Toomey Opening Statement from Today’s Congressional Oversight Commission Hearing
Questions if national security loans made to startups and fundamentally insolvent companies were a prudent use of taxpayer dollars
Washington,
D.C. –
U.S. Senator Pat Toomey (R-Pa.), a member of the bipartisan Congressional
Oversight Commission, offered the following opening remarks at today’s public
hearing examining loans to businesses critical to maintaining national
security:
“In
March, unprecedented turmoil in credit markets threatened the ability of
businesses, states, and municipalities to obtain capital. Credit markets were
on the verge of shutting down, and without intervention, private credit was very
likely going to stop flowing to businesses, states, and municipalities.
“Congress
did not want these economic disruptions to result in gaps in our national
security. There was a very real concern that established national defense
firms, essential national defense firms, could even collapse. The CARES Act
program announcement succeeded in stabilizing the markets, and averted a crisis
in the national security sector. In fact, the top five national security firms
raised over $40 billion in bond sales since March.
“Since
creditworthy firms have generally been able to access private markets, only
those with lower grade credit, or limited access to credit in the first place,
appeared to have applied for national security loans. Of the eleven businesses
that have used the national security loan program, five had negative profits in
2019 before the coronavirus struck. At least three are early stage companies
including SpinLaunch Inc., an essentially pre-revenue venture whose products
are commercially unproven.
“While
I am glad that the national security sector is now stable, I would like to
understand better why the Treasury made loans to what appears to be startups
and what may have been, or close to a, fundamentally insolvent company like the
YRC…The question in my mind is whether or not these loans adhere to the
criteria set out under the CARES Act and whether or not they were a
prudent use of taxpayer funds.”