Coronavirus oversight lags as trillions in relief head out the door

Coronavirus oversight lags as trillions in relief head out the door
© Greg Nash

Democrats are struggling to monitor the Trump administration's handling of coronavirus relief funding at a time when Congress is poised to provide an additional $500 billion in emergency aid and watchdogs warn of massive fraud and abuse.

While party leaders have demanded strict accounting of the trillions of dollars Congress has approved to address the pandemic, they’ve faced hurdles setting up oversight mechanisms, even as the massive outlays start flowing out the door.

Much of the impediment boils down to simple logistics: House committees have not been able to meet in the Capitol for weeks over fears of an outbreak, and lawmakers are quarreling over whether the oversight panels can meet virtually using video-conferencing systems like Zoom.


“It’s absolutely more difficult” to conduct oversight, one House Democrat told The Hill.

Another setback originated in the White House, where President TrumpDonald John TrumpNearly 300 former national security officials sign Biden endorsement letter DC correspondent on the death of Michael Reinoehl: 'The folks I know in law enforcement are extremely angry about it' Late night hosts targeted Trump over Biden 97 percent of the time in September: study MORE this month fired the head of an administrative panel created by Congress to oversee the historic relief effort. And a separate post designed to ensure transparency — the special inspector general for pandemic recovery — remains empty while the Senate weighs the fate of Trump’s nominee Brian Miller, a loyalist who faces significant obstacles to confirmation.

Senate Minority Leader Charles SchumerChuck SchumerTrump to lift Sudan terror sponsor designation Ocasio-Cortez, progressives call on Senate not to confirm lobbyists or executives to future administration posts The 2016 and 2020 Senate votes are about the same thing: constitutionalist judges MORE (D-N.Y.) has said Miller, a White House lawyer, “is exactly the wrong type of person to choose for this position.”

But Democrats are now dealing with their own controversy.

Rep. Donna ShalalaDonna Edna Shalala'Nodding Woman' behind Trump at town hall is former House candidate Shalala corrects Spicer on HIPAA: 'I should know, I wrote it' Calls for COVID-19 tests at Capitol grow after Trump tests positive MORE (D-Fla.), Speaker Nancy PelosiNancy PelosiGOP blocks Schumer effort to adjourn Senate until after election GOP noncommittal about vote on potential Trump-Pelosi coronavirus deal Overnight Health Care: Trump takes criticism of Fauci to a new level | GOP Health Committee chairman defends Fauci | Birx confronted Pence about Atlas MORE's (D-Calif.) new pick for a separate, five-member congressional oversight panel, made headlines this week for failing to report the sale of her stocks last year, a violation of the federal STOCK Act that requires lawmakers to be transparent about their investment activity.

Shalala, who was Health and Human Services secretary during the Clinton administration and later a university administrator, issued an apology, saying she took “full responsibility” for her error. But that hasn’t prevented Republicans from calling for her removal from the oversight panel.


“I believe in the STOCK Act. I'm a strong supporter of the STOCK Act. … I was doing the opposite of insider trading; I was getting rid of any conflict of interest in the process,” Shalala told the CBS affiliate in Miami. “But I absolutely missed those deadlines, and I apologize for them. It was my mistake. And I take full responsibility.”

Despite the series of stumbling blocks, Pelosi and other Democratic leaders are vowing to charge ahead with their oversight, fueled by reports that funds designed to be a lifeline for small businesses have instead gone to some large chain restaurants, like Shake Shack, and well-heeled universities like Harvard. Both have since promised to return the loans.

Democrats have made clear they simply don’t trust the president, or those on his team, to disburse the funds equitably. Pelosi on Wednesday drove that point home, saying she fully expects the White House to try to use the money for political gain, rather than targeting the businesses, medical workers and COVID-19 victims most in need.

“The idea that they would have distributed those funds in a way that was not in furtherance of ending this pandemic is totally irresponsible, but not surprising,” Pelosi told Bloomberg News.

With that in mind, Democratic leaders have scheduled a vote Thursday to form yet another layer of pandemic oversight, creating a new congressional committee charged with monitoring the massive spending. 

“We will have a bright light shining on this,” Pelosi said.

But while Democrats are characterizing their oversight regimen as nonpartisan, GOP leaders are signaling their opposition, saying the new panel is "redundant" and designed for the political purpose of attacking the president ahead of November’s elections. Fueling the Republican criticism, Pelosi has tapped Majority Whip Jim ClyburnJames (Jim) Enos ClyburnCedric Richmond's next move: 'Sky's the limit' if Biden wins Candymakers meet virtually with lawmakers for annual fly-in, discuss Halloween safety OVERNIGHT DEFENSE: Top general negative for coronavirus, Pentagon chief to get tested after Trump result l Top House lawmakers launch investigation into Pentagon redirecting COVID-19 funds MORE (D-S.C.), a top surrogate of presumptive Democratic nominee Joe BidenJoe BidenNearly 300 former national security officials sign Biden endorsement letter Trump narrows Biden's lead in Pennsylvania: poll Florida breaks first-day early voting record with 350K ballots cast MORE, as the panel’s chairman.

“The Speaker tried to commit to me that this would be a bipartisan committee. I told her I don't view it that way. I view it more as a political one,” House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthyKevin Owen McCarthyConservatives seize on New York Post story to push Section 230 reform Sunday shows preview: Coronavirus cases surge in the Midwest; Trump hits campaign trail after COVID-19 OVERNIGHT ENERGY: EPA may violate courts with new rule extending life of unlined coal ash ponds | Trump reverses course, approving assistance for California wildfires | Climate change, national security among topics for final Trump-Biden debate MORE (R-Calif.) told reporters Wednesday. “I don't see a lot of members voting for it on our side."

House lawmakers are set to return to Washington on Thursday morning to vote on a $500 billion emergency rescue package to provide more funding for small businesses, hospitals and COVID-19 testing. It will mark the first time many lawmakers will have set foot in the Capitol since March 27, when they passed the $2.2 trillion CARES Act, the largest such economic aid package in U.S. history.

Their weeks-long absence from the Capitol has made it extremely challenging for Democratic-controlled House committees to conduct any oversight of Trump’s response to the coronavirus crisis or his administration’s distribution of trillions of dollars in small-business loans, expanded unemployment benefits and relief checks.

Still, some are trying to keep tabs.

The House Small Business Committee, led by Rep. Nydia VelazquezNydia Margarita VelasquezDemocratic Rep. Carbajal tests positive for COVID-19 The red herring of Puerto Rico's Status Convention Ocasio-Cortez, Velázquez call for convention to decide Puerto Rico status MORE (D-N.Y.), held a private, members-only phone call with Small Business Administrator Jovita Carranza on Wednesday to raise concerns about CARES Act implementation and other issues, lawmakers said. The committee is also planning a public meeting on Thursday, though most other House panels have not scheduled such gatherings in order to comply with social-distancing guidelines in the Capitol.

Complicating oversight efforts, Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam SchiffAdam Bennett SchiffHillicon Valley: DOJ accuses Russian hackers of targeting 2018 Olympics, French elections | Federal commission issues recommendations for securing critical tech against Chinese threats | House Democrats slam FCC over 'blatant attempt to help' Trump Federal commission issues recommendations for securing critical tech against Chinese threats Ratcliffe, Schiff battle over Biden emails, politicized intelligence MORE (D-Calif.) and Homeland Security Chairman Bennie ThompsonBennie Gordon ThompsonLong-shot Espy campaign sees national boost in weeks before election House chairman asks Secret Service for briefing on COVID-19 safeguards for agents Hillicon Valley: House panel says Intelligence Community not equipped to address Chinese threats | House approves bill to send cyber resources to state, local governments MORE (D-Miss.) have drafted competing bills that would create a 9/11-style commission to look into why the government failed to stop the spread of a virus that has already killed more than 46,000 people nationwide. It’s unclear if or when such a bill would get a vote on the House floor, and the GOP-controlled Senate would be unlikely to take it up if it’s passed.

On Wednesday, some progressive groups and the House GOP’s campaign arm called for Shalala to resign from the oversight board. But Shalala said she didn’t feel her mistake was disqualifying, and Pelosi indicated she was standing by her pick for the panel.

In a statement, Pelosi spokesman Drew Hammill said Shalala took “aggressive steps” to avoid any appearance of a conflict of interest upon arriving in Congress last year and has been working with the Ethics Committee to address the matter.

“As a distinguished administrator who has spent many years in public service, Congresswoman Shalala has the Speaker’s complete confidence as she works to hold the Administration accountable to the taxpayer through the CARES Congressional Oversight Commission,” Hammill said.

In her CBS interview, Shalala said she planned to heavily scrutinize the corporations that received some of the billions in bailout funding, including major airlines.

“Here's what I'm worried about: I'm worried about fraud. I'm worried about mischief,” she said. “And I'm obviously worried about: did these companies simply take the money and leverage it for more money?”

-- Updated at 6:06 p.m.