 All right, I think I'm going to get started. I know we only have you for an hour, Congressman Welch. So others will join as we get going. Welcome, everyone. I'm Betsy Bishop, President of the Vermont Chamber of Commerce. And today we're excited to kick off our new virtual policy series, starting with Congressman Peter Welch as our first guest from Vermont. Fortunately, he's here in this state where it's nice and safe and we can stay distant and safe. So I appreciate him being here. This series will run each Monday afternoon through December and will bring together government and business leaders to get your questions answered, provide personal access to key Vermont leaders, and bring you up to speed on important policy. I'd like to say special thanks to our sponsors for this event, AT&T, Northfield Savings Bank, and MVP. We're glad to be able to offer this series to our members and members of other chambers across the state. Just a quick couple of notes of housekeeping first. We ask that you remain muted with your videos turned off. I encourage you to watch today's event in the active speaker view. This event is being recorded and we will send you a link to the recording later this week. As a note, there may be press on this call and they may be watching it in the future. Just so that you are aware of that. We did collect questions during registration and we'll try to get to all of them. I also encourage you to use the chat function today in your sidebar. We have staff who will answer questions in the sidebar as well as we will be asking them of Congressman Welch as we go forward. So we have just about 100 people registered for the call today with a great geographic diversity throughout the state. About a quarter of it today are in the hospitality industry and about another quarter in business services and business organizations with the remaining in manufacturing, higher education and retail. So let's now turn our attention to Congressman Peter Welch who was first elected to Congress in 2006 and has become a champion of remonters throughout his career. In Congress, he is a leading advocate for rural economic development, cutting the price of prescription drugs, investing in our infrastructure and expanding broadband and telemedicine in rural America. I will now give the Zoom mic to Congressman Welch. Thank you very much Betsy. And I'm really, really grateful to all of the Vermont businesses that are on this call. And let's get right to it. This is such a challenge and no one knows it better than you and especially the hospitality industry. This came out of nowhere and it was seven months ago when the governor issued his emergency order. And I think all of us in Vermont are rightly proud at how successful this state has been with Governor Scott's leadership to have the lowest COVID infection rate in the country. Thank goodness the health and safety of people we love, our own health and safety is very much connected to the good job that government has done and Vermont citizens have done and Vermont businesses done. But there's a huge economic price of that has been exacted as a result of this. And we got a start in Washington with the CARES package. And it was an unprecedented amount of money, the payroll protection to over $2 trillion. And it was something that was negotiated by Speaker Pelosi and Senator McConnell. And there are two folks who don't see eye to eye on almost anything, but they did that and they did it and thank goodness, President Trump signed it. But I think the reason it was done is because it was so clear that the impact of COVID was universal. It didn't matter whether you were a Democrat in a blue state or Republican in a red state or Republican in a blue state, you were hammered. And if you were working in a restaurant, you're out of work. If you owned a restaurant, you were just desperate to try to figure out, how do I keep the lights on? How do I get to the other side of this? How do I take care of my employees? So the initial round helped with some limitations. We had the payroll protection plan that was helpful and I was the sponsor of this, heard from people around this call that it was too inflexible and we adjusted it and made it flexible. Again, that was bipartisan. That $1,200 check helped people pay their rent. And then the unemployment, it had some controversial aspects to it, but the fact is it kept the economy afloat and helped people save a little money to try to be able to get through. And then in addition to that, there was significant money that went to the state of Vermont. And then I was really pleased about that because that meant that my appeal here, our legislators and our governors, you have much more direct access to them. We're able to hear you about how best to utilize that money to try to keep us going. And here's the challenge. We're seven months in. The money from the CARES program has dried up and we need to take the next step. And I'm gonna say this very explicitly. We're borrowing money and I'm a pay-as-you-go person, but this is a once-in-a-hundred-year event. And my goal is to try to make certain through the assistance that only the federal government can provide that these Vermont businesses, that our hospitality industry, that our performance spaces, our nonprofits, that when we get to the other side of COVID, you'll come with us. And that's a big, big challenge. But that's my goal and it's why I'm a strong advocate of another round of relief. We've got to help those businesses be able to hang on. And I drop into businesses now. I was down at the coffee cart in Main Street. And this is the story a lot of you have had. They had their best January this January, the best February this February. In March, they lost 10 days, but still beat last year. And then boom, they can't sell sandwiches. And PPP helped him hang on, but he doesn't know how long this is gonna go on. So we've got to be there. We're not having the same agreement right now about trying to resolve this new round of aid that we had at the CARES package. And there's a split. I'll tell you what it is. The house did pass a bill 3.4 trillion. That was rejected by the Senate, by Senator McConnell and the president. The house passed another bill. It's a 2.4 trillion. And now we're negotiating on that. And my hope is that we do get an agreement before the election, because I think it'll be tougher after the election. And I just literally got off a caucus call with the Democrats getting a report on where the negotiations are that are taking place largely between Speaker Pelosi and Secretary Mnuchin. And there's three elements in the negotiations. One is the economic aid. And the economic aid continues to be around these categories that are universally beneficial. Whether you're, this I say, whether you're, it just doesn't matter what your political orientation is. If you're out of a job, you need some help. It doesn't matter what your political orientation is. If you run a hospitality, a beautiful bed and breakfast that you just poured your heart and soul into, it doesn't matter what your politics are. When the phone rings, it's a cancellation. That's a disaster. So my real focus in trying to get the Democrats to agree with me is let's get what we can on the economic aid on unemployment, on PPP, on state and local assistance. And I do think we need to help our schools and we need to put some money obviously into steps that are gonna attack the coronavirus. But the one category where I'm hopeful that there can be bipartisan supports on this economic aid that all of us represent people in businesses that are gonna continue to need help until we get that coronavirus taken care of. The second part of the negotiations are really important, but I'm not sure it'll get resolved right away. And it has to do with the language of testing. It has to do with assurance that the administration will give. And I'll be candid on this. These are areas where Congress can appropriate the money. It can authorize the policy. But if the executive isn't interested in actually implementing it, there's not much we can do. So frankly, from my perspective, having a debate about these details in the language is not that important when, and again in candor, I don't have much confidence that the administration has the same sort of focus on this that say our Vermont administration has. And there's gonna be an election, there's gonna be a decision by the American people that's in two weeks with a few extra days and we'll be able to take that next step depending on what the American people decide. So, and then the third element is things that may be poison pills. And I don't know what those are. Those would be some things that maybe the administration wants, but they're really not disclosed what those things may be. But I see that as something in issues like liability protection, which is I know important to a lot of folks on this call. I don't want an inability to reach an agreement on that right now to get in the way of us reaching an agreement on what I think is urgently, as in now, needed financial assistance to our states, to our businesses, to our individuals. So the where it stands at the moment is that there's ongoing aggressive negotiations largely with the speaker and with Secretary Mnuchin on behalf of the administration. I think Senator McConnell has indicated that he doesn't have that much desire for a deal. He has indicated opposition essentially to aiding state and local governments. And but what he's indicated that gives me some hope is that if President Trump agrees, then I think Senator McConnell has said that if it's okay with the administration and the house, then he, Senator McConnell, will put it on the Senate floor for a vote. So I am as a member of, as your representative and as a member of the caucus, I am advocating very energetically that we focus on the economic part of this package and that we do that as soon as we possibly can. And so I do believe that in this once in a century event that the more we do now, the sooner we'll get out of this and return to normal. Keep in mind, the economy is racked not just because there's been a bad business cycle, it's not because there's been bad management. It's not because there's been a failure in any particular region or location. This is a result of a event that created the necessity of the social distancing and really had an impact on our whole economy. So urgent response to that in my view is needed. We are borrowing money and we're gonna have to deal with that. But I have taken the position that doing more and doing it sooner is better than doing less and doing it later. And the sooner we get our economy back to a semblance of normal. And I think we can, then the sooner we're gonna be able to restore, well, the sooner we'll start being able to deal with that deficit. So Betsy, let me stop there, but I'll end where I began. And that is a sincere thank you to folks who are running these your businesses and put heart and soul into everything that you've done. I've talked to many of you and what I know is that in addition to your own personal situation and financial jeopardy and anxiety, you're really close to the people that work for you. And it's like family and you're doing everything you can to try to get through this. And my job is to try to help, it is to get resources to you so you can make it through. Thank you. Thank you Congressman Welch. There's so much to unpack there but that you just talked about. First of all, I think I can speak for many of us on the call that we just appreciate you knowing the struggle and being able to acknowledge directly to the Hill with you. It is really important. I think in other states, maybe they're not as fortunate as Vermonters are to be this close to our representatives. And so thank you. And I think I'll start with a comment that we received prior from Gail Warner at the old Homestead B&B in the kingdom who expressed a thought. I think many Vermonters share and she said, I appreciate your speeches on the Senate floor. They are to the point, good thoughts and content and well-delivered. Your presence in the Senate, she said Senate but it should say your presence in the house makes me a proud Vermonter. So I think that concept of being a proud Vermonter and being proud of having you represent us, I think that's really helpful. Very kind, very kind. I think I'd like to sort of start with the hospitality industry. We've got several questions from folks and I will encourage folks on the call listeners that if you'd like to add a question, please use the chat function and we will bring those into the conversation as well in addition to what folks have asked prior. But I'd like to start with some questions more specifically around the hospitality industry as that has been hit the hardest for certain. And I think you just recognize that. I think Courtney Lowe of the Woodstock Inn and Resort says it best when he asks the question, what will it take to get this next funding passed? And so you talk about some of the struggles. Well, yeah. It would be really helpful for us to know is what will it take? Well, there's two things, okay? One, I think what we have to do on the democratic side in these negotiations that are undergoing right now is focus just on the economic aid. There's the economic aid, there's the health aid and then there's some policy fights and disputes between the White House and I guess really the House Democrats, because those are the players here. My focus right now is let's do the economic aid. And the reason I say that is that times are the essence and anything we do like on payroll protection plan or unemployment, that is a benefit that goes out universally. So we won't have the kind of fights that are legitimate disputes about policy language, okay? I don't want those disputes about policy to get in the way of getting money out the door to keep our businesses going while we deal with the healthcare issue. Now, that's a debate within the Democratic caucus but I'm firmly on the side of move quickly, hopefully before the election on the economic aid. The second thing, and again, I'll be candid but we all know there is an election on November 3rd. One of two things is gonna happen. The American people are gonna decide to keep things the way they are. And frankly, I think that's really detrimental to the prospects of significant economic assistance just given the position that has been taken by Senator McConnell, okay? Or the American people are gonna say, you know what, we wanna change. So we'll get another bite of the apple. So if there is a new Congress where you've already got the House that has voted for significant economic assistance and where the orientation is to stay the course here and we get a different Senate then they're gonna take our legislation up. So the bottom line, my view, if I were Courtney Lovett, then we'd stock in. I'd say, Peter, do it now. You know, we don't wanna wait two months, okay? And I agree with that. And I'll do all I can to make it happen now. But if we don't make it happen now, I'll do all I can in January to make it happen then. So we're working with some of our partners in DC to try to influence people beyond just Vermont so that we can get chambers of commerce, for instance, across the country talking to, so the Kentucky Chamber of Commerce can talk to their Senator and their members to try to help push this as well as sort of broadening the coalition. I see in the chat that Sophie Zatney from the Chancellor of the Vermont State Colleges is asking, what's the likelihood of spending these CRF funds beyond December 30th? And I think there's sort of two things there. I think that's existing CRF funds we know or until that, but are you advocating for this new phase of funding to be beyond where we are today so that it can carry people into the first quarter of the calendar year or beyond? I am, I am very strongly. And in fact, I've urged Speaker Pelosi to let us have a standalone bill that would extend that December 31st date for utilization of the CARES money for another year. Again, that's money that's authorized, it's available. There was hope way back in ancient history of March that we'd be on the other side of this around now. And that's not happening. So I totally, I believe in that. The HEROES package that we passed, the aid package from the house that hasn't gone anywhere in the Senate does extend that date. I think we'll get there. As you know, Governor Scott is pushing very hard for that as are his fellow governors, Democratic and Republican, and it just makes a lot of sense. So I think we'll get there, but it's gotta be frustrating for you that we're not there. And that's one of those places, as I said, where I'd promote doing it all standalone. I think I know a lot of my Republican colleagues agree with us on that. So one of the other questions that we get frequently and that came Sarah Morris from the Basin Harbor Club and Resort did mention this as well. And that is, what type of input are you getting? How do you decide who gets the funding? And I'm just talking about the economic aid portion here. Can you anticipate that there will be industry earmarks or a heart? Well, there's two things, okay? Number one, the most important thing is to have it be categorical in that pick winners and losers. So, the aid that went out initially with PPP, it was focused on smaller enterprises. We had to make some adjustments on that as well. But number two, I am open to industry specifically. For instance, our performance spaces. I heard from a lot of folks in Vermont around the country, but this is about performance spaces, like say the Flynn or the comedy club in Burlington to mention too, where the Westin Playhouse. A lot of these organizations are incredibly important in their community. They're part of an ecosystem. A lot of people might go to dinner before they go out to see a performance. But these are places that are gonna be the last to open and to have that revenue coming in from patrons. And the performance venues got together and created an organization that put together a proposal and it resulted in the Save Our Stages legislation that I'm the original sponsor of in the house with Roger Williams, a Republican colleague from Austin, Texas. And we now have over 200 sponsors, okay? And that's to specifically your mark money for them. Now hospitality is in a similar situation, okay? Because people can't really come if there's quarantining. And of course we got bad news last week where because of the spike in the COVID cases, a million fewer people are able to come to Vermont without the quarantine, okay? So what's different here about the performance spaces and the hospitality venue is that that national organization helped put together a coherent package so it wasn't just an entity in Stowe asking for it or an entity in Dover, all right? So my encouragement to folks in hospitality is to do, let's see what you're doing with your fellow chambers of commerce and that is get together but also get something specific that you're asking for because there is an appetite on both sides of the aisle to help you in your counterparts. What you're doing, others are doing, as you know, in every state in the union. So part of the first phase of funding, Vermont benefited in a great way because of the small state minimum getting one point by a billion dollars, which is a huge amount for Vermont. I've been saying for some time now, the hole is so deep and so wide, there's never going to be enough money here or in any other state. Do you expect that small state minimum to hold firm in any other future? Is that just sort of a natural part of the discussions or is that something that we also have to fight for? No, we always have to fight for it but in the past we've always won and we're blessed in many ways. You know, Senator Jeffords was a great advocate of that and champion, he got a force in the transportation agency. We now have Senator Leahy, who's the vice chair of the appropriations committee. So he's in an absolutely critical position to help for monitors keep that small state minimum. Our big state colleagues present it, but that's their problem, that's how we see it. So we'll keep fighting. That's great. I'm gonna ask you to take out your crystal ball a little bit. Karim Horry from the Woodstocker Inn has suggested that many lodging properties and restaurants are trying to plan for 2021. I suppose all businesses are right. And just trying to figure out how long some of these economic restrictions will continue, much of that is up to the states but if we have a change in direction with a presidential election coming up, do you anticipate there to be more national focus on that? And if you could think about quarter one, quarter two of the new year, what do you see for the economy going? Well, you know, he's asking the question that all of us ask. And I mean, it has this special urgency if you're running a hospitality business. The Woodstocker is a beautiful place, right very close to the Woodstock Inn. But you know the answer to the question is gonna depend on the virus. And we've had, it's been terrible in the United States how we've responded as a nation, not as a state by state. Vermont's been fantastic. And Hampshire's done a great job. Massachusetts done a great job. New York. But we've got 4% of the world's population and we've had 24% of the world's coronavirus deaths. And other countries have done really well by doing the things that have to be done but everybody doing that. You know, New Zealand's totally open. South Korea where it started, you know, it was one of the early, South Korea had their first case the same day we had our first case, like January 19th, they're open. And it's because there was concerted, consistent participation in the mask and the social distancing, the washing of hands, those things that you have to do. So we've had an erratic response from the president on that. And you need a unified response at the national level just like for our state to do well we have to have consistent leadership from our governor. And he's provided that. So I think if you have a Biden administration, they've made, he's made, I mean, just look, he mirrors the mask President Trump doesn't. I mean, that's that. So I think there'll be a lot more focus on the public health guidance in a different, in the Biden administration. And that'll be beneficial, I think to all of us. Also, there is promise on the vaccines in this scenario where I think the Trump administration is doing as good a job as we can do. I mean, there's an immense amount of resources going into research with several companies having some promising drugs. Second, there has been, I think, a real acceleration of the approval process without not, not by cutting corners, but by ramping up the capacity to do the clinical trials that are necessary to get to a scientifically based conclusion about efficacy. And then third, and this is really important, there's been a significant amount of investment in ramping up the production capacity to manufacture the vaccines once a vaccine is found. Because if we don't have that ready, you could literally see on day one, there's a conclusion this vaccine works. Well, now what? We've got to manufacture it. So the Trump administration has in fact been doing significant investing in having that capacity for manufacturing and distribution. And by the way, that is a huge practical challenge. A couple of these vaccines that are very promising have to be stored at radically low temperatures, like not your freezer, okay? And UPS and FedEx, they've been building facilities for the cold, super cold storage of this. So I think that we get a vaccine. We've got steps here to get it manufactured and get it distributed. I'm going to take you on a little tangent because you brought up sort of the drug, sort of vaccine manufacturing distribution, sort of all of that, but I'm gonna come back to hospitality in a minute. Rebecca Copans from Blue Cross Blue Shield of Vermont asked a question on this topic. And I just wanna bring that in here. The federal government has invested over $2 billion in supporting private drug manufacturers in developing a COVID vaccine. How can you ensure that the manufacturers who receive those public funds will keep the price of the vaccine affordable to the taxpayers who funded it? Well, she's totally, totally right. I mean, this is another example where whatever is produced will be a significant result of research funded by taxpayers. And let's start with the hope that the drug companies understand this has got to be totally affordable. Number two, I think with the COVID vaccine, my preference is that it'd be free to the consumer because the sooner we get an effective vaccine and the sooner you and I take the vaccine, the sooner we get rid of community transmission. So I think two things, the authority of government should be used to make certain we're not getting ripped off on the price. There's a fairness issue, number two, because the taxpayers are financing this. And number three, more broadly, we deploy the vaccine and the sooner we do it, the sooner it's effective, then the sooner all of us are gonna go back to life as normal. Well, we're all hoping for life as normal. I am one that is convinced that some of these changes may be here to stay. I'm just not sure which ones yet. So one of the things that was in the chat, Lynn Green from Orkidney's Inn in Bennington asked, do you expect any pushback? We talked a little bit about pushback of the small state minimum and how senatorly he can be really instrumental to that. But Lynn Green asked specifically, if we thought that there would be any pushback because Vermont is so healthy and your colleagues might suggest, let's start looking at the states where are less healthy and directing money in that way as opposed to more evenly across the board. No, I don't worry about that. In fact, that's one of the things that I hope does come out of this. We've got way too much division and conflict in this country about silly things, right? It's like the kind of partisan stuff that we do. What does COVID show us? It shows us that it is universal in its capacity to do harm. I mean, everybody from a frontline worker to the president of the United States can get COVID. You know, it's not a red, state, blue, state type of thing. We also see how the impacts of it are just brutal. Five million people who lost their jobs that overnight when we had to do that social distancing, they had employer-sponsored healthcare and boom, it was gone. The cost of healthcare, even with Obamacare, was more than they could really afford. So the things that we have to do to help people through this, they're universal. That's where I get some hope is that seeing that the challenge has universal adverse effects and that the remedies are universally beneficial regardless of your political persuasion. May remind us that we have much more in common than we do that divides us. And we all know this country needs that spirit. We've had it and it's frayed and it needs to return. So that's a hope I have about the experience we have all endured. But that means we focus on what's gonna help you and what's gonna help me and what's gonna help my neighbor. You know, it's sometimes I feel like we see what's happening in Vermont and I feel that spirit is alive and well here. You know, I feel like our COVID incidences are quite low and they have been low and there is this community effort to pull together. And sometimes you think that, you know, Burlington is so far away from Brattleboro that they can't possibly understand but at the same time we're so small and we're able to pull together. So I share that hope with you. I just hope it's rather than later. I hope the right. I lost your audio. Sorry, do you hear me now? I do, yeah. Okay, sorry about that. So I'm hoping just to ask about, you had mentioned the federal assistance and about helping workers as well. And there's been a little bit of competition as things have started to open up a little bit and businesses have needed workers to come back. There's sort of a prolonged effects and the federal assistant has created a bit of a competition for people to come back to work. This question is from Melissa Moore at the Best Western Waterbury Stow. How does the government intend on balancing that assistance in the future with an incentive to get people to work? So I'm just curious what your thoughts are on that. Well, I mean, she's right. Okay, there was a number in the original plan in addition to whatever unemployment a person would get from the state of Vermont there was a supplement of $600. And the economist, by and large conservative and liberal think that has been extremely helpful to the economy and it allowed actually some people to save money and make the rent payment. It's also created some distortion because you actually had some situations where people were making more money by being on unemployment than they were if they went back to work. And also it was creating some resentment among employees who were working and people that weren't were making more money than they were. So the discussions between the House and Senator McConnell on the new unemployment are focused there's a focus on that with an adjustment to address that distortion that you're talking about. One of the things we did learn from this is that it probably would have been better for us we've got kind of an antiquated unemployment system it's all state administered and of course our computers are way behind it was a wicked challenge for our state to catch up and you remember how much Governor Scott worked on that. But in Europe, what they did instead of just unemployment with that supplement the money that went to the employee went through the employer and it was based on the salary that the employee had. So it avoided that distortion that was number one and number two it maintained as much as possible that connection between the employer and the employee. And one of the things I hear from many of our employers is they're concerned about the potential of losing employees who may have to move or have to do something so they're not around when the lights go back on. So message heard and we're working on it but I also have been a co-sponsor of this legislation that would have done it the way some European countries have done it and it appears to be successful without that distortion. Yeah, and I think what I've heard from a lot of folks the business community is they understand the reason behind helping people, right? A lot of people lost their jobs and we needed to do that. So if there's a better way if that needs to be done again I appreciate you understanding sort of that push and because in order to get to successful recovery we, businesses are only as good as their workers who are working for them. So we need to bring them back in and share that with them. I had a question from a couple of the local and regional chambers of commerce on the phone something that I think we've covered before but I just wanted to know if you have seen any movement in allowing 501C6 organizations to take advantage of some of the federal programming a lot of them have been out of this certainly with a PPP so I'm curious about that. In the HEROES Act we did make more flexibility so organizations like yours would be eligible under ours you wouldn't be able to use any money for lobbying which I think is appropriate but as you point out there's a lot of these organization like yours that are providing crucial services to help us address the consequences. So in the HEROES Act we did have provision that would provide opportunity for you to get some of the help. Great, speaking of PPP, Sandy Croft in the chat she's from VEDA. She was asking what is the likelihood that automatic forgiveness will be granted on the PPP loan program maybe of loans up to a certain size so what are the negotiations like on that? Very good, I think a really simplified process for loans under $500,000. I mean, so I think that's gonna be okay. I mean, I say that with real respect for the anxiety that businesses have seen the revenues plunge having a worry that this money that we want to be a grant may be a loan because you don't need loans when your revenues are hemorrhaging and your expenses aren't. So again, that's bipartisan, okay? I mean, everybody business here doesn't matter who's which you vote, you know, it doesn't matter. So I think we'll be successful there. My understanding is already been significantly simplified for loans under $500,000. So just a reminder to folks, feel free to ask questions in the chat. I'm able to get to them as well as some of our questions as well. So we've got probably about 15 minutes left with the congressman. I've got a couple of questions here but I'm open to additional questions in the chat. Sort of a slightly different subject around the infrastructure and stimulus package and if there is such a thing moving. So Dave Saladino from BHB is asking, what is your perspective on an upcoming infrastructure stimulus package to address pressing needs and to stimulate the economy? We need it. The house past one, a one and a half trillion dollar bill that will include housing broadband, obviously rail, roads, bridges, airports, stations, we need it. And if there's an opportunity to do it where interest rates are as low as they are, this is the time to do it. So the house passed that legislation. President Trump has always said he wants a bigger bill, like a couple of trillion, but I can't speak for Senator McConnell but he hasn't put it on the floor in the Senate. Now I think a new Congress, that'll be one of the first orders of business. I mean, what's gonna happen here? What here's what's happened in Congress in the last couple of years is that the house has really been somewhat ambitious in its legislative agenda with lowering prescription drug prices, justice in policing, and the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act and infrastructure bill of a trillion and a half dollars, lowering the cost of student loans and the list goes on, lowering the cost of prescription drugs I mentioned. In the Senate, Senator McConnell's focus has been on confirming judges to the appellate court and of course now confirming the new Supreme Court justice. But that's it, he literally is not putting any of this other house passed legislation on the floor. And why in the world? I don't know why, all right? But depending on the outcome of the selection, all of that is gonna be actively considered and it's gonna be very, very ambitious and there'll be lots of other challenges, but we won't be facing this division between the house and the Senate where you've got a desire to act in the house and a refusal to act in the Senate. And this has gotta be frustrating for all Americans but the way the Senate's organized, the Senate Majority Leader has the total authority to decide yes or no about putting a bill on the floor. And Betsy, you and I know when we were in the State House, the Speaker, if there was a majority in the House or in the Senate, committee chair in the Senate when I was Senate President, if that committee chair wanted to bring the floor to the bill, to bring the bill to the floor, that chair could. So, we're just not used to this sort of incredible authority that the Majority Leader has. And I wonder about that because, you know, I think about all the businesses through this and I know that a lot of states have different restart, different openings, some are wide open and others aren't, but we're experiencing this economic pain throughout the country. And there doesn't seem to be sort of the traditional pushback that we often hear when we have huge spending bills like this, which is, oh my goodness, we're going into debt. I think this is where you started this conversation, Congressman, is we will deal with that at some point. Certainly my organization, myself in the past, haven't always been like, you know, ready to add more to the national debt or the state debt. But I think in this particular instance, this is a very different time. And so, it's hard for us to understand that calculus, whether it's on infrastructure. One of the things that Vermont needs quite a bit of is really, and the only place that we can get help for this from is from the federal government. And that is with broadband infrastructure. Exactly. And that's in that infrastructure bill. Yeah. No, again, if there are some good things that have come out of this, it is the awareness that you just can't have rural America with any chance whatsoever without having high speed broadband. You just can't, you can't have it. And of course, one of the things that's happening is a lot of folks I'm told by the real estate folks are moving into Vermont. Yeah. And a lot of those folks might be able to contribute significantly to our economic revitalization, but they can't do it without high speed internet. Just can't be done. And again, I'm the head of the internet, the broadband caucus in Congress is bipartisan about 20 Republicans and Democrats. It is a universal need. And, you know, before COVID, we used to talk about kids needing it to do their homework. Now we talk about it because that's how they went to school. And we talked about the advantage of telemedicine, but now for many people, that's the only way they can get access to their doctor. And now it's not just having the convenience of doing some work at home. For many of us, the only place you can work is at home. And all that takes high speed internet. So the case has been made and the need that Vermonters have, I'm their representative, a Democrat is no different than the need that my friend Jeff Bortenberry, who's a Republican in Nebraska, his folks need it in the exact same way that Vermonters who I represent need it. So I just really got one last question for you. And then I'm going to ask you to make some closing comments, but the question is from Bill Parker and Creative Microsystems in the Valley. And, you know, really thinking about the uncertainty and the uncertainty in Washington and really understanding how that's grinding everything to a halt. And so I'm wondering if you can suggest what is it that Vermonters can do to help you press through that? You certainly have a lot of interests that we have in trying to move through that. So I am curious what you could recommend for us. You're muted Congressman. Thanks so much for that. There's kind of two ways. It's such an important question. So much of that requires a creation of a culture. You know, a lot of times in life and in politics, we get into who's right and who's wrong. And most of the time, you know, you're partly right and partly wrong. Or even if the person you're talking to is wrong or you're wrong, it's not with malice. It is just trying to figure out what's the way through. So that kind of respect that we've tended to have and value here in Vermont, it's a way of living and being. And I think the first thing that each of us can do is to have that mutual respect and enjoy of interacting with other people that don't necessarily agree with us and assume that their motivations are exactly the same as ours. Most of us like to think what we're doing is best for Vermont, best for our family, best for our community. We like to think, and you know what? Most of us, that's really true. Even if a lot of times we disagree. So practice that at home. And by the way, I think our low COVID rate is significantly related to that Vermont ethic. You know, nobody really particularly likes to wear a mask. But if you have the satisfaction of knowing that you wearing a mask diminishes the chances that somebody else will get it and neighbor will get the disease. That's a great reason to do it. So practice that in Vermont. In Washington, my job on your behalf is to practice that no matter how difficult the circumstances because I say this and I really mean it. Washington could benefit a lot from a little bit more, a lot of bit more really of them from my way of doing things. So we each do our part here and I do my part on your behalf down there. That's great. Congressman, do you have any closing comments for us that you'd like to leave us with? Well, hang in. I mean, this, you know, seven months and I'm in a fortunate position compared to a lot of people. You know, my kids are older. I'm not trying to figure out how to get them through school. I've got a day job, you know what I mean? Our family is healthy. Folks on this call have a lot of different circumstances but all of you have to run a business that depends on people being healthy to be able to essentially buy your product. And there's a lot of anxiety that's compounded because we don't know when this is just gonna be behind us. We don't know. And it takes an immense amount of fortitude and mutual support to get through this. We will get through it. We will get through it. But we don't know when. But in fact, we do know how and it's gonna be with getting more help financially from the federal government. It's gonna be from creative application of your skills to a totally different circumstance. And it's gonna be with mutual respect and consideration for other people. You know, I have so many experiences and I bet you probably do too. You know, in some of these natural disasters. I remember Hurricane Irene, I was talking to somebody whose home had been ripped in half and I was really, and he just got off the phone with his insurance agent who told him, yes, you don't have flood insurance. And this was a beautiful place, beautiful gardens. And he looked at me and he said, Peter, don't waste your time here. There's a woman down there who's got two kids. She's in a trailer and the thing is destroyed. You know, see if you can help her. It's just, you know, that generosity of spirit. So, you know, I feel very privileged to have this job where my job is to try to help from honors, but each of us can try to help in whatever way we can. We'll get through it. Well, and we will get through it together. So I'm going to ask you one last question. It's not tough at all. Have you voted yet? I have. I voted by mail. And you know what? I'm like, unlike Dr. Fauci, I saw him last night on the 60 minutes and he's gonna vote in person. And he says, you know, you take precautions, it's fine. And they asked him why. And he said, well, he just kind of likes the ritual. So I like going down to the town office or town clerk body, you know, gives me a hard time. And I'm asking who I'm voting for for Congress. It's just, it's just fun to be down there. But Margaret and I did vote and voted by mail and we stuck it in the box down there at the Norwich Town Clerk's office. That's great. So seal sign send next week. So thank you so much for, for having this conversation with us and answering these questions and for fighting for Vermonters in DC. Next week we're gonna have Secretary Jim Condos on to talk about the elections. And that's why I am about that. So thank you for your time. Okay, thank you Betsy, bye-bye. And for those of you who are still on the call our next event in the Vermont Chamber's virtual policy series is next Monday at three o'clock. Secretary of State Jim Condos will be with us to talk about all the ins and outs of ballots, ballots, elections, everything you need to know for the upcoming election. So we hope to see you there. Thank you and have a great afternoon.