President Donald Trump is tapping yet another group to advise him on when to re-open the economy: members of Congress.

The Trump administration is inviting a bipartisan crew of lawmakers to participate in a task force to address the central question of when the country should return to normal amid the ongoing coronavirus pandemic.

Trump and Vice President Mike Pence held calls with members of the House and Senate Thursday, after lawmakers received invitations to join the task force the previous day. In an e-mail sent to Hill offices, the White House informed lawmakers that they were selected to serve on a task force "to provide counsel to the president on the reopening of America in the wake of covid-19." The White House added that the name of the task force had yet to be announced and that a full list of members would soon be released.

The last-minute nature of the task force and the call set off a scramble among members to figure out what it was and whether they wanted to participate.

Trump has also gathered leaders of the business community to advise him on when to reopen the economy, and that effort was criticized by some participants as being somewhat disorganized.

Democrats are hopeful it’s a sign that Trump will seek buy-in from across Washington in any attempts to reopen the economy — one of the government’s most consequential decisions in the pandemic.

Trump’s efforts are not without some partisan flare-ups, though — he bashed Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Twitter earlier in the day, for example. It’s also unclear how much influence the sprawling task force will have on the administration’s plans, and Trump already has a group of loyal conservative hardliners in his ear.

On an hour-long call with members of the House panel on Thursday morning, about 20 members shared ideas about reopening the country. Trump, who spoke for just a few minutes on the call, did not repeat his past demands for states to reopen as soon as May 1 — which would go against the guidance of many public health experts.

Instead, Trump spoke “respectfully” of state officials, seemed open to members’ feedback and even complimented California’s Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom, whose state has seen early successes in limiting the spread of the virus, according to a source on the call. Trump also told members that he would be issuing national “benchmarks” for states to help guide their own plans to reopen schools and businesses, many of which have been shuttered for weeks.

"We all talked about working together," House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) told reporters. "It was a very good call ... it was very productive.

During the administration call with the senators, included much discussion about testing, according to Sen. Mike Braun (R-Ind.). But the president also talked about the need to reopen the economy.

"That clearly came out with many senators stressing that," Braun said in an interview, referring to the Democratic push on testing. "But no one [was] really putting the counterpoint out there other than the president and the vice president in responding... that in economics it's called supply and demand destruction.”

A Democratic Senate aide said that Trump "wasn't particularly antagonistic." The president mentioned China in his opening remarks and said that he wanted to open up the economy quickly. He offered some compliments to Democrats and said he wanted to work together on getting a deal on the Paycheck Protection Program, which has now run out of funds.

In the House, McCarthy, Minority Whip Steve Scalise of Louisiana, Greg Walden of Oregon, Patrick McHenry of North Carolina, Susan Brooks of Indiana, Liz Cheney of Wyoming, Andy Biggs of Arizona and Lee Zeldin of New York are among the House Republicans on the task force.

The House Democrats invited to the task force are Reps. Henry Cuellar of Texas, Ted Deutch of Florida, Josh Gottheimer of New Jersey, Ro Khanna and Jimmy Panetta of California, Derek Kilmer of Washington, John Larson of Connecticut, Stephanie Murphy of Florida and Tom Suozzi of New York.

On the Senate side, the task force included every Republican senator except Mitt Romney of Utah, who voted to convict Trump on charges of abuse of power in February during the president's impeachment trial.

The Democratic senators invited to the task force are Tom Carper of Delaware, Tammy Duckworth and Dick Durbin of Illinois, Dianne Feinstein of California, Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire, Martin Heinrich of New Mexico, Angus King of Maine, Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, Patrick Leahy of Vermont, Jacky Rosen of Nevada, Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, Mark Warner of Virginia and Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island.

The task force invitations come as Trump and some congressional Republicans are pushing for a swift reopening of the economy. They are warning the effects of shutting down the economy to prevent the spread of the virus could be worse than the actual impact of the deadly virus.

But Democrats are urging a more gradual approach to restarting the economy and are seeking to dramatically expand testing as part of a first step to reopening businesses.

John Bresnahan, Burgess Everett and Betsy Woodruff Swan contributed to this report.

(Bloomberg) -- South Korean President Moon Jae-in’s ruling coalition scored the largest parliamentary election victory since the end of military-backed rule more than three decades ago, signaling to global leaders that a strong pandemic response can win votes.The ruling Democratic Party of Korea and its satellite group won 180 places in the 300-seat National Assembly, according to data from South Korea’s election commission. Voter turnout was at about 66%, the highest in 28 years, and the results were seen as a show of support for Moon’s handling of the coronavirus outbreak.“This is a reminder that people respond to steady, trustworthy leadership in times of crisis,” said Mintaro Oba, a former American diplomat who worked on Korean Peninsula issues. “Moon Jae-in showed you can win elections on a cult of competence instead of a cult of personality.”The result gives Moon’s progressive camp a three-fifths supermajority, allowing it to push through legislation without opposition votes, including a supplemental stimulus budget announced Thursday. The victory adds momentum to the bloc’s key goals to reduce income inequality by prioritizing wages, reforming chaebol conglomerates and tightening rules on expensive housing development.Shares of companies in South Korea’s nuclear power industry fell in early trade Thursday on worries that Moon victory’s would add to his push to cut back on nuclear power.“Policies that have met with opposition will now be passed more swiftly, and that’s going to reduce policy uncertainties,” said Nam Chang-woo, an economist at the Korea Development Institute. “Given the economy is falling into doldrums, it won’t be easy to implement chaebol reforms right away, but they could come when the economy starts to recover.”Still, Moon fell short of the necessary two-thirds majority needed to enact more significant changes requiring constitutional amendments, such as allowing future presidents to serve more than one term. That term limit will increase attention on potential successors led by former Prime Minister Lee Nak-yon, who defeated opposition leader Hwang Kyo-ahn, in one of the election’s most closely watched races.Hwang said he would step down from his post in the United Future Party. The conservative group picked up seats to reach a total of 103, but mostly at the expense of smaller groups in parliament and not the ruling party.“What the people showed through the election was their earnest desire, a desire that supports the government’s efforts to overcome the nationwide crisis,” Moon said in a statement. “The government will consider this a heavy responsibility, not be arrogant, and listen to the voices of the people in a modest manner.”Early StumblesLike other world leaders, Moon stumbled in his early response to the pandemic, having predicted that the virus would be terminated “before long” only to see cases spike days later. But the government’s focus on mass testing and isolation of the sick to corral coronavirus clusters has been credited with a sharp slowdown in the spread, with new cases now at their lowest levels since February.His approval rating shot up to 57% from 42% during the crisis as South Korea won global praise for its response to the outbreak.South Korea’s decision to hold the election contrasts with some U.S. states that have delayed presidential primaries and France, which suspended some local elections after cases began to multiply. Poland plans to conduct its May 10 presidential election by mail-in ballot.U.S. Secretary of State Michael Pompeo congratulated South Korea on successfully holding an election, saying its “dedication to democratic values in the face of a global pandemic is a hallmark of a truly free, open, and transparent society -- qualities that are necessary in facing the current crisis.” He called it “a model for others around the world.”South Korea took precautions to keep voters safe: They were required to stand at least one meter (3 feet) apart, cover their faces, wear disposable gloves and be ready to submit to temperature checks, while voting booths were frequently disinfected.The virus provided an opportunity for Moon to rebuild support battered by an economic slowdown, corruption scandals involving presidential aides and resurgent tensions with North Korea, which fired missile barrages on the eve of the election in a show of force. The vote came about halfway through Moon’s single, five-year term, a point when an electoral defeat made his predecessor, former President Park Geun-hye, a lame duck and ultimately paved the way for her impeachment and removal.Before the results were released, South Korea unveiled a second extra budget worth 7.6 trillion won ($6.2 billion) to pay for emergency cash handouts to people as the virus threatens jobs and wages.“We’ve seen more defeats of a ruling party in interim elections in Korean history, so this is a rare case that a sitting president wins,” said Lee Jae-mook, who teaches political science at Hankuk University of Foreign Studies in Seoul.Postponing the election would have been a worrisome precedent, with many Moon supporters being among those who took to the streets in the 1980s to end autocratic rule.“South Koreans have been traumatized by living under the authoritarian regimes of the past and see elections as essential,” said Duyeon Kim, a senior adviser on Northeast Asia and nuclear policy at the International Crisis Group.(Updates with comments from Moon)For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.comSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.

An anonymous person called the police department in Andover, New Jersey, on Monday to report that a corpse was being stored in a shed outside the largest licensed nursing home in the state. When officers arrived, they discovered the body was gone, but found 17 others inside the facility's tiny morgue.The Andover Subacute and Rehabilitation Center I and II has 700 beds in two buildings, The New York Times reports. There have been 68 recent deaths of residents and nurses, with at least 26 testing positive for the COVID-19 coronavirus. As of Wednesday, 76 patients and 41 staffers have also tested positive for the virus. Andover Police Chief Eric Danielson told the Times the facility was "just overwhelmed by the amount of people who were expiring." He added, "I don't know if I'm shocked by any means."Most long-term care facilities in New Jersey have reported at least one case of the coronavirus to state authorities. As of Wednesday, 6,815 patients in New Jersey have been infected by the virus, and at least 45 of the day's 351 deaths related to COVID-19 took place at a nursing home."The challenge we're having with all of these nursing homes is once it spreads, it's like a wildfire," Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D) told the Times. "It's very hard to stop it." His office has been receiving calls from worried nurses and family members of residents, and "it's scary for everybody," Gottheimer said. "What is surprising to me is how many are dying in house, versus the hospital."Local health officials were told by Andover Subacute and Rehabilitation I and II staffers that sick patients were separated from other residents, and placed on the same floors or wings. Prior to the pandemic, Medicare gave the facility a one-star rating, or "much below average," based on staffing levels, patient care, and inspections. Read more at The New York Times.More stories from theweek.com Why can't you go fishing during the pandemic? Lindsey Graham keeps breaking fundraising records. His Democratic challenger still outraised him. Legal scholar who defended Trump during impeachment objects to his idea of adjourning Congress

Demonstrators gathered in front of the Michigan State Capitol in Lansing on Wednesday — some staying in their cars, others getting out and standing shoulder-to-shoulder — to protest against the stay-at-home policy enacted by Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D) as a way to fight the spread of the COVID-19 coronavirus.The protest, called "Operation Gridlock," was organized by conservative groups arguing that Whitmer's order, which bans travel between homes and closes down non-essential businesses, is too strict. As of Wednesday night, Michigan had more than 28,000 confirmed COVID-19 cases, and the death toll stands at 1,921. The stay-at-home rules were enacted to prevent the COVID-19 outbreak from overwhelming the state's hospitalsSome demonstrators wore masks to cover their faces, but those who didn't posed a major health risk to those around them, Whitmer told reporters. "We know that this demonstration is going to come at a cost to people's health," she said. "The sad irony of the protest is that they don't like to be in this stay-at-home order, but they might have just created a need to lengthen it."Whitmer also said that while she understands their frustrations, she was disappointed to learn that an ambulance was stuck in the gridlock caused by the protest. "I know that people are angry, and that's okay, and if you want to, take it out and send it my way," she told the protesters. "I urge you, don't put yourself at risk and don't put others at risk, either."More stories from theweek.com Why can't you go fishing during the pandemic? Lindsey Graham keeps breaking fundraising records. His Democratic challenger still outraised him. Legal scholar who defended Trump during impeachment objects to his idea of adjourning Congress

Two days after claiming he had “total” authority over governors to order states to reopen, Donald Trump is threatening to adjourn both houses of Congress if they don’t bow before him. “The current practice of leaving town while conducting phony pro-forma sessions is a dereliction of duty that the American people cannot afford during this crisis,” Trump said during Wednesday’s coronavirus task force briefing, in a move reminiscent of Boris Johnson suspending parliament. He complained that the “phony” sessions, as the House and Senate try to figure out how to meet going forward in a time of social distancing, prevented him from installing more acting officials to posts otherwise requiring senatorial advice and consent. “It is a scam that they do. It's a scam and everybody knows it, and it's been that way for a long time."When one move to exercise unchecked power is blocked (remember his talk about quarantining New York?), Trump just moves on to another one. This time, he’s taking aim at the power of the Senate itself, and the president is doing so over an almost absurdly low-stakes position.Trump Uses Coronavirus Briefing to Try and Bully Congress Into Approving His NomineesAccording to Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution, presidents may, "on extraordinary occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in case of disagreement between them, with respect to the time of adjournment, he may adjourn them to such time as he shall think proper."Regardless of the constitutionality of his claim (for example, the House and Senate do not currently have a “disagreement… with respect to the time of adjournment”), Trump has, once again, found a new way to stress our institutions, upset precedent, and push a maximalist version of his position.“This is the ultimate example of an untested power,” Jonathan Turley, a constitutional expert who served as an anti-impeachment witness (arguing the constitutional case for Trump’s acquittal), emailed me on Wednesday evening. “It is baffling that the President would take such an unprecedented action for such stated reasons as filling a slot on the Voice of America.”Indeed, the appointment Trump was most vocal about expediting was the nomination of documentary filmmaker Michael Pack to head the agency that oversees the Voice of America, a government-funded news service designed to spread the values of freedom and democracy around the world. That’s right. This latest power grab has little to do with fighting the deadly pandemic and everything to do with installing loyalists. While some initially feared Trump would turn Voice of America into a house organ pro-Trump propaganda outlet, the service has maintained its independence and continues to draw the ire of Trump and his team—most recently, when they claimed VOA promoted Chinese propaganda. "If you heard what's coming out of the Voice of America, it's disgusting—what things they say are disgusting toward our country," Trump said on Wednesday.Regardless of his motives, Trump’s latest threat illustrates how, in a crisis, an executive can unilaterally act (or threaten to act) while everyone else has to react.“Even if successful, these appointees would serve under a considerable [amount] of controversy.” said Turley, who previously testified that President Obama's recess appointment of Richard Cordray was unconstitutional. Facing a global pandemic where he was caught flat-footed, does Trump really need to invent a new crisis? “There are a host of potential challenges here including whether there is truly a disagreement between the houses as members work remotely through a pandemic,” Turley said. Trump’s complaint now is that the Senate has moved into pro forma sessions to avoid technically adjourning during a pandemic crisis (thus preventing any recess appointments).  Article One of the Constitution says that "neither House, during the session of Congress, shall, without the consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days." When the same thing happened a couple years ago, a spokesman for Majority Leader Mitch McConnell explained that "to meet our constitutional requirement of meeting every few days, we’re doing pro formas. We didn’t do it to block Trump.”  Regardless, it’s not clear if McConnell, who has spearheaded the confirmation of numerous conservative judicial appointments, (really) wants all of these Trump lingering appointments approved, or whether he has tacitly approved of some of the stonewalling. But he would have to buy in to Trump’s plan for this to work. In order to force this gambit, “Trump would need to get the Senate to adjourn to trigger a disagreement with the House,” Turley says. “Such a disagreement would then trigger his Article II authority which is needed to create a basis for a recess appointment.”Does McConnell want his legacy to be as the Majority Leader who presided over the erosion of the Senate’s independence and the separation of powers? In a sense, allowing Trump to adjourn Congress would be the logical conclusion after allowing him to declare a bogus “emergency” to bypass Congress’ power-of-the-purse authority and fund construction of a border wall with Mexico.  “As usual, the President is playing poker with his cards facing outward,” Turley says. “This will test Republican members and their fealty to their own institution. This is as unprecedented as it is unnecessary.”Read more at The Daily Beast.Get our top stories in your inbox every day. Sign up now!Daily Beast Membership: Beast Inside goes deeper on the stories that matter to you. Learn more.

Jonathan Turley, a constitutional law professor who was a Republican witness during the impeachment inquiry of President Trump, took issue with Trump accusing Congress of "obstructing" his ability to appoint judges and threatening to close both chambers.Trump said Wednesday evening he was considering exercising "my constitutional authority to adjourn both chambers" so he could make recess appointments, adding, "it's something I'd prefer not doing, but which I should do and I will do if I have to." The president can adjourn the House and Senate when the chambers are unable to agree on when to adjourn, but this constitutional power has not been used before by any president.Turley tweeted that Trump appeared to be referencing Article II, Section 3, of the Constitution, "which gives a president 'in extraordinary occasions' [authority] to convene or adjourn the Houses. This power has never been used and should not be used now. The power to adjourn only applies 'in case of disagreement between them, with respect to the time of adjournment.'"Democrats and Republicans have used pro forma sessions to prevent recess appointments. Turley said he has "long been a critic of such recess appointments. Senators of both parties should vote to support the congressional control over adjournment. Absent a 'disagreement' there is no presidential power to adjourn under Article II. A pandemic should not be an invitation for pandemonium. Indeed, we need regular order now more than ever."More stories from theweek.com Airline conducts COVID-19 blood tests on passengers Michigan governor says protesters against stay-at-home order 'might have just created a need to lengthen it' Trump's performance against Biden reportedly improves after voters watch 90 seconds of a coronavirus briefing

President Trump's daily briefings on the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic are apparently working to his political benefit, The Atlantic reports.A Democratic strategist, speaking on condition of anonymity, described a private research initiative in which voters were shown a 90-second clip of a recent briefing. Trump's general election performance against his likely Democratic opponent, former Vice President Joe Biden, reportedly improved by more than two percentage points after voters watched the clip. Considering most polls are indicating a tight contest, that's quite a shift after such a small amount of footage.Per The Atlantic, part of the briefings' purpose is to serve as a platform for Trump to reclaim the narrative about his initial response to the coronavirus, and push the idea that the president acted swiftly. Trump initially downplayed the threat of the virus and suggested further response efforts were unnecessary. Similarly, The Atlantic notes, the National Republican Congressional Committee sent robocalls to more than 120,000 numbers over a three-day period in late March, during which people were polled about Trump's press coverage, followed by a "sympathetic female voice" expressing frustration with the media coverage of Trump's handling of the pandemic. Read more at The Atlantic.More stories from theweek.com Why can't you go fishing during the pandemic? Lindsey Graham keeps breaking fundraising records. His Democratic challenger still outraised him. Legal scholar who defended Trump during impeachment objects to his idea of adjourning Congress

(Bloomberg) -- President Donald Trump says mail-in voting hurts Republican candidates because it enables fraud among other unspecified reasons, an assertion widely called false by fact-checkers.Now yet another study disputes Trump’s claim that widespread mail-in voting would mean that “you’d never have a Republican elected in this country again.”The study by Daniel M. Thompson, Jennifer Wu, Jesse Yoder and Andrew B. Hall of the Democracy & Polarization Lab at Stanford University found that there is no advantage to either Democrats or Republicans to expanded mail-in voting.Looking at states that moved to vote-by-mail county by county, the researchers found that it didn’t affect either party’s share of either turnout or the vote and only modestly boosted average turnout rates.Vote-by-mail “has no discernible effects on either partisan turnout or election outcomes. It is remarkably neutral in its partisan effects,” tweeted Hall.Amash Says He’s Considering a White House Run (12:07 p.m.)Justin Amash, a Michigan representative who left the Republican Party to become an independent, says he’s still considering a bid for the White House.On Monday, after President Donald Trump claimed that a president’s “authority is total,” Amash wrote that “Americans who believe in limited government deserve another option.” When a supporter replied urging him to run, Amash tweeted: “Thanks. I am looking at it closely this week.”On Wednesday, Amash’s campaign told ABC in a statement that he would make a decision “soon.”Amash, a libertarian who is considered one of the more conservative members of Congress, left the GOP in July and voted for Trump’s impeachment. -- Emma KineryAOC Says She’s Not Yet Ready to Endorse Biden (11:11 a.m.)Joe Biden won the backing of progressives Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren this week, but he’ll have to do a little more work to win over Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.In an interview with Politico published Wednesday, the freshman representative from New York said she wants the presumptive Democratic nominee to “clarify” his positions on health care and the environment.“We are having conversations with Biden’s team and we will see what some of these policy conversations are looking like,” she said.Specifically, she wants to know more about Biden’s plans to help Puerto Rico, reform immigration and expand health care, calling his recent proposal to expand Medicare to Americans at age 60 inadequate. “I don’t think the vice president has a climate change policy that is sufficient,” she added. -- Erik WassonComing Up:Voting in Wyoming’s mail-in caucuses ends on April 17. Voting in Ohio mail-in primary ends on April 28.For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.comSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.

President Donald Trump's halt to World Health Organization funding is illegal and violates the same federal spending laws as the Ukraine aid freeze that partly prompted his impeachment, House Democrats said on Wednesday.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Trump’s decision is “dangerous, illegal and will be swiftly challenged," without elaborating on what specific action might be taken.

But a senior administration official contended that language in the most recent spending bill for the State Department and other foreign aid programs gives Trump “broad discretion” in spending money allocated to WHO, including a possible redirection of the health organization’s funding to other international causes after the administration completes a review of the funds in two to three months. Trump announced the review at the same time he said WHO funding would be halted.

House Democrats for months have homed in on the administration’s efforts to slow, halt or redirect dollars appropriated by Congress to satisfy Trump’s personal policy priorities, and they said this is another example.

They said a decision issued by the Government Accountability Office in January also applies to Trump’s action against WHO, which receives $400 million from the U.S. each year. The U.S. is the world’s largest contributor to the organization, which operates on a $4.8 billion annual budget.

GAO concluded that Trump broke the law when he paused hundreds of millions of dollars in critical military aid to Ukraine last summer, declaring that the president can't “substitute his own policy priorities for those that Congress has enacted into law.“

Democrats said Trump is breaking that law again. “In a desperate attempt to deflect blame, President Trump is violating the same spending laws that brought about his impeachment,” Evan Hollander, a spokesperson for the House Appropriations Committee, said in a statement on Wednesday.

“The President does not have the unilateral authority to withhold the United States’ assessed contribution to the World Health Organization,” he said. “Moreover, refusing to fund the WHO is a foolish step that only weakens international tools to fight this pandemic and future global health emergencies.“

But a senior administration official pointed to language included in fiscal 2020 appropriations law requiring that the administration spend the money on “necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, to meet annual obligations of membership in international multilateral organizations.” The language doesn’t specify that the dollars must flow to WHO, the official said.

“We believe that pursuant to the appropriation, we have broad discretion to spend that money,” the administration official said.

Trump announced on Tuesday night that he’ll hit pause on the health organization’s funding for 60 to 90 days while his administration reviews the group’s handling of the coronavirus outbreak, accusing WHO of bungling the response and failing to communicate the disease’s threat.

Similarly, the administration said it paused $400 million in military aid to Ukraine last summer while it conducted a “policy review,” with administration officials saying that they wanted to ensure other countries are contributing their fair share to the Eastern European region.

In January, GAO concluded that the president can’t withhold funds for a policy reason because it’s a violation of the Impoundment Control Act, a 1974 law that sharply curbs the executive branch’s authority to alter congressionally appropriated funds. The report undercut an oft-stated defense of Trump’s decision to hold the aid back: that it was a lawful exercise of the president’s authority.

“We disagree with GAO’s opinion,” OMB spokesperson Rachel Semmel said at the time. “OMB uses its apportionment authority to ensure taxpayer dollars are properly spent consistent with the president’s priorities and with the law.”

On Wednesday, the senior administration official argued that how the White House manipulates funding for WHO is an entirely separate issue.

Many Republican lawmakers have matched Trump's criticisms of WHO over the past few weeks, accusing the organization of taking a deferential posture to the Chinese government, calling for investigations into the group’s pandemic response and demanding the resignation of WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus.

“The current WHO leadership has proven to be incompetent and shown overwhelming evidence of China bias,” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), a close ally of the president and the chairman of the Senate Appropriations panel that oversees foreign aid, tweeted on Wednesday morning. “Cutting off funding to the WHO at this time is the right move.”

Others, like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, acknowledged the need for reform while stressing that a funding freeze could cause more harm than good as the coronavirus continues its global spread.

“The Chamber supports a reformed but functional World Health Organization, and U.S. leadership and involvement are essential to ensuring its transparency and accountability going forward,” said Myron Brilliant, executive vice president and head of international affairs for the Chamber, in a statement.

“However, cutting the WHO’s funding during the COVID-19 pandemic is not in U.S. interests given the organization’s critical role assisting other countries — particularly in the developing world — in their response.”