealthy class.
+ And with reference to the tax cuts to the corporations, do
+you believe that corporations should have received those tax
+cuts and still keep those tax cuts?
+ Mr. Strain. Congressman, I reject your characterization--
+ Mr. Green. Seconds left--
+ Mr. Strain. I reject your characterization of reducing tax
+rates--
+ Mr. Green. My time has expired.
+ Mr. Strain. --as giving a handout to anyone.
+ Mr. Green. My time has expired.
+ Mr. Strain. I also reject your characterization of my views
+and I--
+ Chairwoman Waters. The gentleman's time has expired.
+ The gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Stivers, is now recognized for
+5 minutes.
+ Mr. Stivers. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I appreciate you
+holding this hearing.
+ The most important issue facing us, Madam Chairwoman, as
+you know, is recovering our economy and moving past COVID-19
+and getting our kids back in schools, getting our businesses
+open, setting the conditions to make that happen, to have
+sustainable growth in the future, and to mitigate the suffering
+in the meantime.
+ So, I am curious, Dr. Strain, do you think opening the
+economy is the best long-term solution toward our economic
+growth?
+ Mr. Strain. Thank you, Congressman.
+ I think there is really no question about that. Once we get
+the virus under control, and once we get people vaccinated,
+there is every reason to believe that the economy will bounce
+back--
+ Mr. Stivers. Okay. Thank you, Dr. Strain.
+ Mr. Strain. --very strongly. And--
+ Mr. Stivers. Thank you.
+ I only have a short amount of time, and I would like to ask
+Mr. Anthony, Mr. Johnson, Ms. Murguia, and Mr. Spriggs, do you
+all support vaccinations, one at a time, quickly, yes or no?
+ Mr. Anthony. Clarence Anthony, I personally support it and
+I educate people to take it, but it is their decision,
+especially in the Black and--
+ Mr. Stivers. I am not asking about mandatory vaccines. I am
+asking if you personally support vaccinations. Thank you.
+ Mr. Johnson?
+ Mr. Johnson. Yes.
+ Mr. Stivers. Thank you.
+ Ms. Murguia. Yes.
+ Mr. Stivers. Mr. Spriggs?
+ Mr. Spriggs. Yes, I do.
+ Mr. Stivers. Thank you.
+ I want to be clear: I am not for mandatory vaccinations for
+people who have religious or personal problems with it, but I
+want to educate, and I think that vaccinations are the fastest
+way forward. By the way, I did put forward an idea a couple of
+weeks ago, that I have since walked away from, of tying the
+stimulus payments to the vaccinations.
+ But I would like to talk to Mr. Johnson about vaccinations.
+I read in a front-page story in the Columbus Dispatch that in
+Ohio, the vaccination rates among minority communities were
+lower than majority communities.
+ Is there something we should be doing in this bill to help
+support vaccinations, whether it is a PR campaign; again, I am
+not for mandatory vaccinations, but is there something that we
+could do? Is it a distribution issue? Have you dug into that
+issue, Mr. Johnson, about what is going on? Is that an anomaly
+in Ohio or is that happening around the country? Is there
+something that we need to do?
+ Because I believe vaccinations are one of the fastest ways
+to open the economy.
+ Mr. Johnson. First of all, that is the reality across the
+country. It is a trend we have seen that African-American
+communities have been disproportionately left out of the
+vaccination opportunities. In this bill, we should prioritize
+those communities who have been hit hardest first to ensure
+that we get those individuals who are critical workers, who are
+providing the support.
+ Second, in this bill, there should be a robust
+communications plan investing in African-owned media, and
+Latino-owned media to talk to some targeted communities, and
+then American-owned media to talk to targeted communities to
+ensure the proper education is provided.
+ Mr. Stivers. Thank you. I really appreciate that.
+ We need a partnership with really trusted organizations
+like the NAACP, Mr. Johnson, as we pursue this.
+ I have seen some conspiracy theories on social media about
+Hank Aaron's death that don't appear to be based in fact, and I
+would like to make sure that we address some of those issues,
+too. Because while it is true that Mr. Aaron got the
+vaccination and passed away, I don't believe, and doctors that
+I have seen interviewed have said there seems to be no
+correlation between the vaccination and him later dying.
+ So, is that an issue in the minority community, Mr.
+Johnson?
+ Mr. Johnson. There are some historical questions that many
+would like answered, but that is the part of education that
+must take place. We stand ready to partner with you or the
+committee or anyone in general to ensure that people are
+educated around their options, which is most crucial, and in
+doing so, we could find ourselves getting out of this pandemic
+much quicker if we target impacted communities.
+ Mr. Stivers. Are we doing enough with testing? Are African
+Americans represented enough in the FDA's tests? Is that an
+issue, Mr. Johnson?
+ Mr. Johnson. There is a huge disparity in clinical trials
+in terms of the demographics of African Americans and Latinos.
+So, we must increase that, as well.
+ Mr. Stivers. I would like to work--
+ Chairwoman Waters. The gentleman's time has expired.
+ Mr. Stivers. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
+ Chairwoman Waters. Thank you.
+ Mr. Stivers. I am committed to working with everybody on
+those issues. Thank you.
+ Chairwoman Waters. The gentleman from Missouri, Mr.
+Cleaver, who is also the Chair of our Subcommittee on Housing,
+Community Development, and Insurance, is now recognized for 5
+minutes.
+ Mr. Cleaver. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
+ Madam Chairwoman, I am so glad to have Mayor Anthony with
+us today. We were mayors back in the day. He started a little
+earlier. He was there at the age of--I think, in his 20s. But I
+would like to talk with him and Ms. Murguia.
+ Mayor Anthony, we have a problem in Congress that you can
+recognize, maybe most, which is that the Federal Government
+leans towards Governors, because most of the people who come
+from other divisions, they come from State legislatures, State
+senates, and there are only a few of us who were mayors, and so
+we tend to do dumb things like, the first CARES Act only wanted
+to give direct grants to cities populated over 500,000. We did
+fix that, however, but the other thing it might be important
+for people to remember is that there are 27 States in our union
+that don't have any cities populated over 500,000.
+ Mr. Mayor, there seems to be this resistance, particularly
+on the Republican side, of giving money to cities and States in
+our package.
+ What would you say to them or what can you say to them
+right now in terms of that need and what happens if they don't
+do it?
+ Mr. Anthony. Thank you, Congressman Cleaver, for that
+opportunity to respond.
+ What we are seeing, again, is a loss of jobs and loss of
+ability to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic that exists
+specifically in the neighborhoods and the communities of rural,
+small, as well as urban communities. And I think that the
+misnomer here is that we are looking for a bailout.
+ What we are saying is if we are going to get back on track
+in America, we must give some support to the level of
+government directly to respond, and to create the jobs, and to
+be able to help the small businesses, and minority-owned
+businesses, help those that have been left behind. So, that is
+the bottom line here. We were overlooked in the last bill,
+because we did not get direct dollars.
+ I am just asking that we get a partnership with those
+mayors and councilmembers of towns and villages of all sizes to
+get them the dollars, Congressman.
+ Mr. Cleaver. Amen.
+ Ms. Murguia, I am not going to mention that you are from
+Kansas City, I am not trying to rub that in to people, but what
+I would like for you to address is that Black and Brown people
+end up being disproportionately on the front lines of holding
+the country together, but we are on the back lines of receiving
+the vaccines.
+ But even before that, there has been always this resistance
+about increasing the minimum wage. Has your organization taken
+a position yet on the minimum wage, which we do have in this
+package?
+ Ms. Murguia. Thank you, Congressman, for your leadership.
+We absolutely support a $15 increase in the minimum wage. We
+understand that an unfair minimum wage disproportionately
+affects people of color, including Latinos and African-
+Americans, many of whom are often concentrated in low-wage
+jobs; for instance, 34 percent of Latinos are earning below
+poverty-level wages.
+ And we know, also, that Congress has not raised the Federal
+minimum wage in quite some time. It is currently at $7.25 an
+hour, and has been since 2009. So for us, we absolutely
+understand how increasing that minimum wage can help provide
+needed economic support for these communities who have been
+disproportionately impacted, and not just by the pandemic, as I
+highlighted in my testimony.
+ Even in pre-pandemic times, we had seen significant
+challenges in terms of income and equality and those underlying
+conditions that are systemic that have kept our communities
+from being full participants in the economy. So, we absolutely
+believe that minimum wage has to be part of a robust recovery
+and we support it.
+ And I will just build quickly, the States and localities,
+part of that ecosystem, as you know, Mr. Mayor, Congressman, is
+the ecosystem of community-based organizations that are key
+links to communities of color for services. And so, Guadalupe
+Center or the Mattie Rhodes Center or El Centro, those are all
+key to providing important services in this particular time,
+and need that funding, as well.
+ Chairwoman Waters. The gentleman's time has expired. Thank
+you.
+ The gentleman from Kentucky, Mr. Barr, is recognized for 5
+minutes.
+ Mr. Barr. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
+ And for all of the Americans who are watching this hearing
+online or on television, I want to be clear-eyed about what the
+Biden Administration and my Democrat friends are doing this
+week. This week, Democrats are using a budget procedure
+originally designed to cut spending, to pave the way for a
+massive spending spree that, with interest, will add over $2
+trillion to the national debt, despite the immediate
+availability of over $1 trillion in unspent funds from the
+CARES Act, and a $900 billion relief bill passed less than 2
+months ago. That bears repeating: Over $1 trillion in unspent
+funds are immediately available for the American people.
+ I would hope that all of us, on a bipartisan basis, would
+focus on actually deploying those funds before we rushed to
+saddle future generations of Americans with an additional $2
+trillion in debt.
+ But one thing we absolutely must do is, do no harm. I want
+to explore this minimum wage hike that is included in this
+bill, because at a time when so many workers, and especially
+low-wage workers, the minority workers that Ms. Murguia was
+just talking about, are struggling, one thing we absolutely
+should not do is force those workers to lose their only source
+of income.
+ And Congress went to great lengths through the PPP to
+ensure that small businesses could keep their employees on the
+payroll, yet this proposal from President Biden and
+Congressional Democrats to raise the Federal minimum wage to
+$15 per hour, without any adjustments based on regional
+differences and cost-of-living, would compromise those efforts.
+ According to the CBO, 1.3 million low-income workers will
+lose their jobs because of this misguided proposal. I want my
+friends, my Democrat friends who support this policy, who are
+well-intentioned, who want to help low-income workers, and I
+share their goal, but I want them to hear what I was told by my
+local restauranteurs, a sector of the economy that has been
+devastated by this pandemic. I have talked to big
+restauranteurs with 1,800 employees across all of their
+restaurants, and then in some cases, a small restauranteur, who
+owns two restaurants in a very low-wage, low cost-of-living
+county, Estill County, in my district, and they said it would
+be ``catastrophic.'' Those two restaurants would close as a
+result of this because of the low cost-of-living. Those 40
+employees would lose their jobs.
+ And the large restauranteur in Lexington, Kentucky, told me
+that because of this policy, his business would lose 70 percent
+of their profits and the result would be ``carnage'' for the
+tipped employees in his business.
+ So, Dr. Strain, what would be the impact on low-income
+workers, especially those in the distressed restaurant sector,
+with this across-the-board hike in the Federal minimum wage
+that would destroy jobs?
+ Mr. Strain. Thank you, Congressman.
+ Your characterization is correct. I think CBO's estimate of
+1.3 million is actually on the low side. There are three States
+where the median wage is below $16.50, where half of all
+workers earn less than $16.50. There are two dozen States where
+half of all workers earn less than $18 or $18.50 an hour. And
+in 47 States, over one quarter of workers earn less than $15 an
+hour.
+ So, this would be extremely disruptive, particularly in
+low-wage States. But when you think about low-wage States,
+think about approximately half of the States.
+ Mr. Barr. Can I just reclaim my time quickly, because I
+know my Democratic colleagues do very much care about, just
+like we do, these low-income workers, but the reality is, in
+the restaurant sector, in this past year, nearly one in every
+five restaurants permanently closed their doors, and over 30 of
+the country's largest retail and restaurant companies have
+filed for bankruptcy.
+ Is this the time? Is this really the time to put greater
+stress on those employers in their ability to retain workers?
+ I think this is a devastating policy that will destroy jobs
+and kill peoples' ability to stay employed. And with that, my
+time has expired, and I yield back.
+ Chairwoman Waters. Thank you, very much.
+ The gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Perlmutter, who is also
+the chairman of our Subcommittee on Consumer Protection and
+Financial Institutions, is recognized for 5 minutes.
+ Mr. Perlmutter. Thanks, Madam Chairwoman.
+ And I have to start by saying to my friend, Mr. Barr, I am
+your ``Democratic'' friend. I am not your ``Democrat'' friend.
+It is the Democratic party. It is not the Democrat party. I
+don't call you my ``publican'' friend or ``banana republican''
+friend. You are my Republican friend.
+ So, please, I am your Democratic friend. It is the
+Democratic party. Thank you.
+ Now, many of my questions have been answered and I thank
+the panel, all of you; you have been excellent witnesses. I
+would just like to confirm with you, Dr. Strain, and with you,
+Mr. Anthony, some numbers that you guys testified to, as to the
+need for backfilling, to some degree, State and local
+governments.
+ Dr. Strain, in my notes, I have that you said a $100
+billion for State and local governments probably is your
+ballpark number; is that right?
+ Mr. Strain. Yes, Congressman. I think that would be
+appropriate to the need.
+ Mr. Perlmutter. Okay. And Mr. Anthony, the number that I
+had for you was $350 billion; is that correct?
+ Mr. Anthony. That is correct, Congressman.
+ Mr. Perlmutter. Okay. Thank you.
+ I turn my attention to you, Ms. Murguia, even if you are
+from Kansas City, which is a shame, and to you, Mr. Johnson. In
+Colorado, we noticed an uptick in calls to our housing hotline
+in terms of evictions and mortgage delinquencies. Within the
+Hispanic and Latinx communities, within the African-American
+community, have either of you seen an uptick in concerns about
+delinquencies, either with rentals or in homeownership?
+ And I will start with you, Janet Murguia from Kansas City.
+I shouldn't be messing around with Kansas City, but Mr. Cleaver
+always makes me crazy about that.
+ Ms. Murguia. Well, go, Kansas City Chiefs, on Sunday, just
+to add another point of emphasis there.
+ Look, you are right, Congressman. There is no question that
+our communities are being impacted very seriously by the rental
+and the foreclosures or mortgage challenges. It is one of the
+reasons that in my written testimony, I really went to great
+lengths to talk about the importance of housing counseling
+programs. They can provide that on-the-ground resource where
+folks can call and turn to trusted partners and advisors, and
+we can provide linguistic and culturally competent information.
+ And that information is so important right now as they are
+navigating the crisis, the confusing messages about what they
+can and can't do. It is essential that we expand and deepen
+resources for those types of housing assistance programs, in
+addition to funds that will help extend eviction moratoriums
+and also mortgage relief for some of these individuals.
+ I found that our network of community-based organizations,
+the UnidosUS Affiliate Network, has been extremely effective
+when we have the resources to be able to engage on the ground,
+because we are seen as trusted partners and we can give them
+that important information. But it is essential that those
+services be funded as part of this recovery.
+ Mr. Perlmutter. Thank you.
+ And Mr. Johnson?
+ Mr. Johnson. I absolutely agree with Janet, and I also
+agree with Congressman Green that there is some immediate need,
+not only for the home renters who actually work every day, but
+for this pandemic, but also for the homeowners who are
+providing access to home rental as a supplemental income
+opportunity. It is absolutely vital to provide support as soon
+as possible.
+ Mr. Perlmutter. Thank you.
+ And I would just like to say that I tried cross-examining
+Jim Jordan in the Rules Committee on Zoom the other day. It
+didn't work very well. Cross-examining witnesses on Zoom or on
+Webex is hard and everybody should just remember that.
+ I yield back.
+ Chairwoman Waters. Thank you very much.
+ The gentleman from Texas, Mr. Williams, is recognized for 5
+minutes.
+ Mr. Williams of Texas. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
+ In December, Congress passed a bipartisan $900 billion
+COVID relief bill, which brings the 10-month total on
+coronavirus relief to $3.5 trillion. Now, this means we have
+spent more money on COVID relief in less than a year than the
+entire GDP of Germany, France, or India.
+ It is not sustainable or realistic to think the Federal
+Government can continue this pace of spending to keep propping
+up the U.S. economy, while States are forcing businesses to
+remain closed. The only way to get out of this pandemic with
+our economy still intact is if we end the lockdowns and put
+people back to work.
+ Dr. Strain, I am going to have 3 questions for you. This
+will be the first one. Can you give us some examples of
+policies we can be examining in Congress that would incentivize
+reopening the economy, that would not require, I repeat, not
+require additional Federal spending?
+ Mr. Strain. Policies that would not require additional
+Federal spending?
+ Congressman, I think there is a need for some additional
+Federal spending, to advance your goal of reopening the
+economy, and to get shots in arms, to distribute the vaccine
+much better than we have seen so far.
+ I also think that despite the rollout of the vaccine, a
+more adequate testing regime would go a long way toward
+reopening the economy, as well. So, I think those sorts of
+measures would do what you want, but they would cost some
+money.
+ Mr. Williams of Texas. What about liability protection for
+businesses?
+ Mr. Strain. Yes, Congressman, I think that is an important
+component. I think you don't want to give businesses blanket
+immunity. You want businesses who are grossly negligent to
+still be liable.
+ But businesses are faced with sometimes conflicting
+guidance. They are faced with guidance that is changing
+relatively rapidly. So, I think if you are a business and you
+make a good-faith effort to follow public health guidance, that
+a temporary liability shield from frivolous pandemic-related
+lawsuits would be very appropriate and advisable.
+ Mr. Williams of Texas. Thank you.
+ Secondly, if my friends on the other side of the aisle are
+intent on passing another COVID-19 relief package, they should
+prioritize reopening the economy, as we've talked about, and
+getting people back to work. But, instead, they are looking to
+include completely, I think, unrelated liberal policy
+priorities such as increasing the minimum wage to $15 an hour.
+We have talked a lot about that.
+ And I just got out of another committee hearing with a
+small business where they had 3 witnesses who all said it would
+be a disaster to increase the minimum wage to $15. I am a small
+business owner in Texas, and I have some experience in that. It
+would be a real problem.
+ Now, Jim Clyburn said back in March that this virus is a
+tremendous opportunity to restructure things in their vision.
+Now, the Congressional Budget Office, as we have already heard
+today, estimates an increase in the minimum wage to this level
+could cause over a million workers to lose their jobs, and it
+is crazy that a job-killing policy is being considered in the
+middle of a pandemic.
+ So, Dr. Strain, can you discuss how increasing the minimum
+wage could affect the rate of the automation in our workforce?
+ Mr. Strain. Yes, Congressman.
+ I think the CBO estimate of over a million jobs lost is a
+reasonable estimate. I think it is actually too low, given the
+fact that we are talking about an increase during a period of
+labor market weakness.
+ I think economic research shows that when the economy is
+weak, that the job loss from a minimum wage increase is higher
+than in normal times. So, I think it really would be a
+significant, significant mistake, that would accrue to the
+detriment of low-wage workers.
+ You asked about automation. The plan to phase this in over
+a 4- or 5-year period, I think, on the one hand, blunts the
+impact, but on the other hand, if you are a small business
+owner, you know that you are in for a period of 4 or 5 years
+where every year, your labor costs are going to go up and up.
+So, that really, I think, will encourage businesses, since they
+know they are looking at a sustained problem that is going to
+grow every year, that will encourage businesses to think about
+how they can produce goods and services with fewer workers and
+that will increase the use of automation.
+ Mr. Williams of Texas. Thank you very much.
+ And Madam Chairwoman, I yield back. Thank you.
+ Chairwoman Waters. Thank you very much.
+ The gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Foster, is recognized for
+5 minutes.
+ Mr. Foster. Thank you. Ten years ago, when we were
+preparing the stimulus bill to revive the economy in response
+to the previous economic collapse that the previous Republican
+Administration had left us with, we were greeted with
+terrifying predictions that the stimulus spending would trigger
+hyperinflation, huge increases in government borrowing costs to
+debase our currency, and on and on. I can't remember how many
+hearings we had on this subject.
+ And in the 10 years since those predictions, of course, we
+saw something very different, actually historically low
+inflation and low borrowing costs. And I was wondering, I guess
+starting with Dr. Spriggs, what has been learned in that 10
+years about what is wrong with these predictions that are being
+made in response to stimulus spending during times of economic
+stress?
+ Mr. Spriggs. We learned from the Great Recession that we
+gave too little, and that was an error, and we are trying not
+to repeat that. Where we stand right now is where we were at
+the depth of the Great Recession. Congress already responded in
+March with a very substantial package, to recover from what was
+even worse than where we are now.
+ But it slowed down. In December, we lost jobs. And one of
+the things that we know was weak from the recovery during the
+Great Recession was that we didn't pay attention to State and
+local government. We lost jobs in the State and local
+government sector, we left that sector weaker, and we don't
+want to repeat that going into this recovery, and we need those
+workers so we can go door to door, and we can call people. The
+idea that we are going to use computers and people getting
+online and setting up appointments is not going to reach the
+communities that we need to reach. It is not going to reach
+rural communities that don't have internet. It is not going to
+reach small cities where internet isn't that strong. We need
+local government to have the people in place to really reach
+the people, and to make sure that going forward, we have a more
+robust recovery.
+ Mr. Foster. In the 10 years that we have had to study the
+response to the last stimulus--it contained a variety of
+different measures, and if I recall properly, roughly 40
+percent of that stimulus was tax cuts, some of which actually
+went to very wealthy people and some to the working class.
+ What have we learned about the benefits of things like tax
+cuts for the wealthy, compared to assistance to working-class
+families, in terms of the bang for the buck, in generating GDP
+in response to a crisis, which is more effective?
+ Mr. Spriggs. We had a much bigger fiscal multiplier by
+helping those with lower incomes, and one of the problems from
+the recovery during the Great Recession was that we didn't get
+wages to rise. Wage growth was very slow, until State and local
+governments stepped in and marched us towards $15 an hour. So,
+we have to understand that the call to raise the Federal
+minimum wage to $15 an hour is not the whole country, because
+the whole country is on an uneven path, and those States that
+aren't on that path disproportionately have Black workers.
+There is a racial equity issue here because Black workers have
+not seen their wages respond as quickly since the Great
+Recession, and it is in large part because we ensured stronger,
+safer economies by doing that.
+ We have studied, as economists, raises in the minimum wage.
+All of these claims of job losses in restaurants is not what we
+find in the evidence. The claims by the CBO have to do with
+workers who maybe work two jobs, and are asked to deal with
+substitution within the household, where maybe the wife decides
+she doesn't need to work if the wages are higher. So, it is not
+that we mean fewer jobs. It is that some workers may be able to
+cut back on their hours.
+ Mr. Foster. Thank you, and I understand there is another
+large effect that if you provide economic benefits to those at
+the top of the economic scale, instead of spending in the local
+economy, they are much more likely to basically turn it over to
+their investment advisors who will advise them to diversify,
+and roughly one-third of that money will be invested offshore,
+which I think is another new argument about the benefits, of
+targeting the benefits at the working families who need it the
+most.
+ I am done here, and I yield back.
+ Chairwoman Waters. Thank you. The gentleman from Georgia,
+Mr. Loudermilk, is recognized for 5 minutes.
+ Mr. Loudermilk. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I am surprised
+that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have all of a
+sudden felt the need to rush through this partisan COVID relief
+package, when the Speaker actually held up the last one for
+over 6 months. We all know that was done purely for political
+reasons, to hurt the other President politically in his
+campaign. But now, all of a sudden, this is an emergency that
+we have to get it out.
+ There is over $1 trillion of the last several packages
+still unspent. Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer recently
+said it makes no sense to pinch pennies when so many Americans
+are struggling. I would argue that it makes no sense to spend
+another $2 trillion when there is still more than $1 trillion
+of unspent funds from the other packages.
+ The CBO projects that the December package will grow the
+economy 1.5 percent faster in 2021 and 2022, and less than 20
+percent of it has been spent. We should let that package work
+and see what else is needed before rushing to pass a colossal
+waste of $2 trillion. I appreciate that President Biden and
+other Democrats have called for unity and have spoken of the
+need for job growth, but actions speak louder than words. They
+are pushing a hyperpartisan package, and quite frankly, we
+voted yesterday on a budget, and the Budget Committee has not
+even been organized yet. There has been no input from
+Republicans. There is no bipartisan agreement here. This is
+being ramrodded through and it is a package that could destroy,
+and I believe will destroy, millions of American jobs.
+ Here is my question. Mr. Strain, there is an old saying
+that you don't raise taxes during a recession. I would argue
+that you don't raise the minimum wage during a recession
+either. CBO estimates that a $15 minimum wage would destroy 1.3
+million jobs. It would disproportionately increase employment
+for part-time workers and those without a high school diploma
+and raise the cost for small businesses, and the small
+businesses are the ones that have been hurting the most because
+of the government shutdowns. Those are the people we should be
+helping. It is unconscionable that Congress would pass a policy
+to destroy so many jobs when we are trying to recover the
+economy.
+ So, Mr. Strain, can you explain why now is not the time to
+raise the minimum wage?
+ Mr. Strain. Thank you, Congressman. I agree with that. I
+think there are several reasons why raising the minimum wage in
+a period of labor market weakness leads to a larger amount of
+employment loss. Businesses are just more willing to make those
+kinds of changes to the way they produce goods and services
+when the economy is weak, and when the economy is weak, of
+course, there is less demand for businesses, products, and
+services to begin with, which also makes them more inclined to
+change the structure of their labor forces.
+ I think it is actually maybe even a little bit worse than
+you characterized, Congressman, because the same CBO report
+that found 1.3 million job losses also found that a $15 -an-
+hour minimum wage would slow economic growth. And so, I just
+think that there are many reasons why you don't want to raise
+the minimum wage to $15 an hour, and raising the minimum wage
+to $15 an hour during a period of elevated unemployment is
+adding insult to injury, I think.
+ Mr. Loudermilk. Thank you. I agree with you there, and
+there is another provision in here that gives me grave concern.
+Back in August of last year, I was visiting with several of our
+local governments, and one of the county commissioners came to
+me and said, ``Look, please do something for us. Will you stop
+the unemployment subsidies? We don't want any handouts from
+Washington. We want you to stop the subsidy because we can't
+get our county employees to come back to work because they are
+making more money being on unemployment than they were being
+paid at their jobs,'' which, according to the economy in
+northwest Georgia, they were making good money there. Four
+hundred dollars is keeping people out of work and it is hurting
+our economy.
+ Do you agree with me that extending this $400 subsidy for
+nearly 2 years is going to be devastating to especially the
+small businesses?
+ Mr. Strain. Yes, Congressman. I think extending the $400
+through September, which is what President Biden is proposing,
+would be an act of economic self-harm. When Congress passed the
+$600 Federal supplement in March, that was during a period of
+time where the country was locked down, and you really did not
+want unemployed workers out there trying to find a job because
+you didn't want them spreading the coronavirus. That is not the
+situation we are going to be in for September. You are going to
+have unemployed workers sitting at home and not getting jobs,
+when there is no reason for that.
+ Mr. Loudermilk. Thank you. I yield back.
+ Chairwoman Waters. The gentleman's time has expired. The
+gentlewoman from Ohio, Mrs. Beatty, who is also the Chair of
+our Subcommittee on Diversity and Inclusion, is now recognized
+for 5 minutes.
+ Mrs. Beatty. Thank you so much, Madam Chairwoman, and thank
+you to the committee, and thank you to all of the witnesses. It
+is an honor for me to be here today. Certainly, as we have
+heard, and research and the people's comments have supported,
+individuals need relief. Small businesses need relief. We know
+that when we look at the 440-some thousand individuals dying
+from COVID-19, that it is a three-headed pandemic. It is health
+care, it is the economic issues that we are dealing with, and
+it is the social injustices.
+ So when it comes to this committee, I want to thank the
+Congresswoman for speaking up for all of the people and what we
+know to be true. We know that people need more financial
+assistance. We know that individuals need relief. We are
+hopeful that we will get through this COVID-19 because of
+science and medicine. But we know we are not there.
+ We know cities and communities across this country are
+saying, ``Give us relief. Continue the individual
+unemployment.'' I think it is unthinkable for anyone to believe
+that someone would not go to work because they are getting an
+additional $200, $300, or even $600. It comes back to the
+economy. Economists have told us that. Wall Street has said to
+us, when you look at the stock market and what happens when
+individuals get more dollars, what do they do? They buy food.
+What do they do? They try to keep a roof over their heads.
+ I want to thank all of the witnesses, but I want to give a
+special thank-you to Mr. Johnson, head of the NAACP, because
+last week he brought up former Ambassador Susan Rice to talk
+about domestic policy leadership and the issues and racial
+justice inequity. He had soon-to-be HUD Secretary Marcia Fudge.
+Housing is a big part of what we do under Chairwoman Maxine
+Waters' committee. He had me come on to talk about financial
+services. And I want to thank you, because when the people
+called in, it was Black people, White people, Democrats, and
+Republicans, because death and hurting is not a partisan issue.
+ So, Mr. Johnson, can you help us? When we know that it
+comes to people who are affected most by COVID-19, whether it
+be medically or economically, African Americans have borne the
+brunt of this pandemic, so is there anything, as head of the
+NAACP, that you want to elaborate on, that we still need to do
+in Congress to ensure that all communities who have suffered
+are made whole?
+ Mr. Johnson. Thank you, Chairwoman Beatty. Three quick
+things. First, is a targeted approach to ensure that
+communities who are most at risk receive the vaccine
+immediately. Second, I have never heard that giving people in
+need of money, more money, will hurt people in need of money.
+That is a concept I am not familiar with. We need to ensure
+that we stabilize our economy. It fuels more resources in
+people's hands, not corporations, but those people who use
+those funds to support the very small businesses that many of
+them work for, like the Henry Ford Model. He paid his workers
+more because he wanted to sell more cars.
+ And then third, I always go back to the looming student
+debt crisis. We depend on our governmental workers, local and
+State, teachers, and they are suffocating under the burden of
+student loan debt in the midst of a pandemic, in the midst of
+an economic crisis. We must give those individuals relief, and
+if we do so that can stimulate the economy, because the $300 to
+$500 that they are paying in monthly student loans will go
+right back into the economy.
+ Mrs. Beatty. Thank you. Dr. Spriggs, can you tell us a
+little bit about the economy and the consequences of not
+providing more rental assistance dollars?
+ Mr. Spriggs. Thank you, Congresswoman. We are risking too
+much going in the economy because all workers in America make
+too little money. The size of this package is evidence to us
+how little we have put in the hands of our workers, keeping
+them from being individually resilient in the face of crises.
+Letting them become homeless complicates this situation. If you
+are a long-term unemployed worker, it is very hard to reconnect
+you to the labor force. Letting you become homeless is
+virtually impossible. That is too steep a challenge for us to
+face. It is penny wise and pound foolish for us not to make the
+investment now to prevent the scarring of homelessness--
+ Chairwoman Waters. The gentlewoman's time has expired.
+Thank you.
+ Mrs. Beatty. Thank you.
+ Chairwoman Waters. The gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Davidson,
+is now recognized for 5 minutes.
+ Mr. Davidson. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. And I thank our
+witnesses. This is certainly a timely hearing and one that
+deserves a lot of attention. Frankly, over the past year,
+nearly $5 trillion has been voted on here in this body to add
+to the monetary supply of the United States of America.
+ One of the agenda items is that the Fed's dual mandate
+should be updated to address economic inequality. The proposals
+behind that, from the Majority, focus on more redistribution.
+They want the Fed to take money that we cannot even print fast
+enough and redistribute it. They want the Fed to make loans
+that the market would never actually make. And they want the
+American taxpayer to underwrite risks that no one rationally
+would take.
+ The Federal Reserve is adding to this inequality massively,
+because what they are doing isn't driving a huge amount of
+consumer price inflation. It isn't driving that kind of
+inflation because that money does not make it to the average
+American worker. That money makes it to people who are wealthy,
+people who have a large portion of their net worth tied up in
+marketable securities. And that is why right now, in the midst
+of this pandemic, where much of Main Street is decimated, Wall
+Street is having its best days ever. You are seeing the S&P 500
+hit record highs with no correlation to the activity on Main
+Street. Lots of hope for the future, but we had lots of hope
+for the future at this time last year, and we weren't yet
+reacting to the COVID-19 pandemic.
+ When those asset prices become inflated, the wealth gap
+grows. The wealthy benefit from this right now. Jeff Bezos
+doesn't even pay the capital gains tax on his shares. He simply
+borrows against their value, which is rational in our current
+Tax Code.
+ But while the worker, the American worker back home in Ohio
+is busy working his hourly job, or hoping to be able to get
+back to it because it has been crippled not entirely by the
+virus but by the government's reaction to it, is happy that his
+401(k) or his IRA has gone up, but that is for future earnings.
+That is not for money that can be spent today. That is hope for
+someday. But meanwhile, the value of those dollars being
+deposited in his paycheck are destroying--destroying--our
+economy.
+ When I first got to Congress, I wasn't sure that people
+were aware that this destruction was taking place. But the sad
+thing is that they are, and they want to misdirect and blame
+things like the Tax Code or employers or things like that. And
+I don't want to say there is no fault anywhere, but the biggest
+pump-and-dump scheme going on in America right now is being
+driven by the Federal Reserve. We need to get back to sound
+money and have a sound, rational basis for our monetary policy.
+ These economic distortions are crippling not just America's
+economy but the global economy. Developed economies around the
+world are talking about going to real negative nominal rates.
+The real rate for interest right now is already negative. No
+one really believes that the rate of inflation over the next 10
+years is going to be less than 1 percent. But that is what
+happens when you wire Treasuries. It is central planning. It is
+distorting pricing.
+ And that is not an attack against the whole concept of
+central banks. Our central bank has been effective. In March,
+and in April, in particular, it is a case study in why central
+banks should exist. They provided essential stability to make
+our markets function. It was incredible. A number of programs
+implemented swiftly and decisively when there was literally no
+buy side for, for example, the safest assets, municipal bonds.
+Super safe assets. A market only functions when there is
+equilibrium between buyers and sellers, and when there is no
+buy side, the market is in freefall. So I commend the Federal
+Reserve for that, but since that time we have seen massive
+economic distortion, and it not going to end well.
+ Look, billionaires will lose billions of dollars. They may
+even lose a higher percentage of their net worth. But the
+working men and women of America are harmed by this economic
+distortion. We have to get back to sound money. Now, the idea
+to print even more of this money that we don't have, robs from
+future consumption. Dr. Strain, you have spoken well of this
+economic distortion. I want to give you a chance to talk about
+the consequence of spending future earnings of the American
+people. What kinds of consequences might we expect from this
+economic distortion?
+ Mr. Strain. Thank you, Congressman. I think it is
+appropriate for Congress to spend money to support households
+and businesses and to fight the virus, and I think that the
+CARES Act really did a great deal of good for American
+businesses and households.
+ Mr. Davidson. Thank you for that, and I would agree with
+you that it did a very good--
+ Chairwoman Waters. The gentleman's time has expired.
+ Mr. Davidson. --job in the essential moments, as I
+highlighted. So, I appreciate that final comment, and I yield
+back.
+ Chairwoman Waters. Thank you. The gentleman's time has
+expired. The gentleman from California, Mr. Vargas, is
+recognized for 5 minutes.
+ Mr. Vargas. Thank you very much, Madam Chairwoman, and I
+also want to thank the Republican Ranking Member today for this
+hearing. I do think it is very timely, and I first want to say
+that I do agree with some of the things that were said by my
+good friends from Ohio, certainly Representative Stivers. I
+think it is very important that we get the vaccine out in as
+many arms as we can. And I do think that my good friend, Mr.
+Davidson, what he just said, there is that distortion where you
+have now the wealthy getting wealthier and wealthier and the
+poor and the working class falling behind, that is something
+that is real and we have to work on it.
+ However, at the same time, I have to say I listened to most
+of my other colleagues on the other side and it seems that they
+want to figure out how to give the working class and the poor
+as little possible help as they possibly can, and the wealthy
+as much as they possibly can through tax cuts. It was
+interesting to hear a scold today tell us about how we are
+going to add trillions of dollars through this potential
+process, when that same person, a few years ago, voted in favor
+to adding trillions of dollars to the long-term debt by doing
+the tax cuts for the wealthy, that even Dr. Strain said he had
+problem with, at least with the individuals, not with the
+corporations. I do not want to put words in his mouth.
+ That, to me, is crazy. That is as looney as I think this
+QAnon stuff, that we make the wealthier wealthy and the poor
+and the middle class, we give them as little help as possible.
+That doesn't make any sense to me at all. It doesn't make any
+sense. That is not why government exists and that is not what
+we should be doing.
+ I do want to ask a couple of questions here before I become
+the scold in the rank here. Ms. Murguia, you were talking about
+the losses suffered by Latinos, and they are very painful in my
+district, of course, which is predominantly Latino. You talked
+about how they are 3 times as likely to die because of COVID-
+19, and twice as likely to get sick, and the losses that we
+have suffered. And then you have talked about some of the
+things that we can do. What else can we do? You mentioned some,
+but what else?
+ Ms. Murguia. Thank you, Congressman. I appreciate your
+comments. And I think I would just say, in addition to what you
+have laid out, in terms of making sure we are concentrating on
+targeted relief to those who have been the essential workers,
+and what we have found is that the Federal relief so far has
+not included those essential workers. And as you know,
+Congressman--you have worked a lot on behalf of Dreamers and
+many who have been undocumented, who are yet filling the lines
+of folks who are helping our country right now, whether it is
+in the fields as farm workers, whether it is in meat processing
+plants, whether it is stocking shelves or actually delivering
+food, or whether it is providing care to all of these folks who
+are in need of health professionals. But yet, we have found
+that Federal relief, because of these families being mixed
+status, the relief has not gone there. But they have provided
+the work, the services to keep things going.
+ So we have argued, as you have heard, that we should make
+sure that all essential workers, regardless of their status,
+many who are families who have U.S. citizen children, should be
+included, and that we should take the step to look at, perhaps
+in a reconciliation bill, maybe addressing, first and foremost,
+how we can provide protected status for these folks. Because
+they are going to continue to keep the economy going from this
+particular moment and into the future.
+ Mr. Vargas. Thank you very much. I appreciate that.
+ I also want to ask Mr. Anthony, I was on the San Diego City
+Council for a number of years when I started my political
+career, and the City and a lot of the little cities that I have
+in my district are really suffering at this moment. They are
+working hard but they are suffering. How can we help them,
+through this package? You have talked a little bit about that,
+but could you expand on that? Because I know that they work
+hard. At the same time, they are in desperate need.
+ Mr. Anthony. Yes. Thank you, Congressman, for asking that
+question. I think the way in which we could be of help to those
+small and especially the rural communities is to be able to get
+those dollars in the hands of those local leaders who can
+actually create those programs such as the food programs. Also
+to be able to help them keep their employees so that we can get
+our economy started back up through permitting, housing, and
+capital investments. Again, this is not a bailout. This is
+being able to help them administer the programs that you, in
+fact, are approving through the past stimulus projects as well.
+Thank you, Congressman.
+ Chairwoman Waters. The gentleman's time has expired.
+ Mr. Vargas. Thank you.
+ Chairwoman Waters. The gentleman from North Carolina, Mr.
+Budd, is recognized for 5 minutes.
+ Mr. Budd. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I just want to
+confirm, Dr. Strain, can you hear me okay?
+ Mr. Strain. Yes, sir.
+ Mr. Budd. Thank you. I appreciate you being here today.
+Over the past 11 months, Congress has appropriated nearly $3.5
+trillion to stimulate the economy and support families,
+workers, and small businesses. Today, we are discussing the
+newest plan proposed by President Biden which is seeking to add
+$1.9 trillion in untargeted relief. I am supportive of the
+widespread testing, I am supportive of vaccinations, and I
+believe that these are both critical components to opening
+safely. But I also strongly believe that additional funding, if
+necessary, should be targeted to meet those needs. Keep in mind
+that a majority of the funds we appropriated in the December
+COVID package has remained untapped.
+ So my question is this: How will the new untargeted
+spending provide greater benefit to our economy that the
+already appropriated $3.5 trillion hasn't, and is this even
+necessary?
+ Mr. Strain. Thank you, Congressman. I think much of it is
+unnecessary and a good chunk of it is actually actively
+harmful. The checks to households, a whole lot of that money is
+going to go into savings. That is not going to help support the
+recovery. The reason it is going to go into savings is because
+so much of it would go to households earning well above median
+income, earning six figures a year, who haven't suffered any
+employment losses.
+ The unemployment insurance supplement of $400 a week
+through September, I think will be actively harmful. On the one
+hand, it will support consumer spending. On the other hand, it
+is going to act to keep people unemployed for longer, at a time
+when most likely the vaccines are in wide distribution and we
+want people to be getting back to work. The $15-an-hour minimum
+wage will be actively harmful to helping low-wage workers keep
+jobs, get back to work, and get back on their feet.
+ So I think you are right, Congressman, that we should be
+looking at the actual needs here, and I think it is appropriate
+for Congress to spend some more money this month on addressing
+those needs. But large portions of the President's proposal
+wouldn't do much good, and large portions of the President's
+proposal would actually do harm.
+ Mr. Budd. Thank you. I also want to ask, we have seen the
+devastating impacts that widespread lockdowns have had on our
+economy. Just last month, the Labor Department reported that
+our economy lost 140,000 jobs, and we are used to, over the
+last several years, adding jobs by the hundreds of thousands,
+but now we have lost 140,000 jobs, the bulk of which came from
+States that have endured long-lasting and broad lockdowns.
+States with less restrictions are rebounding at a rapid pace.
+ So, Dr. Strain, do you believe that the most effective way
+to support the economy is to safely open it up?
+ Mr. Strain. Yes, Congressman. I don't think there is really
+any doubt that in order to fully recover from the pandemic, we
+need the economy to be reopened. And the best way to get the
+economy reopened is to get vaccine shots in people's arms. I
+think that the inability to do that quickly, the fact that
+vaccines have been sitting in storerooms and not being
+administered is a national scandal, and I think it is very
+appropriate for Congress to figure out what it can do to help
+get people vaccinated. Because the faster we do that, the
+faster we can reopen and the faster we can recover.
+ Mr. Budd. Thank you. And lastly, Dr. Strain, would you
+detail the benefits of using private lending institutions to
+operate an emergency loan program instead of creating a
+government-run program?
+ Mr. Strain. One benefit is just speed. And that was a key
+reason to rely on private sector lending institutions for the
+PPP program, that you wanted to get money to businesses
+quickly, and that creating a new government agency to do that
+really would have slowed it down.
+ Another reason, of course, is that the situation we are in
+now is temporary, and we should not be kind of changing the
+structure of government to support a temporary problem.
+ Mr. Budd. Very good. I appreciate your time, Dr. Strain,
+and, Madam Chairwoman, I yield back.
+ Chairwoman Waters. Thank you very much. The gentleman from
+Florida, Mr. Lawson, is recognized for 5 minutes.
+ Mr. Lawson. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and I would like
+to thank the witnesses for being here today. I had an
+opportunity to listen to many of the panelists, whom I think
+have done a great job. And I am going to talk a little bit from
+the small business standpoint, because I have been in small
+business for the last 34 years. One of the things that, Mr.
+Strain, you said, is that enhancing the minimum wage is going
+to really, really hurt small businesses. I wonder if you could
+elaborate a little bit more on that and tell me why you think
+it is really going to hurt them? Oftentimes, we can draw good
+employees if we pay them well, which increases our bottom line
+and helps us to do better economically, and we might even have
+the opportunity, if we get more resources, to hire other
+people.
+ So, maybe you can elaborate on that a little bit more for
+me, please?
+ Mr. Strain. Yes. Thank you, Congressman. I think the
+example that you gave is an example of something that does
+happen. When a State or when the Federal Government increases
+the minimum wage, you often see businesses hire a different
+type of worker. Perhaps, a business was employing workers who
+hadn't graduated high school when the minimum wage was $6 or
+$6.50. Then, the minimum wage goes up to $7, $8, and they start
+to hire workers who have graduated from high school. So in that
+instance, the business itself that is doing that is not
+necessarily worse off. They are hiring workers who are going to
+be more productive and they are able to absorb the minimum wage
+that way.
+ But the person who loses out is the person who didn't
+graduate high school, and my concern is that even in situations
+where businesses will be okay--and to be clear, when you are
+talking about doubling the minimum wage, I think many, many
+businesses are going to really struggle. But even those
+businesses that don't struggle because they find other ways to
+adapt, that doesn't change the fact that the least skilled,
+least experienced, most vulnerable workers in society are going
+to pay an enormous cost for the minimum wage increase up to
+$15. Middle-class households are going to see their incomes go
+up, but the cost of the policy is going to be borne by the
+least skilled, least experienced, most vulnerable workers in
+society, and that is just not a tradeoff that I think Congress
+should make.
+ Mr. Lawson. Okay. Thank you.
+ Mr. Johnson, I heard you earlier give quite a few analyses
+about where we stand, especially with people of color. And I
+know how important it is to get the vaccine out there because I
+know it is critically important. I represent a lot of rural
+areas. How do we get dollars down, because there has been some
+consideration this morning about dollars are not really coming
+down. Dollars are going to the wrong people who don't really
+need it, but in my district, everybody I come in contact with
+seems to really need the stimulus dollars to benefit their
+families. How do we do that in legislation to make sure that
+the dollars that are needed the most by individuals are
+stimulating the economy?
+ Mr. Johnson. Was that question for me?
+ Mr. Lawson. Yes, sir.
+ Mr. Johnson. Putting money in people's hands becomes
+crucial. That is why we supported the $2,000 stimulus check
+that was first stated by the prior President, that many people
+now oppose. But we also understand, in terms of the vaccine,
+you have to provide access to vaccination closer to where
+people live, and if you only provide it through the medical
+facilities, you can miss whole communities. Municipalities play
+a huge role. Public housing systems play a huge role.
+ But then, more importantly, to your earlier question about
+minimum wage, I have never been able to reconcile this concept
+of a free market economy, but we don't want a free market
+economy when it comes time to pay people an equitable wage
+because people go out of business. We have to pay people their
+value, and if we look at what the growth is in terms of the
+cost of living, and we are not keeping up the cost of living,
+we must supplement or create a space where people can actually
+work hard every day and make a living. Every community I have
+driven through that appears to be impoverished, I could assure
+you those are low-wage workers. We need to raise the floor for
+the quality of life.
+ Chairwoman Waters. Thank you very much. The gentleman's
+time has expired. The gentleman from Tennessee, Mr. Kustoff, is
+recognized for 5 minutes.
+ Mr. Kustoff. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. Thank you for
+convening today's hearing, and thank you to all of the
+witnesses who have appeared today.
+ Dr. Strain, if I could talk with you first, you talked in
+your testimony in response to other questions about the
+enhanced set of employment benefits that we approved in the
+CARES Act, and that we renewed, to a lesser level, back in
+December. I will tell you that in my district, I have heard
+from ``X'' number of employers who told me that they literally
+could not get employees to come back to work when they were
+receiving those unemployment benefits because they were
+literally making more money with these enhanced unemployment
+benefits than they were pre-pandemic.
+ And I will say, with the passage of the CARES Act that we
+passed in March, I think we did a lot of things right, as a
+Congress, and we did it on a strong bipartisan basis. But my
+recollection is that when Secretary Mnuchin, who was
+essentially the lead negotiator for the Trump Administration,
+talked about the $600 enhanced unemployment benefit, he
+essentially said that was a median number.
+ So my question to you is a little bit wonky, and that is,
+if we do approve additional enhanced unemployment benefits, is
+there a way to make that locality-based, based on cost of
+living for an area? I represent Tennessee, so in my area--
+Arkansas, Mississippi--the cost of living is lower than in
+California, New York, and New Jersey. Is there a way for us to
+do that, as a Congress, and with the Biden Administration?
+ Mr. Strain. Congressman, it is a really good question. I
+think we saw in the ability of State Governments to administer
+unemployment benefits, the inability to handle even the $600
+increase, suggests that their capacity to do something
+complicated like that is unfortunately limited. I think you are
+right to be thinking about ways to mitigate the damage that
+those unemployment benefits could do.
+ I think a similar solution is just to do them at a much
+lower level than $400, or not do them at all, and to make sure
+that they stay in effect for a relatively short period of time,
+certainly not until September.
+ When Congress appropriated the $600 as part of the CARES
+Act in March, that was an extremely unusual circumstance. The
+idea behind the $600, as you said, was to replace completely
+the income that unemployed workers would lose when they lost
+their job. The reason why that was reasonable to do was because
+you did not want unemployed workers trying to find another job,
+and the reason you didn't want them trying to find another job
+was because if they were trying to find another job, they would
+be spreading the virus. This was in March and April when we did
+the lockdown. Keep everybody at home. Don't go to work unless
+you absolutely have to. Certainly, don't be trying to find a
+new job.
+ That is just not the situation we are in anymore. If we
+thought the $600 would keep workers from trying to find a job
+in March and April, certainly it is going to keep them from
+trying to find a job in July, August, and September, when the
+vaccine is going to be in wide distribution. So, I really think
+that this is a damaging proposal.
+ Mr. Kustoff. Thank you very much, Dr. Strain.
+ Mr. Anthony, if there is another stimulus bill that, in
+fact, appropriates money, replaced money for cities, as you
+talked about in your testimony, first of all, if you were
+writing the bill, would you write in a population threshold for
+a city or municipality? And if the answer is yes, what is that
+number?
+ Mr. Anthony. Thank you, Congressman. That has been a
+question that many have asked. I think that our perspective as
+the National League of Cities is that every mayor, no matter
+the size of their community, has been elected to lead and to
+make decisions on behalf of that community. And if I then had
+to make a formula decision, I would use the Community
+Development Block Grant formula, that gets it down to $50,000,
+and would require that if money is sent to the State for those
+smaller cities, that it be transferred immediately, within 30
+days of receipt of those dollars, down to those communities.
+ Mr. Kustoff. Thank you. My time has expired.
+ Chairwoman Waters. Thank you very much. The gentleman from
+Guam, Mr. San Nicholas, who is also the Vice Chair of this
+committee, is recognized for 5 minutes.
+ Mr. San Nicholas. Thank you so much, Madam Chairwoman, and
+thank you for convening this very important hearing. I think it
+is doing a huge service to the American people by allowing them
+to really vet the conversations that we are having and to
+address what is on the table and also how to speak towards
+misnomers that are circulating regarding what is happening
+next. I would like to thank our witnesses on the panel for
+making time to be with us today.
+ Madam Chairwoman, I want to address some of these
+misperceptions. That way, the American people can have clarity.
+First, there is a misperception out there that there is $1
+trillion kind of just sitting out there, that we have already
+approved, that is not being spent, and it is creating the
+perception that we have money out there that has been made
+available that is somehow just not being used.
+ Mr. Anthony, based on your experience, is it true that $1
+trillion in relief is languishing and wasting away or is it
+largely programmed by our States, our cities, and our local
+governments?
+ Mr. Anthony. Yes, Congressman. I think that we know, again,
+we were not prepared for a pandemic. No one was. And so if
+those dollars have gotten to State and local governments, there
+had to be an infrastructure created and a plan. And what we are
+seeing is that the States, as well as the mayors and counties,
+have those programs, and now those dollars are going to be
+spent.
+ And we also must recognize there is a lagging economy that
+is happening. We haven't even seen the worst of what is going
+to happen. So, thank you, Congressman.
+ Mr. San Nicholas. Thank you. Yes, and we are having the
+same experience in my district. The money is not languishing
+out there. It is being programmed. It has a purpose, and the
+purpose is to fulfill the intent of the Congress to make sure
+that we are addressing the COVID-19 circumstances and the
+relief that needs to go out to our communities.
+ Mr. Anthony. That is correct.
+ Mr. San Nicholas. I am looking forward to our local
+governments deploying those resources expeditiously, but the
+funds that we made available is not somehow money that can all
+of a sudden be reprogrammed. It has already been programmed.
+ Second, there is a misnomer out there that was reiterated
+by, I am not sure if it was Dr. Strain, but it is the idea that
+the Federal Pandemic Unemployment Compensation (FPUC) was
+somehow provided to prevent people from going back to work. We
+are talking about the additional supplemental $600, $300, now
+$400. That is absolutely incorrect. The purpose of that
+resource was because we have millions of Americans who are now
+relying on unemployment, and the unemployment compensation
+provided by their unemployment insurance in their State, and in
+my district, is insufficient to meet the cash flow strains that
+they are suffering from because they are no longer able to
+work. That supplement is being used to make up the difference
+between what they are receiving in unemployment insurance and
+what they were actually earning.
+ And to be perfectly honest, that difference is still very
+insufficient: $600 was insufficient; $400 was insufficient; and
+$300 is insufficient. And the fact that we are at least
+providing something is keeping families from going from being
+able to provide, what they are doing for their communities and
+bringing money into their households, to now at least having
+unemployment, whatever paltry sum that is they are receiving in
+their respective districts, plus the supplement that is going
+out to support them.
+ The idea also that we have to engage in a protracted
+deficit at this time has me very concerned. We entertained an
+amendment just the other day that would have locked up the
+ability of this committee to be able to provide any relief
+whatsoever if we did not find a budgetary offset. Now, of
+course, we should always be mindful of the deficit, but I am
+going to ask a very elementary question to Dr. Spriggs, and
+forgive me for the elementary nature of it. But is the time for
+us to be addressing Federal spending during the pandemic we are
+enduring now, or should it be during times of economic
+stability?
+ Dr. Spriggs?
+ Mr. Spriggs. Thank you, Congressman, for that question. It
+should be in times that are normal. We are actually in a war.
+The virus has killed more Americans than we lost to combat in
+World War II. This is not the time to be looking at a budget.
+Now is the time to be looking at, are we successfully winning
+our war against this virus? That has to be the number-one
+priority. That is what is killing our economy. We cannot heal
+the economy until we heal the virus.
+ Mr. San Nicholas. Thank you, Dr. Spriggs. Madam Chairwoman,
+thank you so much, again, for convening this hearing, and
+again, thank you to our witnesses for making time for us today.
+I yield back.
+ Chairwoman Waters. The gentleman from Missouri, Mr.
+Luetkemeyer, is recognized for 5 minutes.
+ Mr. Luetkemeyer. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and I thank
+our witnesses for being here this morning. I certainly
+appreciate their willingness to be here and inform us.
+ But I would like to take a moment, before I begin my
+testimony, my questioning, to point out that the testimony for
+this hearing was not posted until last night, Madam Chairwoman.
+If the Majority wants to have a serious discussion regarding
+the needs of American consumers and businesses during this
+pandemic, and what Congress should do to enhance economic
+recovery, giving Members less than 12 hours overnight to review
+and prepare for this hearing is unacceptable. If this was any
+indication for how the Majority intends to operate the 117th
+Congress, I have serious concerns over what we are trying to
+accomplish here. So, I would appreciate more timely responses
+by the witnesses and/or the Majority staff who is in charge.
+ With that, first question. With regards to the stimulus, it
+is interesting that Lawrence Summers, who was President
+Clinton's Treasury Secretary, and the top economist for Barack
+Obama's Administration, Jason Furman [inaudible] the concern
+with this pouring of more money into the economy, feeling it
+may overheat and cause inflation. Mr. Strain, what would you
+say in response to that concern?
+ Mr. Strain. I share that concern. I think it is commonly
+argued that right now, Congress should err on the side of doing
+more rather than doing less, and I think that is a reasonable
+way to think about the problem, given the balance of risks. I
+think there are more risks to doing too little than to doing
+too much.
+ But that is not to say that Congress should pass another
+stimulus that is untethered to an assessment of the actual
+economic need. The actual economic need is maybe a few hundred
+million dollars, something like that. And so, you want to have
+the fudge factor to do more than less. But there are real risks
+to dumping another $2 trillion on the economy right now, and
+one of those risks is a few months where there is some
+troubling price inflation.
+ Mr. Luetkemeyer. One of the things that concerns me is,
+there is some money in here, about $350 billion, to bail out
+the States. Now, I realize some of the States are struggling a
+little bit, but in my own State of Missouri, we ended the
+lockdown in mid-May. In 2020, we had a 5 percent increase in
+revenue over 2019. Yes, last year we had an increase in revenue
+over 2019. We have a 4.4 percent unemployment rate, and over
+200,000 jobs that are being unfilled right now.
+ It seems as though there are a number of States which are
+well-managed, from the standpoint of the COVID problem, and
+their own budgets and revenues now. It would appear that this
+$350 billion is going to bail out some States that are not very
+well-managed. What would your comment be on that, Mr. Strain?
+ Mr. Strain. Look, Congressman, I think you are right that
+as a general matter, State and local finances are looking a lot
+better than many people thought that they would, and a good
+number of States are basically even with 2019, in terms of
+revenue. That really varies from State to State. States that
+rely a great deal on tourism have taken a big hit. States that
+rely relatively more on sales taxes from in-person activities
+have taken a big hit.
+ And so I do think that, looking across all of the States,
+there is a hole in terms of revenue of around $100 billion to
+$150 billion. And so, I think it is appropriate for Congress to
+help States with pandemic-related revenue losses, but not to
+help States that just use rainy-day funds, not to help States
+bail out pensions. And there are some States that aren't going
+to need that much help at all.
+ Mr. Luetkemeyer. I appreciate that. Yes, I can tell you, I
+live very close to the Lake of the Ozarks there in central
+Missouri, which is one of the premier recreational
+destinations, especially in the summertime. And they actually
+had a record amount of visitation last year. So, I think being
+open is a big key. It is interesting to me, with the COVID
+lockdowns--and I have made this comment before--you look at
+Florida and New York and they are roughly the same population;
+one is 21 million and the other is 19 million. New York had
+only twice as many deaths last year due to COVID as what
+Florida did. And yet, Florida is open and California is locked
+down, and Florida has a greater elderly population, probably,
+than New York.
+ So, as a result, I am concerned that we are trying to bail
+somebody out here instead of actually giving money to--putting
+it in places where it actually needs to be targeted to be
+helpful.
+ I understand my time is up. Thank you very much for your
+responses.
+ Chairwoman Waters. Thank you very much, Mr. Luetkemeyer,
+and there are many things that I think I could advise you about
+publicly. The ranking member and I have an agreement to work
+out our concerns, and we are in charge, so I didn't appreciate
+your comments earlier.
+ Mr. Luetkemeyer. I appreciate getting information on time.
+ Chairwoman Waters. The gentlewoman from Iowa, Mrs. Axne, is
+now recognized for 5 minutes.
+ Mrs. Axne. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and thank you,
+everyone, for being here today.
+ Mr. Anthony, I would like to start with you. Cities and
+towns, of course, across the country have been fighting to
+support people and the communities for the last year as COVID
+hit our shores, and I know that nationally, we have lost about
+1 million jobs in the State and local government sectors. One
+of the areas that I have been really focused on, and this
+committee has as well, is housing. Could you tell us a little
+bit about how the budget losses and the job losses for State
+and local government employees have made it more difficult to
+keep people in their homes, and what are some of the steps that
+you have had to take to overcome that?
+ Mr. Anthony. Thank you, Congresswoman, for that question. I
+spoke earlier about the eviction level. We are looking at about
+40 million renters who are on the cliff of being evicted.
+ The second data point is that this is a pent-up loss for
+even real estate owners of about $7 million of revenue or
+renter income that will be lost.
+ And the final thing is, in city governments and local
+governments, period, we are seeing homelessness increase. So we
+are dealing with all of those issues and responding. And I
+think what this relief package would do is it would help us to
+be able to provide programming for those challenges.
+ Mrs. Axne. I appreciate you saying that, and I thank you so
+much, because one thing I know can be an issue for so many of
+our constituents during this time is finding the help that they
+need and the different programs that are available to them, in
+a timeframe by which they need them.
+ So what can you tell us about how we are helping people
+navigate some of these programs so that they can keep a roof
+over their heads?
+ Mr. Anthony. Cities all over America have created rental
+assistance programs during this time, but first of all, helping
+to get those dollars specifically to nonprofits and to create
+programs so that people will be able to come in and get those
+dollars. Mayors and councilmembers have created small business
+programs as well, small business loan programs, rental
+assistance programs, and I think that if we think about the
+level of government where people can knock on the front doors
+of mayors and the city halls, it is local government.
+ So, I think that what we are asking for is direct dollars.
+We know that we have lost over 1 million jobs. We anticipate
+more than $90 billion of additional revenue loss this year. So,
+I am begging that we get the dollars out to that level. But I
+appreciate that question because it has been desperate in some
+cities, not all, but I will tell you that in 95 percent of the
+cities--rural, small, as well as urban--the homeless challenge
+is increasing.
+ Mrs. Axne. It is an issue that we face right here in Des
+Moines, Iowa, so I absolutely understand. And that fits,
+actually, really well, with something that I have been working
+on since last spring, which is getting more resources for
+housing counselors, who can help people figure out what is
+going on, how they can save their money, how they can stay in
+their homes, et cetera.
+ You brought up some facts here, but the last estimates I
+saw showed almost $60 billion in rental assistance is needed,
+and with the forbearance that has been offered for mortgages, I
+think a lot of people are going to need help with that. And, of
+course, we saw, after the 2008 financial crisis, that 2 million
+people who worked with housing counselors were 3 times as
+likely to get loan modifications and then not go into
+foreclosure or redefault, which is a great thing for our
+communities.
+ Many of those same benefits--lower costs, more stable
+housing--can also help renters when they are in tough straits,
+like you mentioned. Ms. Murguia, or anyone else, does that seem
+like something--these housing counselors--that we could benefit
+from right now?
+ Ms. Murguia. Yes. Thank you, Congresswoman. I really
+appreciate your leadership on this. I know you have seen and
+understood the efficacy of using housing counseling programs
+and those community-based organizations, those nonprofits, who
+are so effective in reinforcing the importance of the steps to
+be taken, the information that needs to be provided, to the
+most hurt families, the most impacted families, and their
+success rate, as you pointed out, is really high.
+ So, the $700 million-plus for COVID housing counseling
+assistance is absolutely necessary. UnidosUS has the largest
+Hispanic housing counseling network in the country, and we have
+seen first-hand the role that they play, because they are
+trusted partners; they have the cultural and language
+competencies to be able to provide that service.
+ Chairwoman Waters. Thank you. The gentlewoman's time has
+expired.
+ Mrs. Axne. Thank you.
+ Chairwoman Waters. The gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Gonzalez,
+is recognized for 5 minutes.
+ Mr. Gonzalez of Ohio. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. Quick
+check, Dr. Strain, can you hear me?
+ Mr. Strain. Yes, sir.
+ Mr. Gonzalez of Ohio. Yes, very good. Thank you. First, I
+want to just comment on a couple of things. Some of my friends
+on the other side of the aisle have commented that, now is not
+the time to worry about deficit spending or where it is going,
+and I would offer this.
+ We are in a pandemic. There is an emergency, and there is a
+need to act. I agree with that. But I would offer that it is
+always our responsibility to make sure that we are spending
+taxpayer dollars wisely and effectively. That is always a
+priority. You never get to put that on hold. And I think what
+we have done to date has been pretty good, not perfect. But
+when we are talking about a $1.9 trillion bill, which, let's be
+honest, the justification is pretty poor for a lot of the
+spending in there, and a lot of it would be wasteful, I can't
+possibly support it.
+ The second thing I would say is, if there is one thing that
+President Biden said in his inaugural address that I think
+every single Republican agreed with, and most across the
+country, it is that we need to come together. We do need to
+come together as one country and solve our problems, and we
+need to take the temperature down politically. Unfortunately,
+everything that has been done from that speech to today,
+including this spending bill, has gone completely counter to
+that. And so, I would ask my Democratic colleagues, whom I know
+are sincere in this, please help on that, because I will help
+anybody who wants to work on that. I don't care who you are.
+ But if we are going to just jam wish list items, like a $15
+minimum wage, which we know isn't a bipartisan solution, if we
+are going to jam a $1.9 trillion spending bill with no
+Republican votes, that is not going to bring anybody together,
+and you know it. And so, I would ask you to think wisely about
+where we are as a country, culturally, emotionally, before we
+go down that path. And it sounds like that train has already
+left the station, but I would ask you to think twice.
+ Now, Dr. Strain, you talked about the unemployment rate.
+Currently, where is the bulk of the unemployment? What sectors
+of the economy?
+ Mr. Strain. The sectors of the economy that have been hit
+the hardest are sectors that feature in-person interaction, so
+sectors like retail, trade, leisure, and hospitality. Those are
+the sectors that have borne the brunt of unemployment.
+ Mr. Gonzalez of Ohio. And a $15 minimum wage would do what
+to those sectors?
+ Mr. Strain. It would be a major challenge to workers in
+those sectors and a major challenge to businesses in those
+sectors as well.
+ Mr. Gonzalez of Ohio. Yes, I would argue it would be
+completely counterproductive, and we asked, where is the
+unemployment? It is not an interest rate question. It is not a
+stimulus check issue. It is a virus issue. I think we all know
+that, and I think that is what you are saying, and that screams
+towards quickly getting targeted relief in the form of
+vaccines, testing, and anything we can do to defeat the virus.
+The faster we defeat the virus, the faster we come back. Now,
+we could pass that, I would argue, with broad bipartisan
+support later tonight if we wanted to.
+ And then, the second piece I want to touch on is the
+stimulus checks. You mentioned in your testimony--you say, for
+example, direct checks to households earning six-figure incomes
+that have not experienced employment loss are an unnecessary
+and imprudent use of government spending. I agree with that 100
+percent. Have you seen anyone anywhere who has intellectually
+or economically justified the notion that we would be paying
+people thousands of dollars who have not been economically
+harmed by the pandemic? What is the rationale for that? Have
+you seen it?
+ Mr. Strain. Congressman, I haven't seen a rationale that I
+found compelling to support those checks. I think you could
+make an argument for targeting checks that went to low-income
+households that have been really hurting in this economy. But
+checks to households earning $150,000, $200,000, and up, there
+really is just very little justification for that policy.
+ Mr. Gonzalez of Ohio. Yes, thank you for that. I agree. I
+want to be targeted. I want to help. Anybody who has been
+affected by the COVID pandemic economically, I want to be there
+to help them. I think most Republicans would agree with that.
+This overshoots by a mile, and, again, I would encourage my
+Democratic colleagues to come back and work with us. I yield
+back.
+ Chairwoman Waters. Thank you. The gentleman's time has
+expired. The gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Casten, is recognized
+for 5 minutes.
+ Mr. Casten. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. And thank you to
+our witnesses. Before I start with my questions, I want to just
+respond to something Mr. Barr said. He had noted that a lot of
+the public is watching us right now, and it is really important
+to understand this budget reconciliation process. This isn't
+about being partisan, nonpartisan, or bipartisan. We pass
+things by majority rule. The Senate has this goofy filibuster
+rule that certain things require 60 votes, and budget
+reconciliation is the way we pass things by simple majority.
+The last time that my colleagues across the aisle controlled
+everything--the House, the Senate, and the White House--they
+used budget reconciliation to pass a massive tax cut to
+corporations and to take away people's healthcare.
+ Now that we are in control, we are using budget
+reconciliation to address the fact that we are in a pandemic
+that has killed 443,000 Americans, and left 12 percent of
+Americans hungry, and 60 million people out of work. That is
+the right way to use your majority. I do not apologize for it,
+and please do not say that this is somehow not worth doing in
+the name of bipartisanship or question why that [inaudible].
+ I want to move from there to a question for Mr. Spriggs. We
+have done a lot of funding so far. We have a lot of support for
+small businesses. The PPP program, while it had some slow
+rollouts and some hiccups that we are all aware of, has really
+been a lifeline for a lot of small businesses, certainly in my
+district and across the country. But I think we have lost sight
+of the fact that it was designed, first and foremost, to
+protect labor. There were no credit checks. It was run with the
+SBA. The size of your loan was a function of your employment,
+and your ability to convert that into a grant was a function of
+making sure that you used it for labor. Again, not perfect, but
+it has kept a bunch of people off of unemployment rolls, off of
+welfare, not needing COBRA, and out of needing food assistance.
+ Because we could not get support across the aisle to
+support State and local funding, the PPP has really protected
+people who work for the private sector or certain classes,
+nonprofits. And following your introductory comments, Mr.
+Spriggs, we have had about 1.3 million public sector job losses
+since February. Correct me if I'm wrong on the math. If we do
+not get State and local aid, Mr. Spriggs, do you think that
+that 1.3 million number will increase, decrease, or stabilize?
+ Mr. Spriggs. Thank you for the question, Congressman. If
+you don't provide the direct aid, and you have heard this
+directly from Mayor Anthony, we are going to continue to lose
+jobs at the time we need those workers in place, both to
+implement the plans, as the mayor pointed out, that cities and
+local communities are trying to put in place, but also to make
+sure that we have a full court press in getting people
+vaccinated, because we can't do this from the air. We cannot
+just do this using the internet and assume that people can log
+on and make appointments. This is going to take direct action
+from the local level and local governments.
+ Mr. Casten. Thank you. Mr. Anthony, is there anything you
+would like to add to that? Personally, like we all do, I have a
+neighbor who is a schoolteacher. I have friends who are cops.
+They didn't get any of this protection. Anything you would like
+to add or put color on [inaudible]?
+ Mr. Anthony. Yes, I would just add that Dr. Spriggs has
+said it very clearly. If we really want our economy to come
+back, it has to start at the local level, and get done quickly.
+Our leaders are able to deal with, through distributions, PPE
+and the vaccine distribution and education. I know that our
+mayors and council members from our rural, as well as urban,
+communities are ready to partner with the Federal Government to
+get us back on the right track. So thank you, Congressman.
+ Mr. Casten. Okay. Thank you. Mr. Strain, I have been
+reading a little bit of your bio, and I am a Dartmouth guy, so
+I won't hold your Cornell degree against you. But if I am
+following right, you went to work at the Fed in 2005, and the
+Census Bureau in 2008, and you have been AEI since 2012, right?
+Do I have that timeline about right?
+ Mr. Strain. Yes, that is about right, Congressman.
+ Mr. Casten. I am not going to ask you for particulars, but
+have you had any raises during that period?
+ Mr. Strain. Have I had any raises?
+ Mr. Casten. Yes, has your salary gone up since the 2008
+time frame?
+ Mr. Strain. Yes, my salary has gone up.
+ Mr. Casten. Mine has, as well. As you have earned more
+money, did you find that you increased your spending? Do you go
+out to dinner more often? Do you ever buy a nicer car, buy a
+nicer house?
+ Mr. Strain. I did not buy a nicer car, but I have increased
+my spending.
+ Mr. Casten. I mention that because the Federal minimum wage
+has not gone up during that period. It has been locked since
+2009. And as you run your economic forecasts that presume that
+somehow if you raise wages to the wealthiest, they will
+increase their spending and live a nicer life, but if you raise
+it for the poorest, they are not going to be willing to pay
+more for a sandwich [inaudible] suggested by some of your math.
+Thank you. I yield back.
+ Chairwoman Waters. Thank you very much. The gentleman from
+Tennessee, Mr. Rose, is recognized for 5 minutes.
+ Mr. Rose. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and thanks to
+Ranking Member McHenry and Representative Hill for having this
+committee hearing today. I am [inaudible] into the 117th
+Congress. I am grateful that we are finally getting under way
+with the business of the country.
+ Today, we are discussing the next COVID stimulus package
+before the ink has even dried on the last one. As my colleagues
+have cited, Republicans and Democrats have negotiated 5 COVID
+relief packages totaling $3.5 trillion to address the pandemic
+and the economic crisis. A significant portion of the funds
+Congress has already allocated are yet to be spent by agencies,
+and I believe that before providing additional relief, we must
+do a thoughtful review of the programs that have been most
+effective and then determine whether to place additional
+targeted funds.
+ Our economy is recovering. The best way to stimulate
+economic growth is to safely reopen businesses and schools. Our
+focus now needs to be on providing timely, targeted, and
+temporary funding to ensure adequate testing and vaccination
+supplies get to States across the country. Finally, I would be
+remiss if I didn't mention that I find this hearing to be
+largely a show, as Democrats in the House, Senate, and the
+White House have already moved forward on the path to pass
+another COVID package that would completely cut out the voices
+and input of Congressional Republicans.
+ Over the past few weeks, I have spoken with private, not-
+for-profit colleges back home in Tennessee, and they are
+distressed by President Biden's and the Democrats' stimulus
+plan. The President's plan includes funding for all public
+colleges and universities, but fails to acknowledge the
+majority of private, nonprofit institutions that have felt the
+repercussions of this pandemic just like their public
+counterparts. There are more than 1,700 degree-granting
+private, nonprofit colleges and universities located across the
+country which collectively enroll over 5.1 million students and
+provide more than 1.2 million administration, faculty, and
+staff jobs to the economy. Low-income students, students
+regardless of their college choice, face increased challenges
+during this time as well as members of faculty and staff. While
+these institutions have had access to Federal relief through
+the CARES Act, we cannot cut them out of future relief.
+ Dr. Strain, do you believe there should be parity in the
+treatment of these higher education institutions, and could you
+speak to the potential negative effects of treating them
+differently?
+ Mr. Strain. Thank you, Congressman. I think as a general
+matter, pandemic-related relief should be broad-based and
+should be available to businesses that meet a certain
+threshold. I think it was appropriate, for example, to limit
+PPP grants to businesses of a certain size class. I think it
+would be inappropriate to target relief on specific industries
+or the specific characteristics of businesses in those
+industries.
+ Mr. Rose. Thank you. We have talked extensively about how
+the $15-per-hour minimum wage would destroy millions of jobs,
+and I think we can all agree that at a time when our national
+unemployment has only just begun to recover from the economic
+pain imposed by the COVID-19 lockdown last year, we should not
+be jeopardizing the economic security of more than a million
+American workers. Dr. Strain, can you discuss the
+disproportional negative impact this one-size-fits-all approach
+would have on smaller and rural communities like those in the
+6th District of Tennessee?
+ Mr. Strain. I think it would have a significant impact,
+Congressman. I think in many American States that are more
+rural, you have a lot more workers who earn lower wages in the
+labor market. And if you are talking about doubling the minimum
+wage in those States or more than doubling it, you are talking
+about a policy that is going to impact directly, one-third,
+pushing up to the really middle-of-the-wage distribution
+workers in that State. And that is just going to make it a lot
+harder for them to find jobs.
+ Mr. Rose. Thank you, and I see my time has expired. Madam
+Chairwoman, I yield back.
+ Chairwoman Waters. Thank you very much. The gentlewoman
+from Massachusetts, Ms. Pressley, is recognized for 5 minutes.
+ Ms. Pressley. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and thank you to
+our witnesses for joining us here today. We have been living
+with this pandemic and the disparities that it has laid bare
+for nearly a year, and yet we have consistently fallen short of
+fully delivering relief than meets the scale and scope of
+people's hurt. These hearings are a critically important
+reminder that our work is not done.
+ The stock market may have recovered, but our communities
+have not. My colleague across the aisle said this feels like a
+show. Well, in this show, we are centering on the American
+people, and it is important that we never lose sight of the
+plot, and the plot is the people. The inherent and outstanding
+disparities in our public health and economic systems, coupled
+with the slow and inequitable rollout of vaccination efforts
+across this country, mean that our hardest-hit communities--
+Black, Brown, indigenous--will continue to shoulder the burden
+of the pandemic and will be the last to recover, if at all. In
+fact, a CBO report projects that while the economy may rebound
+in the next year, it will take until 2024 for employment to
+return to pre-pandemic levels.
+ Mr. Spriggs, for those who look to conflate the two, can
+you please explain the consequences of an economic recovery
+without a labor recovery?
+ Mr. Spriggs. Thank you, Congresswoman. We have had this
+problem in our economy for the last several recoveries where we
+have the economy rebound much quicker than the labor market, so
+we have to pay attention to that. When we look at things like
+unemployment assistance and people projecting when they think
+the economy will recover versus when the labor market will
+recover, we have to have our ears open, because in September,
+it isn't clear whether the labor market will recover. It is
+hopeful that because of the vaccinations, our economy will be
+much closer to normal operation. But workers will still find it
+very difficult to reconnect, and the additional support in
+their unemployment insurance will still be necessary.
+ So, we cannot do what we did in the past, which is have
+everyone declare a victory because the stock market is up or
+because the unemployment rate nationally is 5 percent or 4\1/2\
+percent.
+ Ms. Pressley. Thank you.
+ Mr. Spriggs. That is not cause for celebration.
+ Ms. Pressley. Thank you. And we know that women of color
+accounted for all jobs reported lost in December. So what does
+a slow labor recovery mean for them specifically?
+ Mr. Spriggs. This is why we need to act now, because when
+you are unemployed for more than 6 months, it becomes
+increasingly difficult for you to find a job. If people become
+homeless, then it becomes impossible, and so we can't let this
+story take place. We need to get the labor market back as
+quickly as we can to have a robust labor market, which is why
+we must raise the minimum wage, because it is specifically
+Black women who would be left behind if we continue on the path
+we are on now. While most Americans are on their way to a $15
+minimum wage, it is disproportionately Black women who are not,
+and we need robust wage growth so that we can have sustained
+growth, and so that these kinds of recovery efforts won't be as
+expensive to the government and our economy won't be as
+fragile.
+ Ms. Pressley. Thank you. And so to that end, since Black
+women are disproportionately bearing the brunt of this hurt,
+and that certainly is true when it comes to housing, there is
+an ACLU analysis of national eviction data. Black women were
+filed against for eviction at double the rate of White renters,
+and were more likely to be denied housing because of it. In my
+district, the Massachusetts 7th, the report found that during
+the first month of the pandemic, 78 percent of all evictions in
+Boston were filed in communities of color.
+ So that is why I am partnering with Representatives Tlaib,
+Ocasio-Cortez, and Neguse to introduce the Emergency
+Homelessness Assistance Act, to provide nearly $5 billion
+dollars in additional funding to support those experiencing
+homelessness. It is responsive to the needs of community and
+the hurt that people are experiencing. This funding includes
+support for additional vouchers and the acquisition and
+development of non-congregate shelters. Mr. Anthony, many
+cities have looked to purchase and convert hotels and motels
+into shelter spaces. Why is it critical to give cities and
+local providers the flexibility to make these long-term
+investments?
+ Mr. Anthony. Thank you, Congresswoman, for that question.
+And you know very well, being a former city council member in
+Boston, the challenges that local governments are facing. We
+need that flexibility. We need the resources first and the
+flexibility to create solutions that will address our local
+needs specifically to the cities, and we thank you for your
+support on that.
+ Chairwoman Waters. Thank you. The gentlewoman's time has
+expired. The gentleman from Wisconsin, Mr. Steil, is recognized
+for 5 minutes.
+ Mr. Steil. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I appreciate your
+recalling us back in here a month into Congress. Some of our
+colleagues here are in a big hurry to spend more taxpayer
+dollars and enact a liberal wish list. And just a few months
+ago, we were sitting here in this committee, and committee
+Democrats on this committee referred to that liberal spending
+wish list as Washington gamesmanship, party politics. One
+member described it as a waste of time, but here we are.
+ This is not what Wisconsin wants. It is not what the
+country wants. People in Wisconsin, people across the country,
+we want to get back to work. We want our way of life back. We
+want to get back to work. Let's talk about where we are today.
+Congress and President Trump have already provided $4 trillion
+in coronavirus relief, including $915 billion that was
+authorized less than 6 weeks ago, and I know, that is what Joe
+Biden calls a down payment. But by the latest estimates, almost
+a trillion dollars of that has been allocated has not yet been
+spent.
+ And so, let's conceptualize what this means. We have
+already provided $12,000 for every single person in the United
+States. That is $48,000 for a family of four. You can buy a new
+Cadillac car with that kind of money. And about a third of it--
+and this is what is important--nearly $4,000 per person, hasn't
+even been spent. And now my colleagues want to move forward and
+spend another $1.9 trillion, rammed through on a party-line
+vote. That is another $5,700 per person.
+ And a big portion of these funds would be earmarked for
+projects like bailing out States, States like Illinois, that
+have been fiscally irresponsible for years. The Illinois
+Pension Fund system is absolutely out of control. Meanwhile, in
+my home State of Wisconsin, as in many other States, tax
+collections turned out to be better than expected. The
+Wisconsin Department of Administration just a few days ago
+reported that, ``Our State's fiscal condition has remained
+remarkably resilient,'' pointing out the continued tax revenue
+growth in States like Illinois. Why should Wisconsin have to
+bail out States like Illinois? They should not.
+ But wait, there is more. My colleagues also want to use
+this package to push through a whole host of job-killing
+measures. Killing the Keystone Pipeline and private sector
+infrastructure is not enough. And I appreciate, Dr. Strain, you
+discussing some of these policy proposals today. We are living
+in a time when far too many small businesses have shut their
+doors and workers are out of work. Sixty-one percent of adults
+in the United States are currently in the labor force. We
+haven't seen labor force rates at this level consistently since
+the Carter Administration. If we want to get people back to
+work, now is not the time for job-killing ideas.
+ It is time to slow down the spending spree, and focus,
+focus, focus. Focus on what is important. Focus on getting
+vaccines to everyone who wants one. Focus on getting kids back
+in the classroom. Focus on reopening the economy safely and
+responsibly. And the spending spree that we are discussing here
+today does not do that. I yield back.
+ Chairwoman Waters. Thank you very much. The gentleman from
+Massachusetts, Mr. Lynch, is recognized for 5 minutes.
+ Mr. Lynch. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and I want to thank
+the witnesses as well for your attendance and your testimony.
+ Mr. Spriggs and Mr. Anthony, in my area, we have, and I
+think in most cities around the country, we have a real mix of
+small landlords, and then we have some major housing developers
+as well. Frankly, I have been surprised at the willingness of a
+lot of landlords, big and small, to exercise forbearance with
+their tenants. That is just what I am seeing in my community.
+Some of my big landlords have come out ahead of Congress, ahead
+of the CDC to say, you know what? We are not going to evict
+anyone. We are going to work with you. And yet, at the same
+time, those big landlords now are saying, look, we have a large
+number of workers, electricians, plumbers, laborers, carpenters
+that they have kept on the payroll to make sure that the
+quality of life in those big developments is maintained. And,
+again, I have smaller landlords who are really, because they
+only have one or two rental units, really hard-pressed.
+ Mr. Spriggs and Mr. Anthony, could you talk about what you
+are seeing and what you are hearing from your positions and
+what you might recommend in terms of providing relief to those
+small landlords, and also the larger responsible landlords that
+have been trying to do the right thing?
+ Mr. Spriggs. Yes. I will go first, Congressman, and thank
+you for the question. This is why rent assistance is necessary.
+It is the best way to help out the landlords, and it is, in
+many ways, the first way to help out the landlords. If quite
+small landlords are in the awkward position of having to demand
+arrears all at once, it is going to be a very difficult
+situation. You mentioned it is uncomfortable for many small
+landlords. That is why I think the most proven and effective
+way to do it is through rental assistance.
+ Mr. Lynch. Thank you. Mr. Anthony?
+ Mr. Anthony. Yes, I will just quickly add that--thanks,
+Congressman--we are looking at a $7 billion backlog of landlord
+rent on properties that they own, and I think that we need to
+have some assistance there. And local governments are coming up
+with programs, rental assistance programs, to stop those
+evictions. And the real impact is not happening to the wealthy.
+You are finding a lot of us who are blessed, are moving to
+rural communities and buying new properties. But those who are
+poor can't leave, and they are stuck with the bill of owning
+these properties and having to pay full rent.
+ Mr. Lynch. Ms. Murguia, would you like to add anything to
+that, please?
+ Ms. Murguia. I would. Thank you, Congressman. I think just
+building on the previous comments, we are finding, certainly
+within our communities of color, Black and Hispanic landlords
+are actually more likely to work with tenants to keep them in
+their homes, but, yes, they are facing great financial
+struggles, too, because of the pandemic. And we do find that
+these smaller landlords, especially those paying off a
+mortgage, face some of those challenges that we are hearing
+about, small businesses and cash-strapped small businesses,
+with not enough money in their pockets at the end of the day.
+ And so, that is why we think this is another opportunity
+for the Federal Government to partner with community-based
+lenders, including community development financial institutions
+(CDFIs), to perhaps deploy short-term aid or low-interest
+financing to help struggling landlords with assets and who are
+being solvent through this pandemic. Of course, it is nothing
+more than just making sure we are able to get direct assistance
+and funding into the hands of those renters, and we do know
+that our Latino renters, in particular, use any payments that
+they are getting to pay for basic needs, like rent. So, I
+appreciate your question and the comments of my colleagues.
+ Mr. Lynch. Thank you. And, Madam Chairwoman, I just want to
+thank you. I know you have been focused on this issue like a
+laser. I do want to say to some of my Republican colleagues,
+you know I love you, but I can tell by the way you talk about
+this, that you have never stood in an unemployment line. And I
+have, being an ironworker for 20 years, and you are constantly
+working yourself out of a job. I think you might have a
+different perspective if you had actually stood in an
+unemployment line. The fact that you got a check for $1,000, 5
+months ago, really doesn't amount to much. So with that, I
+yield back. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
+ Chairwoman Waters. Thank you so very much. The gentleman
+from South Carolina, Mr. Timmons, is now recognized for 5
+minutes.
+ Mr. Timmons. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. The only thing
+that is going to solve the problem we are currently in is to
+reopen the economy as quickly and safely as possible. It seems
+today we are talking about three different buckets of spending.
+One is the easier-to-reopen bucket, and that is the bucket that
+I believe that we should be focusing most of our time and
+effort on. The second bucket is the easier-to-stay-closed
+bucket, and while that bucket was appropriate in March of last
+year when we had our 15 days to slow the spread, 300-plus days
+later it is no longer the best use of our resources, and we
+should not throw money into that bucket. And then the last
+bucket, and I don't even really know what to call it--I guess
+you could call it the progressive wish list, policies that have
+no chance of becoming law outside of a global pandemic. You can
+call it the let-no-crisis-go-to-waste bucket.
+ And let's start there. I have heard it proposed that we are
+going to cancel $1.7 trillion in student loan debt. That has
+nothing to with COVID. There is also granting amnesty to 20
+million illegal immigrants. I want to fix immigration. I think
+that is something that we should do this Congress, but the idea
+that we would do it through budget reconciliation is just
+irresponsible. It is not going to happen, and that is really
+not part of COVID relief conversations, that are very
+important, when we should be spending our time talking about
+politics that will actually help.
+ A $15 minimum wage? I can tell you what that will do to my
+business in Greenville, South Carolina, and the other small
+businesses in Greenville and Spartanburg, South Carolina. That
+makes a lot of sense in New York City and Chicago, but it will
+severely impede our ability to not only successfully overcome
+COVID, but to even survive as a small business in my district.
+So, a $15 minimum wage just doesn't make sense all across the
+country. Now, again, that is not a conversation that I'm
+unopposed to having, but one-size-does-not-fit-all.
+ The second bucket--let's go back--the easier-to-stay-closed
+bucket. You have State and local bailouts. Any money spent with
+State and local governments should be focused on reopening the
+economy safely and quickly. Bailing out unfunded pension
+liabilities and poor fiscal policy for the last decade is just
+not an appropriate use of Federal tax dollars for COVID relief.
+Then, you have stimulus checks for people who make six figures
+or more, who have had no income disruption. That is not
+appropriate. And unemployment benefits that disincentivize
+returning to work also not helpful.
+ We need to spend all of our time and resources on the first
+bucket. How do we make it easier to reopen? Vaccines are
+clearly the number one issue there. Anyone who wants a shot
+should be able to get it as quickly as possible. That will
+allow all of our economy to reopen, and we can get past the
+pandemic. Schools are another very important way. Even if we
+reopen the economy, if our schools are not reopened, parents
+are not going to be able to go to work because they have to
+keep the kids at home. We need to give the schools the
+resources necessary to reopen. That is additional PPE. That is
+additional testing. Whatever the schools need to reopen, that
+is what we need to be spending our time and resources on.
+ Last, but certainly not least, we need to address
+businesses that have been disproportionately affected by COVID,
+and that is tourism, hotels, and restaurants. We have done
+that. We have already spent $3.5 trillion. We can have
+conversations about more, depending on how long it takes for
+the vaccine to be fully distributed. But we just need to spend
+all of our time on how we are going to make it easier to reopen
+the economy. We are going to have $30 trillion of debt within
+the next year or two, but probably in the next month or two, if
+this passes.
+ The global community is not going to let us borrow $40-,
+$50-, or $60 trillion. The only reason we are getting away with
+it right now is because the dollar is the global currency and
+we are able to spend beyond our means, but the global community
+will find alternative currency eventually. And if our debt is
+called, if we lose the global currency, our entire economy is
+going to fall apart. So, again, we must reopen as safely and as
+quickly as possible, and that is where we should be spending
+our time and resources. With that, Madam Chairwoman, I yield
+back.
+ Chairwoman Waters. Thank you very much. The gentlewoman
+from Michigan, Ms. Tlaib, is recognized for 5 minutes.
+ Ms. Tlaib. Thank you so much, Madam Chairwoman. Look, I
+think the biggest job killer right now in our country and
+around the world is COVID, so let's just be very clear. That is
+the job killer in our country, and that is what we need to
+truly address right now, to pretend that it doesn't even exist,
+to talk about these different kinds of economies that are not
+connected to the fact that we need to protect our public
+health.
+ Madam Chairwoman, I don't know if you realize this, but the
+United States is on a course of losing about 500,000 people.
+That is half a million lives lost because of the incompetence
+of this past Administration. Just in my home State of Michigan,
+we have lost nearly 16,000 of our neighbors. For comparison, in
+the entirety of Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, and Japan
+combined, there has been less than 7,000 deaths. Think about
+that for one moment.
+ It did not have to be this way. The stock market might have
+bounced back, but everyday Americans--our neighbors, our
+communities, like my residents--are suffering. The measure of
+our nation's greatness should not be the gains of Wall Street.
+It should be in how our most vulnerable are taken care of.
+Since the beginning of the pandemic last March, we have senta
+$1,200 check and another $600 check, a total of $1,800 to our
+neighbors. That is an average of $163 per month. That is
+absolutely shameful. It is the reason why our food bank lines
+are growing longer in my district, and people are falling
+behind on their rent and losing their homes.
+ I have been calling for a $2,000 recurring monthly direct
+payment since the start of the pandemic. And Mr. Spriggs, I
+want to know, if we fail to provide sufficient economic support
+for the most vulnerable among us in the coming months, what
+will be the impact on our economy and, by extension, on
+everyday people?
+ Mr. Spriggs. Thank you, Congresswoman. We are in the
+situation we are in because of our high level of inequality.
+The size of these packages is an indication of what it takes to
+actually fill the gap because people at the bottom of our
+income distribution don't have enough money. We scar them and
+scar our economy. It will be harder to reconnect them. When we
+have the virus under control and employers go to meet with
+these workers, it will be harder to find them because they will
+have lost their homes. They will have lost contact with the
+labor market. We have to keep households engaged and as intact
+as possible so that when the economy does recover, people are
+spending their money on growth and not on paying back debts.
+ So the importance here is keeping this growing from not
+just the physical, not just the mental, not just the spiritual,
+but you don't want economic disparity.
+ Ms. Tlaib. Absolutely. The vaccine can't fix the problem of
+our savings accounts, right? It can probably keep us healthy,
+but, again, how does that extend to the fact that this economic
+downfall that is happening is going to be something that is
+going to be hard to address if we don't do something now?
+ I represent the third-poorest congressional district. The
+majority of my neighbors were living paycheck to paycheck prior
+to this pandemic, so just imagine now this layer of issues. I
+also want to push back against the deficit hawks and
+Republicans who worry more about the budget than getting
+Americans money so that they can keep food on their table and a
+roof over their head. They had no issue with granting
+corporations and the wealthiest of Americans hundreds of
+billions of dollars' worth of tax cuts, yet they speak out now
+when we need to help everyday Americans, when this is their
+money that they are asking for, and they are saying, this is
+the time for the government to be about people and to help
+them.
+ So, Dr. Spriggs, do you agree that those billions of
+dollars of lost tax revenue could have funded greater financial
+relief to our Americans right now?
+ Mr. Strain. We saw many corporations didn't have the
+liquidity they should have had because after we gave the
+corporations the tax cut, they found themselves fragile going
+into this pandemic. They required government assistance as
+well. So those tax cuts didn't build up the reservoir that we
+were told would be there to make those corporations much more
+resilient. If those corporations with their billions weren't
+more resilient, then what does it say of these households
+living paycheck to paycheck?
+ Ms. Tlaib. Thank you. I know my time is up. I apologize.
+Thank you so much.
+ Chairwoman Waters. Thank you. The gentleman from Texas, Mr.
+Taylor, is recognized for 5 minutes.
+ Mr. Taylor. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I appreciate being
+in this hearing. Mr. Anthony, I want to talk to you a little
+bit about municipal finance running local governments. I am
+very blessed to represent Collin County, Texas, and we have
+some very successful cities, and our County is very well-run.
+We have some of the safest streets, and some of the best
+schools. I think it is a testament to the people in our
+community who consistently elect competent leaders who then, in
+turn, run fiscally conservative cities, counties, and school
+districts. And as such, not only are our taxes low, but we keep
+decent reserves in our local governments. And so when COVID-19
+came, we watched a modest drop in municipal revenues, and the
+CARES dollars that went to the Collin County government
+actually, which is Collin County has about a million, so it got
+us a direct CARES dollar contribution. That money was then
+distributed to the cities, and the cities actually went ahead
+and distributed that to the citizens.
+ I have heard a lot of talk here today about rental
+assistance. Rental assistance actually came from the cities to
+the citizens, so there was no need for Federal assistance,
+because the cities and the counties could actually go ahead.
+They were in good fiscal shape, well-run physically. They could
+actually go ahead and help their citizens. And I remember
+visiting the Allen Area Food Bank, which is a food pantry in
+Allen, Texas, and they had gotten a $10 million grant from
+Collin County. The county government gives them $10 million to
+help feed people, but that was possible because the county was
+well-run. It had the resources. It had gas in the tank.
+ And so as we talk about more CARES dollars going to cities,
+what I am kind of concerned about is that my cities and my
+county have been well-run, and I am worried that you are
+talking about taking money from my voters and giving it to
+other places that were not well-run, because those are the ones
+where taxes were high, and so they are more likely to have
+revenues drop off very quickly, and where they didn't have
+money in the bank and they were unable to handle the problem in
+front of them. So, how should we think about this to be sure
+that we are fair to people who did a good job, who had money in
+the bank, who were well-run, Mr. Anthony? How should we think
+about this problem?
+ Mr. Anthony. Yes, thank you, Congressman Taylor, for that
+question. I think I will start from a place of assumption that
+municipal leaders are responsible, that they, in fact, have to
+balance their budget based upon the tax base that they have.
+And perhaps in your county, region, it is very diverse, and
+perhaps the wealth of that county may be a little different
+than some other counties and cities. So my assumption is that,
+again, local governments do manage their budgets.
+ The other thing I will say is that your description of how
+the CARES Act dollars came into the State, into the county, and
+then, in fact, were shared with the city is a story that we
+want to happen all over America, but it has not happened that
+way all over America. And the fact that your county was able to
+get the CARES Act dollars and then provide them to the
+nonprofits is the way we want it to happen. The thing that we
+want to stop is having to argue with counties and States to get
+the money. We think that your mayors in your county, in your
+district, should get direct dollars. So, I commend your county
+leaders and say that all of our leaders attempt to be good
+stewards of dollars.
+ Mr. Taylor. Thank you. I appreciate that. Obviously, I feel
+very fortunate.
+ Mr. Anthony. Yes.
+ Mr. Taylor. And I am very proud of the leaders in my
+community, and it is a team effort to build Collin County into
+a really, really terrific county, and it has been humbling, to
+say the least, to watch the struggles. And they are very real,
+very personal struggles that individuals in my county have
+confronted, like the single working mom who just lost her job
+and is trying to find toilet paper, and getting that phone
+call. It is very hard, very humbling calls that we have had as
+leaders, but I am proud of what we have been able to do to step
+up, and I appreciate your thoughts on this subject. And I yield
+back.
+ Mr. Anthony. And I am proud of you as well.
+ Mr. Taylor. Thank you.
+ Chairwoman Waters. Thank you. The gentlewoman from North
+Carolina, Ms. Adams, is recognized for 5 minutes.
+ Ms. Adams. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. Thank you for
+convening this hearing today. And to our witnesses, I want to
+thank you as well for sharing your perspectives. Mr. Anthony,
+let me take a moment to ask you some questions about housing
+insecurity, which has been worsened by this pandemic. According
+to the Census household post-survey, we know that of an
+estimated of 15.1 million adults living in rental housing, 1 in
+5 adult renters are not caught up on their rent, according to
+the data collected in January. But let me just skip over and
+talk about a little problem that is going on in my district.
+ In Charlotte-Mecklenburg, we are seeing the impacts of the
+pandemic-fueled housing insecurity. In fact, it has played out
+before our very eyes. We have a large and growing homelessness
+situation. Our community calls that largest settlement the Tent
+City. Tragically, each and every day, more and more tents join
+that community. These people are actually living on the street,
+because the pandemic does not allow the social distancing in
+these centers. They have needs that vary from basic healthcare,
+to mental health services, job training, hunger, clothing, et
+cetera. So in addition to the recent $25 billion in emergency
+rental assistance, what more should Congress do to provide the
+funding solutions and support to our cities and counties in
+addressing the ever-growing homeless problem, and does the
+pandemic give us an opportunity to tap into new and innovative
+solutions?
+ Mr. Anthony. Thank you, Congresswoman Adams. I know your
+mayor, Mayor Vi Lyles, and I have worked with the county as
+well to address the issues and questions about housing
+instability. And we all know that having a roof over your head
+is one of the things that creates a feeling of safety, a
+quality of health, and wealth. And what we are seeing and
+hoping is that there could be dollars in the rental assistance
+and housing stability programs to help residents to get a roof
+over their head and to get some security. So what we would want
+is some dollars, again, going directly to those counties and
+cities, who can actually create programs and partnerships with
+neighborhood associations.
+ Ms. Adams. Thank you for that, for your comments. Mr.
+Johnson, when Congress created the Paycheck Protection Program
+in the CARES Act, we found through various studies,
+particularly by the Brookings Institution, that businesses in
+majority Black neighborhoods received PPP loans less
+frequently, they waited longer for their loans, and they were
+more likely to apply through fintechs or online lending
+platforms, which frequently carry less favorable interest
+terms. So, how can we ensure that minority communities have
+adequate and equitable access to programs like PPP, and that
+they are not victims of disparate treatment by financial
+institutions in carrying out these programs?
+ Mr. Johnson. Thank you, Congresswoman. First, with the
+current consideration, there is a requirement for small
+business owners, if they want to go in for a second PPP, they
+have to demonstrate that they had a loss of up upwards of 25
+percent in one quarter of last year. For many small businesses,
+particularly for African-American businesses, if they had a 25
+percent loss last year, they are no longer in business, so that
+should be addressed in this upcoming bill.
+ Second, you have to ensure that the lending institutions
+that are closer to those businesses have access and preference
+for those small businesses, whether it is CDFIs, local credit
+unions, and others, that are closer to the ground, and
+particularly Black banks, because many of those institutions
+are the lenders for African-American small businesses.
+ Ms. Adams. Thank you for that. I just want to add one
+thing. As I talk to some of the banks and some of the
+individuals who were trying to get these loans, many of the
+banks are just now providing information to their customers,
+and some of these are small businesses that were unbanked and
+so forth. So that continues, I guess, to be a problem.
+Hopefully, we can figure that out, but thank you very much.
+Madam Chairwoman, I yield back.
+ Chairwoman Waters. Thank you very much. The gentleman from
+New York, Mr. Zeldin, is recognized for 5 minutes. And I am
+going to turn the gavel over to Mr. Perlmutter, as I must leave
+to attend to other business at this point. Thank you all very
+much.
+ Mr. Zeldin. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. Thank you to the
+witnesses for being here today. Thank you to Ranking Member
+McHenry as well. I represent the 1st Congressional District of
+New York, which is located on the east end of Long Island in
+Suffolk County. Long Island was hit very hard by COVID-19 from
+the earliest stages of the outbreak here in our country, and
+the local governments in my district all stepped up to the
+plate in a very big way to provide critical services when my
+constituents needed it most. In light of historic shortfalls
+caused by this ongoing outbreak, our local governments have
+been struggling to recover fiscally. Additional relief from
+Congress is likely coming, but it cannot be an across-the-board
+free-for-all. Additionally, the State and local government
+relief being discussed should not be a bailout of budgeting
+failures unrelated to the pandemic.
+ Democratic leadership has decided to try to push forward a
+$1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief package through the budget
+reconciliation process, ignoring that the Federal Government
+just passed another massive coronavirus recovery bill just a
+few weeks ago. Our country cannot afford a partisan approach to
+COVID-19 relief, like the Democrat-flawed HEROES Act from last
+Congress. We must target our relief to where it can pack the
+greatest punch. Congress provided support for State and local
+governments in the CARES Act, but limited it to support for
+local governments with more than 500,000 in population.
+ I did not agree with that population limit, which is why I
+have worked across the aisle with my New York colleague,
+Congressman Antonio Delgado, to reintroduce H.R. 199, the
+Direct Support for Communities Act. This would drive support to
+the most local levels of our counties, towns, cities, and
+villages without that population threshold, and driving it to
+those who desperately need the assistance.
+ Dr. Strain, in a recent AEI blog posted on January 26th,
+you stated, ``The best thing that Biden is proposing is the
+Federal grants to State and local governments, which are
+providers of essential services and major employers. The
+decrease in tax revenue caused by the pandemic left these
+governments with no choice but to lay off workers, especially
+since Congress failed to provide funding for States and
+localities in the previous relief packages.'' It is clear that
+the fiscal solvency of all levels of government is important
+for economic recovery. Can you elaborate on the importance of
+the health of all levels of government as we talk about the
+health and growth of the overall U.S. economy?
+ Mr. Strain. Yes, Congressman. Thank you for the question.
+Right now, State and local unemployment levels are about 1.4
+million below where they were prior to the pandemic, so there
+are about 1.4 million fewer jobs in State and local governments
+than there were in February of 2020. That includes about
+600,000 fewer education sector workers. And so, if we want the
+overall economy to recover, if we want the national labor
+market to heal, and if we want there to be enough personnel in
+schools for schools to reopen, I think it really is critical
+that Congress replace the pandemic-related revenue losses that
+have been experienced by States and localities, if for no other
+reason than to support the national economic recovery.
+ Mr. Zeldin. Yes. I am a member who supports additional
+funding for State and local governments, but I would not want
+it to be a one-size-fits-all approach. I would not want us to
+be inefficient with it. I believe that it is important, as
+stewards of tax dollars, to ensure that it is not just going to
+State governments or the largest cities, but it is going to
+some of the local governments that have been on the front lines
+of responding to this pandemic. I had towns that had balanced
+budgets. They had AAA bond ratings. They were doing a really
+good job with their finances, and then they got hit hard by
+this pandemic.
+ In New York State, we have unique issues where the State
+had a deficit before we got hit, and it was exacerbated. New
+York City has financial issues, correct, but it got exacerbated
+by this pandemic. Plus, it is also important that our nation's
+largest mass transit system, the MTA, as well as the Port
+Authority and some of these others are being heard and that we
+are being responsive, but have to be smart in how we do it.
+That is extremely important, and that is our responsibility,
+working together on both sides of the aisle. I yield back.
+ Mr. Perlmutter. [presiding]. The gentleman yields back.
+Another gentleman from New York, Mr. Torres, is recognized for
+5 minutes.
+ Mr. Torres. Thank you. We often speak of a single American
+economy, but in truth, there is no single economy in America.
+The economic reality for Americans varies widely depending on
+your ZIP Code, and often depending on the color of your skin.
+Take, as an example, New York City. In the South Bronx and West
+Farms, the unemployment rate is 25 percent, which is
+Depression-level unemployment. Right across the river in the
+Upper East Side, the unemployment rate is 5 percent. New York
+City, much like America itself, is a tale of two economies. And
+so my first question is, what are your thoughts on how to best
+confront the crisis of Depression-level unemployment in
+communities of color in places like the South Bronx? And I will
+start with Mr. Spriggs.
+ Mr. Spriggs. Thank you for the question, Congressman. It is
+to recognize these disparities. When you hear folks say that,
+oh, if you add more money to unemployment benefits, then this
+would discourage work. It doesn't discourage those workers who
+live in the South Bronx. They are living in absolute fear
+because they don't know when they will get their next job.
+Their data are clear. They will suffer long-term unemployment.
+They may well run out of unemployment benefits. So if you
+design unemployment and ignore these realities, if you ignore
+the reality that those workers have no savings, they truly live
+paycheck to paycheck, and missing one paycheck means they are
+in debt, this $600, $400, whatever we add to the unemployment
+check, is vital for them.
+ So it is important that we not model on who is not
+unemployed, and understand in this downturn specifically, it is
+a clear set of workers who are unemployed, who have severe
+challenges. And we can't legislate based on somebody's notion
+of what those workers look like. When we added the extra money
+to the unemployment check, everybody howled that workers
+wouldn't return to work. The evidence was absolutely clear.
+Workers returned to work. That was not a discouragement for
+people to get back to work, because real people who live in
+those communities know you need a job. An unemployment check is
+not a job, and in the face of this downturn, it is not a
+discouragement for them.
+ Mr. Torres. I have a question about State and local aid.
+State and local governments, largely through no fault of their
+own, have seen a catastrophic loss of revenue caused by an
+economic crisis the likes of which we have not seen in a
+century. New York City has a $4 billion deficit over the next
+year. New York State has a cumulative deficit of $60 billion
+dollars over the next 4 years. State and local aid matters not
+only to State and local governments; it matters to the larger
+ecosystem of community-based organizations that depend on the
+stability of local and State government. These are community-
+based organizations that often heavily employ people of color,
+and heavily serve communities of color.
+ One example that comes to mind in my district is Acacia
+Network, which employs thousands of people. More than 85
+percent of its essential workforce are people of color who
+depend heavily on local and State aid. So when it comes to
+local and State aid, can you share with the committee your
+thoughts on what is at stake for communities of color and the
+ecosystem that heavily serves and employs them? And this
+question is for Mr. Anthony, Mr. Johnson, and Ms. Murguia.
+ Ms. Murguia. I would be happy to take the first stab at
+that. Thank you, Congressman. It is a great question. We have
+been talking about how there is an ecosystem at the State and
+local level, particularly at the local level, and, yes, it is
+State and local governments. But it is these community-based
+nonprofits that are the lifeline, the safety nets, for so many
+in our communities. These affiliate clients are low income,
+mostly now ravaged by the hospitality industry layoffs. They
+are the essential workers that we are trying to make sure we
+can get assistance to.
+ But when you see funding cuts for these nonprofits, you see
+their safety nets shut down. These affiliates are there to
+provide much-needed resources, oftentimes setting up food
+pantries and direct assistance, and information. And these are
+trusted partners in those communities, so getting that
+information, whether it is about vaccines, or economic
+assistance, or, again, food, they are a lifeline. They are a
+safety net, and we need to make sure that we are supporting
+State and local governments, but also, and in addition to,
+these community-based organizations. I'm proud of Acacia, which
+is a UnidosUS affiliate as well. Thank you.
+ Mr. Anthony. Congressman, I will add on behalf of cities
+all over America, that we know that if there is stress on local
+government in the ability to provide support for the nonprofit
+community, we know that the communities of color will suffer
+first.
+ Mr. Perlmutter. And, Mr. Anthony, I don't mean to cut you
+off, but the gentleman's time has expired, and it has been a
+very long hearing for all of the witnesses, that is for sure.
+So, Mr. Torres, thank you for your questions. I am going to
+recognize Ms. Williams from Georgia for 5 minutes.
+ Ms. Williams of Georgia. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for
+convening this hearing on the critical need for additional
+funding to assist our families and communities that have been
+impacted by COVID-19. Our constituents are suffering, and are
+in desperate need of assistance from the Federal Government. My
+colleagues across the aisle keep expressing their outrage at
+the fact that we are spending necessary dollars to help
+families impacted by a deadly pandemic, but were silent on the
+$1.9 trillion tax scam that benefited the wealthiest in the
+country.
+ My question is for you, Dr. Spriggs. In your testimony, you
+stated that there is a misguided belief that simply reopening
+businesses will solve the current unemployment crisis. What
+will it take to actually help the economy recover and ensure
+that long-term unemployment is resolved?
+ Mr. Spriggs. Thank you, Congresswoman. The data is clear
+because we have a huge variation in levels of shutdown, what
+has been shut down, and it is clear from the economic evidence
+that it is not these orders. It is the disease. People are
+responding to the risk, and they aren't going out because of
+the risk, and it is hurting the businesses because of that. So
+the real issue is, can we solve the disease? Can we get it
+under control? Can we throw everything at it that we possibly
+can? Simply reopening is not going to get people on airplanes.
+It is not going to get them into a theater. It is not going get
+them to a live music venue. It is not going to get them flying
+to Disney.
+ Ms. Williams of Georgia. Thank you, Dr. Spriggs. Like my
+colleagues, I also want to have people get back to work, and I
+want our economy to recover and work for the people. So, Dr.
+Spriggs, could you tell us, in your opinion, what happens if we
+reopen too soon or have a patchwork of States reopening and do
+not have a coordinated reopening?
+ Mr. Spriggs. My fear is that too often, that will be
+accompanied by lowering our barriers on the safety issues, and
+we would reignite the disease. We were warned of that going
+into this fall. People ignored it, and now we have the disease
+on a path we are so uncertain of. We are hopeful that it has
+peaked, but it has peaked now with variants that are even more
+dangerous, so we can't take our eye off the ball. We must
+concentrate on safety first.
+ Ms. Williams of Georgia. As we have heard, communities are
+still being ravaged by the pandemic. Millions of workers are
+struggling to find work, and countless families are facing a
+looming eviction crisis. There is currently an eviction
+moratorium in place by the CDC halting evictions through March
+31st. However, we know that several States, including my home
+State of Georgia, have been continuing with the eviction
+proceedings for months. Mr. Anthony, as we work to pass the
+necessary proposals in President Biden's rescue plan to assist
+families, how can we ensure that CDC eviction moratoriums are
+being enforced?
+ Mr. Anthony. Congresswoman Williams, thank you for that
+question. I think what we need to do is to have our local
+leaders, our mayors and our council members work with the local
+legal center to make sure that the rights of those people are
+not taken for granted. And I think that local leaders are
+committed to that by the programs that they have created, and
+the mayors, again, in your region are models for that. Atlanta
+and other mayors are doing an amazing job in trying to make
+sure that evictions do not occur without some place for people
+to live.
+ Ms. Williams of Georgia. Thank you, Mr. Anthony. As we work
+towards slowing the spread of COVID-19 and ensuring that the
+majority of the country is vaccinated, we must continue to
+provide emergency funding to help families and communities
+recover. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back the balance
+of my time.
+ Mr. Perlmutter. Thank you. The gentlelady yields back her
+time. The gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Garcia, is recognized
+for 5 minutes.
+ Mr. Garcia of Illinois. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and all of
+the witnesses, and I want to thank Chairwoman Waters and the
+ranking member for holding this hearing. This Congress has to
+deliver more relief, and we have to do it fast. And I applaud
+our witnesses for joining us today to talk about how our
+communities across the country are experiencing this pandemic.
+ I would like to ask Ms. Murguia a question regarding
+housing. I thank you for joining us today. As you know, I
+represent a working-class Latino district, and communities like
+mine have been hit especially hard. Essential workers in my
+neighborhood worry about getting their family sick when they
+come home from work. Especially in times like this when money
+is tight, intergenerational living puts entire families at
+risk. And a report came out last month saying that one-quarter
+of Latinos in Illinois think they will miss their rent payment.
+Families are worried about losing their homes. Can you talk a
+little bit about why it is so important to keep families in
+their homes, and tools like rental assistance and counseling
+that can help do that?
+ Ms. Murguia. Yes. Thank you, Congressman. Thanks for your
+leadership on so many issues, but particularly this one. I know
+we have worked on the impact of systemic inequalities and how
+that has impacted communities of color in terms of our Latino
+community, and we are seeing that in healthcare, but of course
+now economically through the pandemic, and in housing in
+particular, and it has been devastating. Our Latino workers are
+the essential workers, and they are being crushed right now by
+this pandemic.
+ And I would just say it is absolutely essential for us to
+up the housing counseling assistance funding right now. The
+Housing Counseling Program gives that early intervention that
+really does empower renters and homeowners to stay in their
+homes, and this support is also accessible to mixed-status
+families who have been cruelly left out of Federal assistance.
+So we do know that there is a high success rate as well. In
+terms of when families and individuals are able to get that
+counseling, it is 3 times more likely to allow them to stay in
+their homes. So we do understand that that helps us prevent
+homelessness and eviction by helping these renters locate
+secure and retain affordable rental housing or stay in their
+homes.
+ So, housing counseling improves outcomes, and that helps
+create stability for these families, and in our economy, so it
+is very important. And what we have found, and as you know, in
+Illinois, Unidos affiliates, like the Resurrection Project,
+have the trust of communities. They have the cultural
+competency and are able to provide the linguistic support to be
+able to effectively connect with these families. That is going
+to be true for housing. It is also going to be true for
+vaccines, which we know have to be more equitable in terms of
+their distribution, and to gain the confidence for our
+community to do that.
+ So, across-the-board, we know that this nonprofit network,
+the community-based networks, become key. UnidosUS has the
+largest Latino housing counseling network in the country, and
+it has proven to be very effective, but we need to grow that
+footprint and its impact with more funding. Thank you,
+Congressman, for your leadership.
+ Mr. Garcia of Illinois. Thank you, Ms. Murguia, and as a
+former housing counselor, I couldn't agree with you more. On
+the special drawing rights, I would like to ask Dr. Spriggs,
+whether it is the virus or the economy? We talk a lot about how
+we are all in this together, but if we don't keep people safe,
+we will keep spreading the virus, and if we don't get money
+into people's pockets, we won't see economic growth.
+ But that is true on a global scale, too. Like many others
+in my neighborhood, I moved to this country from Mexico. It
+matters to me and my community that Mexico is able to fight the
+virus effectively, and, of course, it matters to us here in the
+U.S., and that the global economy recovers. The AFL-CIO is a
+major proponent of the International Monetary Fund (IMF)
+issuing special drawing rights. Could you talk a little bit
+about what those are and why a large issuance is so important?
+You have about 33 seconds.
+ Mr. Spriggs. Thank you so much for the question and for
+your leadership on banking issues. Yes, it is vital that
+governments not face fiscal constraints when it comes to them
+responding on the global scale, and that is why we want these
+special drawing rights. It is not a time right now for finger
+pointing and arguing about which countries we think were
+profligate or anything like that. It is time to let them be
+unfettered in responding, and we don't want them to go into
+early austerity. You don't want them to start cutting their
+budgets and cutting their services because that will hurt the
+rate of recovery for the global economy. And they are all going
+to turn to wanting to export to the United States as their
+number-one answer if we force them into austerity.
+ Mr. Perlmutter. Thank you. Thank you, Dr. Spriggs. The
+gentleman's time has expired, and now we will recognize Mr.
+Auchincloss from Massachusetts for 5 minutes.
+ Mr. Auchincloss. Thank you, and thank you all for being
+here. Our nation's response to this pandemic has revealed
+significant gaps in our domestic ability to rapidly deploy key
+medical equipment and supplies in the face of ever-changing
+requirements. The Biden Administration has taken action since
+day one to accelerate vaccine deployment, in part by invoking
+the Defense Production Act (DPA), but the reality is that it
+will be a while before we have the supply to meet the need. In
+Massachusetts, we have the personnel and equipment needed to
+distribute vaccines. We just don't have the vaccines themselves
+in sufficient supply.
+ My question is for Mr. Anthony. We know that the Defense
+Production Act could be invoked to provide PPE, like N95 masks,
+gloves, and gowns. These are in short supply, and we must ramp
+up their production for States and local governments. As we
+begin to implement our mass vaccination campaign, it appears
+that the supply of the vaccine components will be the limiting
+factor. How can the DPA be used to address this bottleneck for
+States and local governments? How can we use the DPA to
+actually expand the supply of vaccinations themselves?
+ Mr. Anthony. I think that one of the things that most
+citizens have an assumption on, Congressman, is that most
+cities have access to the distribution and supply of vaccines,
+and, in fact, probably 90 percent of cities do not. It is a
+State- and county-level process. What we are hoping is that you
+will partner with those cities, those neighborhoods, those
+churches, and those places in the community so that we can get
+the vaccine in the arms of people very quickly, especially
+people of color.
+ In my State of Florida, where I grew up, they are, in fact,
+using one of the high-class, I would say, grocery store chains
+to get access, and it is not working because those citizens
+don't have access. So, local government is the answer.
+ Mr. Auchincloss. Thank you, Mr. Anthony. I will yield back
+my time.
+ Mr. Perlmutter. The gentleman yields back. Thank you, Mr.
+Auchincloss, and I don't think we have any more Members. To our
+panelists who have shown incredible stamina, thank you all very
+much. I would like to thank you all for your testimony today.
+ The Chair notes that some Members may have additional
+questions for this panel, which they may wish to submit in
+writing. Without objection, the hearing record will remain open
+for 5 legislative days for Members to submit written questions
+to these witnesses and to place their responses in the record.
+Also, without objection, Members will have 5 legislative days
+to submit extraneous materials to the Chair for inclusion in
+the record.
+ Again, thank you all very much for your diligence, your
+stamina, and your testimony today. And with that, this hearing
+is adjourned.
+ Mr. Anthony. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
+ Mr. Perlmutter. Everybody have a good day.
+ Mr. Johnson. Thank you. Have a nice day.
+ Mr. Perlmutter. You, as well.
+ Ms. Murguia. Thank you.
+ [Whereupon, at 2:19 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
+
+
+ APPENDIX
+
+ February 4, 2021
+
+
+
+[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
+
+
+ [all]
+