[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 162 (Thursday, November 14, 2013)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8051-S8055]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. DURBIN (for himself and Mr. Franken):
S. 1704. A bill to expand the use of open textbooks in order to
achieve savings for students; to the Committee on Health, Education,
Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of
the bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 1704
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Affordable College Textbook
Act''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds the following:
(1) The high cost of college textbooks continues to be a
barrier for many students in achieving higher education.
(2) According to the College Board, during the 2012-2013
academic year, the average student budget for college books
and supplies was $1,200.
(3) The Government Accountability Office found that new
textbook prices increased 82 percent over the last decade and
that although Federal efforts to increase price transparency
have provided students and families with more and better
information, more must be done to address rising costs.
(4) The growth of the Internet has enabled the creation and
sharing of digital content, including open educational
resources that can be freely used by students, teachers, and
members of the public.
(5) Using open educational resources in place of
traditional materials in large-enrollment college courses can
reduce textbook costs by 80 to 100 percent.
(6) Federal investment in expanding the use of open
educational resources could significantly lower college
textbook costs and reduce financial barriers to higher
education, while making efficient use of taxpayer funds.
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Educational resource.--The term ``educational
resource'' means an educational material that can be used in
postsecondary instruction, including textbooks and other
written or audiovisual works.
(2) Institution of higher education.--The term
``institution of higher education'' has the meaning given the
term in section 101 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20
U.S.C. 1001).
(3) Open educational resource.--The term ``open educational
resource'' means an educational resource that is licensed
under an open license and made freely available online to the
public.
(4) Open license.--The term ``open license'' means a
worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive, perpetual,
irrevocable copyright license granting the public permission
to access, reproduce, publicly perform, publicly display,
adapt, distribute, and otherwise use the work and adaptations
of the work for any purpose, conditioned only on the
requirement that attribution be given to authors as
designated.
(5) Open textbook.--The term ``open textbook'' means an
open educational resource or set of open educational
resources that either is a textbook or can be used in place
of a textbook for a postsecondary course at an institution of
higher education.
(6) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Education.
SEC. 4. GRANT PROGRAM.
(a) Grants Authorized.--From the amounts appropriated under
subsection (i), the Secretary shall make grants, on a
competitive basis, to eligible entities to support pilot
programs that expand the use of open textbooks in order to
achieve savings for students.
(b) Eligible Entity.--In this section, the term ``eligible
entity'' means an institution of higher education or group of
institutions of higher education.
(c) Applications.--
(1) In general.--Each eligible entity desiring a grant
under this section, after consultation with relevant faculty
(including those engaged in the creation of open educational
resources), shall submit an application to the Secretary at
such time, in such manner, and accompanied by such
information as the Secretary may reasonably require.
(2) Contents.--Each application submitted under paragraph
(1) shall include a description of the project to be
completed with grant funds and--
(A) a plan for promoting and tracking the use of open
textbooks in postsecondary courses offered by the eligible
entity, including an estimate of the projected savings that
will be achieved for students;
(B) a plan for evaluating, before creating new open
educational resources, whether existing open educational
resources could be used or adapted for the same purpose;
(C) a plan for quality review and review of accuracy of any
open educational resources to be created or adapted through
the grant;
(D) a plan for disseminating information about the results
of the project to institutions of higher education outside of
the eligible entity, including promoting the adoption of any
open textbooks created or adapted through the grant; and
(E) a statement on consultation with relevant faculty,
including those engaged in the creation of open educational
resources, in the development of the application.
(d) Special Consideration.--In awarding grants under this
section, the Secretary shall give special consideration to
applications that demonstrate the greatest potential to--
(1) achieve the highest level of savings for students
through sustainable expanded use of open textbooks in
postsecondary courses offered by the eligible entity;
(2) expand the use of open textbooks at institutions of
higher education outside of the eligible entity; and
(3) produce--
(A) the highest quality open textbooks;
(B) open textbooks that can be most easily utilized and
adapted by faculty members at institutions of higher
education;
(C) open textbooks that correspond to the highest
enrollment courses at institutions of higher education; and
(D) open textbooks created or adapted in partnership with
entities, including campus bookstores, that will assist in
marketing and distribution of the open textbook.
(e) Use of Funds.--An eligible entity that receives a grant
under this section shall use the grant funds to carry out any
of the following activities to expand the use of open
textbooks:
(1) Professional development for faculty and staff members
at institutions of higher education, including the search for
and review of open textbooks.
(2) Creation or adaptation of open educational resources,
especially open textbooks.
(3) Development or improvement of tools and informational
resources that support the use of open textbooks.
(4) Research evaluating the efficacy of the use of open
textbooks for achieving savings for students.
(5) Partnerships with other entities, including other
institutions of higher education, for-profit organizations,
or nonprofit organizations, to carry out any of the
activities described in paragraphs (1) through (4).
(f) License.--Educational resources created or adapted
under subsection (e) shall be licensed under an open license.
(g) Access and Distribution.--The full and complete digital
content of each educational resource created or adapted under
subsection (e) shall be made available free of charge to the
public--
(1) on an easily accessible and interoperable website,
which shall be identified to the Secretary by the eligible
entity; and
(2) in a machine readable, digital format that anyone can
directly download, edit, and redistribute.
(h) Report.--Upon an eligible entity's completion of a
project supported under this section, the eligible entity
shall prepare and submit a report to the Secretary
regarding--
(1) the effectiveness of the pilot program in expanding the
use of open textbooks and in achieving savings for students;
(2) the impact of the pilot program on expanding the use of
open textbooks at institutions of higher education outside of
the eligible entity;
(3) educational resources created or adapted under the
grant, including instructions on where the public can access
each educational resource under the terms of subsection (g);
and
(4) all project costs, including the value of any volunteer
labor and institutional capital used for the project.
(i) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out
this section for each of the 5 succeeding fiscal years after
the enactment of this Act.
SEC. 5. PRICE INFORMATION.
Section 133(b) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20
U.S.C. 1015b(b)) is amended--
(1) by striking paragraph (6); and
[[Page S8052]]
(2) in paragraph (9);
(A) by striking subparagraphs (A) and (B); and
(B) by striking ``a college textbook that--'' and inserting
``a college textbook that may include printed materials,
computer disks, website access, and electronically
distributed materials.''.
SEC. 6. SENSE OF CONGRESS.
It is the sense of Congress that institutions of higher
education should encourage the consideration of open
textbooks by faculty within the generally accepted principles
of academic freedom that establishes the right and
responsibility of faculty members, individually and
collectively, to select course materials that are
pedagogically most appropriate for their classes.
SEC. 7. REPORT TO CONGRESS.
Not later than July 1, 2016, the Secretary shall prepare
and submit a report to the Committee on Health, Education,
Labor, and Pensions of the Senate and the Committee on
Education and the Workforce of the House of Representatives
detailing--
(1) the open textbooks created or adapted under this Act;
(2) the adoption of such open textbooks; and
(3) the savings generated for students, States, and the
Federal Government through the use of open textbooks.
SEC. 8. GAO REPORT.
Not later than July 1, 2017, the Comptroller General of the
United States shall prepare and submit a report to the
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the
Senate and the Committee on Education and the Workforce of
the House of Representatives on the cost of textbooks to
students at institutions of higher education. The report
shall particularly examine--
(1) the change of the cost of textbooks;
(2) the factors that have contributed to the change of the
cost of textbooks;
(3) the extent to which open textbooks are used at
institutions of higher education; and
(4) the impact of open textbooks on the cost of textbooks.
______
By Mr. DURBIN (for himself, Mrs. Gillibrand, and Mr. Markey):
S. 1705. A bill to provide a Federal charter for the National Fab Lab
Network, a national network of local digital fabrication facilities
providing community access to advanced manufacturing tools for learning
skills, developing inventions, creating businesses, and producing
personalized products; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of
the bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 1705
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``National Fab Lab Network Act
of 2013''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds the following:
(1) Scientific discoveries and technical innovations are
critical to the economic and national security of the United
States.
(2) Maintaining the leadership of the United States in
science, technology, engineering, and mathematics will
require a diverse population with the skills, interest, and
access to tools required to advance these fields.
(3) Just as earlier digital revolutions in communications
and computation provided individuals with the Internet and
personal computers, a digital revolution in fabrication will
allow anyone to make almost anything, anywhere.
(4) Fab labs like the Center for Bits and Atoms at the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology provide a model for a
new kind of national laboratory that links local facilities
for advanced manufacturing to expand access and empower
communities.
(5) A coordinated national public-private partnership will
be the most effective way to accelerate the provision of this
infrastructure for learning skills, developing inventions,
creating businesses, and producing personalized products.
SEC. 3. ESTABLISHMENT OF NATIONAL FAB LAB NETWORK.
(a) Definitions.--In this section--
(1) the term ``fab lab'' means a facility--
(A) equipped with an integrated suite of fabrication tools
to convert digital designs into functional physical things
and scanning tools to convert physical things into digital
designs; and
(B) available for a range of individual and collaborative
educational, commercial, creative, and social purposes, based
on guidelines established by the NFLN relating to sustainable
operation; and
(2) the term ``NFLN'' means the National Fab Lab Network.
(b) Federal Charter.--The National Fab Lab Network is a
federally charted nonprofit corporation, which shall
facilitate the creation of a national network of local fab
labs and serve as a resource to assist stakeholders with the
effective operation of fab labs.
(c) Membership and Organization.--
(1) In general.--Eligibility for membership in the NFLN and
the rights and privileges of members shall be as provided in
the constitution and bylaws of the NFLN. The Board of
Directors, officers, and other employees of the NFLN, and
their powers and duties, shall be provided in the bylaws of
the NFLN.
(2) Board of directors.--The Board of Directors of the NFLN
shall include--
(A) the Director of the Fab Foundation;
(B) members of the manufacturing sector and entrepreneurial
community; and
(C) leaders in science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics education.
(3) Coordination.--When appropriate, the NFLN should work
with Manufacturing Extension Partnership Centers of the
National Institute of Standards and Technology, the Small
Business Administration, and other agencies of the Federal
Government to provide additional resources to fab lab users.
(d) Functions.--The NFLN shall--
(1) serve as the coordinating body for the creation of a
national network of local fab labs in the United States;
(2) provide a first point of contact for organizations and
communities seeking to create fab labs, providing
information, assessing suitability, advising on the lab
lifecycle, and maintaining descriptions of prospective and
operating sites;
(3) link funders and sites with operational entities that
can source and install fab labs, provide training, assist
with operations, account for spending, and assess impact;
(4) perform outreach for individuals and communities on the
benefits available through the NFLN;
(5) facilitate use of the NFLN in synergistic programs,
such as workforce training, job creation, research broader
impacts, and the production of civic infrastructure; and
(6) offer transparency in the management, governance, and
operation of the NFLN.
(e) Purposes.--In carrying out its functions, the NFLN's
purposes and goals shall be to--
(1) create a national network of connected local fab labs
to empower individuals and communities in the United States;
and
(2) foster the use of distributed digital fabrication tools
to promote science, technology, engineering and math skills,
increase invention and innovation, create businesses and
jobs, and fulfill needs.
(f) Funding.--The NFLN may accept gifts from private
individuals, corporations, government agencies, or other
organizations.
______
By Mr. KIRK (for himself, Mr. Coons, Mr. Brown, and Mr. Blunt):
S. 1709. A bill to require the Committee on Technology of the
National Science and Technology Council to develop and update a
national manufacturing competitiveness strategic plan, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Mr. COONS. Mr. President, I come to the floor again today to talk
about jobs, about manufacturing jobs, about the high-quality, high-
skill wage jobs America needs for today and for the future.
Today I have introduced a bill which shows that dealing with our
ongoing challenges of supporting our manufacturing sector and growing
jobs in our manufacturing sector can have bipartisan solutions. Senator
Mark Kirk of Illinois joined me in introducing the American
Manufacturing Competitiveness Act, which has a simple but important
objective: to require the creation of a national manufacturing
strategy.
Today more than 12 million Americans are directly employed in
manufacturing. As I have said on the floor before as part of our
Manufacturing Jobs for America Initiative, manufacturing jobs are good
jobs. They are high-skilled jobs, they are high-wage jobs, they are
high-benefit jobs, and they have a terrific secondary benefit in terms
of the other support and service sector jobs that come along with
manufacturing jobs in a community.
We need to know the direction we are heading as a country as we try
to support the growth of manufacturing. We have grown more than half a
million manufacturing jobs in the last 3 years. That is an encouraging
sign. We are one of the most productive in the output of our
manufacturing sector of all the countries in the world.
What we have lacked is a very coordinated strategy between the
Federal Government, State governments, and the private sector to align
all of our investments--our investments in research and development,
our investments in new skills, our investments in infrastructure--to
make sure they are all heading in the right direction.
Do our competitors have national manufacturing strategies?
Absolutely. Germany, China, India, South Africa,
[[Page S8053]]
and Russia all have thoroughly developed, deeply researched, and
prominently successful strategies for how to accelerate and sustain
manufacturing as a key part of their economies.
This bill would amend the America COMPETES Act. It would require
every 4 years that the Secretary of Commerce, advised by a board of 15
different folks, pull together and think through, research, and then
deliver a national manufacturing strategy. This doesn't require new
programs. It doesn't even necessarily require new funding or new
Federal expenditures. It only requires that we coordinate all the
different areas where the Federal Government is investing in supporting
manufacturing and where State and local governments are working in
partnership with the private sector. This may be a small but vital step
toward giving the lift we need for our manufacturing sector to continue
its sustained growth of the last few years.
Why is a manufacturing strategy essential? Because we have a couple
of areas where, frankly, we are falling short--in infrastructure, in
access to capital, and in skills. Having a highly skilled manufacturing
workforce is one of the things we need to do if we are going to win the
fight to regain our international prominence as the leading global
manufacturing country.
The Manufacturing Institute and Deloitte, a global consulting firm,
have both independently concluded that there are as many as 600,000
manufacturing jobs in America today that are unfilled because of a lack
of a workforce with the relevant skills. The Society of Manufacturing
Engineers estimates that number could increased to 3 million by 2015.
So a focus through a national strategy and through some facilitating
investments and legislation by this body and the House and by enactment
by the President and investments across-the-board could deal with these
important skill gaps.
Why are there skill gaps in manufacturing? Many Americans have a
misconception about what manufacturing is like today. They have a
picture in their heads of manufacturing from 10, 20, or 30 years ago
when it required simple labor, when it required repeated routine tasks
such as simply putting on a bolt or affixing a particular piece onto a
vehicle, where there wasn't any teamwork, there wasn't any continuous
improvement required, and there weren't analytical skills required.
That was the manufacturing line of the past, not of today and certainly
not of the future. In fact, the skills required to be successful in
modern advanced manufacturing are quite different from what they were
10, 20, or 30 years ago. Today one has to work as part of a team and be
able to troubleshoot and problem-solve.
There are fewer people working on manufacturing lines, but they are
higher in productivity because the analytical skills they are bringing
to the job are greater than they have ever been before. That is also
why manufacturing can be a more satisfying career, a more rewarding
place to work than it was in the past, because it engages the whole
human being. It engages the whole worker. It allows them to have
ownership of the quality of the finished product.
One of the lessons American automobile manufacturing learned in the
1970s, 1980s, and 1990s as it faced the threat of higher quality auto
manufacturing elsewhere in the world was to not only retool the
manufacturing line but to empower the individual worker to be engaged
in quality control.
Those of us here in the Senate who worked in the manufacturing
industry know what it meant to have gone through a process where we had
to certify. You had to go through a searching auditing process to be
able to demonstrate, if you were a component supplier or if you were
part of a supply chain, that you were meeting world-class standards. In
fact, the ISO 9000 system--the International Organization for
Standardization--and its 9000 series audits that swept through the
country over 20 years and ended up resulting in a higher quality of
manufacturing was just the first of a number of steps toward requiring
those who were working in manufacturing facilities to have a higher
level of skills.
One of the ways in which we have an ongoing challenge is that
manufacturers--medium and small manufacturers with whom I visited up
and down the State of Delaware--don't know the level of skills and the
quality of skills of young people they wish to hire who may have just
finished high school or might have taken a certificate course with a
community college. We don't have a transportable, translatable
certificate for basic manufacturing skills.
One of the innovations of the IT industry was a whole series of
skills certifications that allow someone to know, when they are hiring
a young person to do office support for IT or when they are hiring
someone to be a network administrator, whether they have the practical
skills they need to do that job and do it well. They can't guess that
by where they went to high school or what courses they took at a
college. We don't have a similar sort of reliable, transportable,
translatable, manufacturing skill certification process. That may be a
part of this national manufacturing strategy.
We certainly have heard from manufacturers large and small--not only
in Delaware but around the country--about what they need, what would
put a floor beneath their growth and would allow them to be globally
competitive. No. 1 would be a stronger, skilled workforce; No. 2 would
be more access to capital; and No. 3 would be more and better access on
a fair basis to a global market and a global economy.
We have had a great first couple of weeks with the Manufacturing Jobs
for America Initiative. More than 25 Senators have contributed more
than 40 bills. Many of these are broad or bold or bipartisan bills that
contain the ideas that I think can sustain and grow manufacturing in
the United States going forward. It is a growing menu of bills--bills
that are bipartisan and that I believe not only need but deserve a vote
on the floor later in this Congress.
I am grateful to Senator Kirk for partnering with me in introducing
this bill today, the American Manufacturing Competitiveness Act, and I
am hopeful it will pick up more bipartisan sponsors in the days and
weeks ahead. I also hope, working in partnership with the Manufacturing
Caucus, ably led by Senator Stabenow and Senator Graham, we will begin
to hammer out the bipartisan bills that will deserve a vote on this
floor and that will ultimately reach enactment through the Congress and
by signature of our President. With that, we might well be able to
deliver on what we hear most often from our constituents: Help us grow
high-quality jobs in this country.
______
By Mr. BLUMENTHAL (for himself, Ms. Ayotte, Mr. Cornyn, and Mr.
Casey):
S. 1714. A bill to impose sanctions with respect to Syria, to expand
existing sanctions with respect to Syria, and for other purposes; to
the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, I am here to talk about the Syria
Sanctions Enhancement Act of 2013, which I am very proud to introduce
today, with bipartisan support, joined by my colleagues Senators
Ayotte, Cornyn, and Casey. This bill is a comprehensive effort to
update our existing system of sanctions and to reflect the reality that
President Bashar al-Assad and his murderous regime continue to engage
in a horrible civil war against the Syrian people.
This bill builds upon the longstanding U.S. sanctions regime against
Syria begun in 2004 to deal with that government's policies supporting
terrorism, continuing its occupation of Lebanon, pursuing weapons of
mass destruction and missile programs, and undermining U.S. and
international efforts to stabilize Iraq. Following events in Syria
beginning in March of 2011, a series of executive orders have been
issued to address the ongoing violence and human rights abuses that
have been supported and perpetrated relentlessly by the Assad regime.
Fortunately, Congress has come together on a bipartisan basis to
sanction many people who are committing terrible atrocities. Now is the
time to add to those sanctions, to enhance and enforce them, and ensure
they encompass everyone who is enabling Assad to continue his massacres
against his own people.
I have seen some of the effects of this cruel war in person. Earlier
this year, I traveled to the Zaatari refugee camp in Jordan, with
Senator McCain and Senator Graham, where I saw firsthand
[[Page S8054]]
how the Assad regime has torn families and lives apart. I returned home
from that trip convinced, along with my colleagues, that the United
States cannot stand idle while this war rages on and over 1 million
Syrians are displaced from their country--a substantial part--the
estimates are 30 percent of its entire population displaced from their
homes. I remain convinced the United States should take action not only
with sanctions but with more effective humanitarian relief. Sanctions
are an effective way to cut off Assad's financing and therefore his
source of power. Humanitarian relief is necessary to aid the Syrian
people who have become refugees in such enormous numbers, even as we
pursue those sanctions.
Thankfully, most of the world has come together to denounce and
isolate Assad for his horrible abuses. Appallingly, though, a few--most
notably Russian banks--finance Assad and enable his continued
atrocities.
In September, Senators Ayotte, Cornyn, Shaheen, and I urged the
Treasury Department to sanction those Russian banks that are
perpetrating war in Syria. They are enabling that war as well as the
atrocities it has spawned, and there is significant evidence that some
Russian banks, including VTB, VEB, and Gazprombank, have given
financial cover to Assad and may still be hiding his assets. This bill,
the Syria Sanctions Enhancement Act, would ensure that those actors do
not go unpunished. It would sanction financial institutions doing
business with Assad and his senior officials, and it would also provide
for a full accounting of all Assad's assets. If Assad is hiding money
in Russian banks or elsewhere, we need to know where that money is,
because it rightly belongs to the people of Syria, not to its murderous
dictator.
But our actions against Assad must be wider in scope than simply the
financial sector. Therefore, the Syria Sanctions Enhancement Act looks
at all the perpetrators of horrific violence who empower Assad and it
creates sanctions against them. This bill codifies existing executive
orders that sanction senior Syrian officials and people who sell or
invest in the Syrian Government. It sanctions anyone who helps the
Assad government develop weapons of mass destruction or provides them
with conventional weapons. They are responsible for the majority of
killings in Syria. They are complicit, and knowingly, purposefully--
they are not merely the enablers, they are the providers of those
assets used by Assad against his own people.
We have seen how some unscrupulous arms dealers continue to provide
arms to the Assad regime that enable his killing. Just yesterday, I was
pleased to announce that the Defense Department will stop doing
business with Rosoboronexport, the arms dealer that is selling weapons
to Assad. Think of it: The U.S. Government was financing, with U.S.
taxpayer money, purchases of helicopters for the Afghan Government, to
go to the Afghans with the knowledge that that same Russian export
agency was selling weapons to Assad. It was stopped, but it is just one
example of a company that allows Assad to continue killing his own
people.
This bill also requires the President to submit a list of people
responsible for human rights abuses committed against the people of
Syria. The President must submit a list of those culpable individuals
who should be held accountable for human rights abuses committed by
Assad against his own people, and the bill will sanction anyone who has
provided goods, services or support to enable human rights abuses.
As my colleagues can see, this bill would do quite a few things, but
there are a number of important things it will not do. It will not
prevent the United States from supporting the moderates who are
fighting against the Assad regime, and it would not jeopardize our
ongoing efforts to destroy Syria's chemical weapons stockpile; rather,
it creates a strategic framework to ensure that the prolonged
dismantling of chemical weapons does not serve as a cover for the
international community to ignore the brutal reality of these
slaughters throughout Syria. The bill is carefully crafted to ensure
that the sanctions do not target the people of Syria themselves who are
just trying to survive during a difficult time. That is why
humanitarian relief from this country is of such paramount importance.
Over the past few months, there has been a lot of debate over what
the United States should or should not do in Syria.
Over these past months, the debate has focused on military force and
many have been hesitant to use such military force in Syria. But that
does not mean the United States can or should stand idle on the
sidelines as hundreds of thousands of people are dying and the war
threatens to create a wider conflict in the Middle East. I think we can
all agree, on both sides of the aisle, that we should be strengthening
sanctions against the human rights abusers and supporters of Assad and
his military that is tirelessly, relentlessly, and purposefully
murdering his own people.
This bill is a bipartisan attempt to move forward around the common
concerns of helping the Syrian people. In the coming days, I look
forward to a debate on this bill and the way forward in Syria as we
consider Iran's nuclear program and other important factors. There will
be a meeting in Geneva upcoming. I view this bill as a means of
strengthening our government's hand as we seek peace in Syria and seek
to strengthen those forces in Syria that seek to protect their own
people.
I look forward to working with my colleagues on this important effort
to ensure that the United States continues to stand up and speak out
strongly on the side of the people of Syria against a regime that is
striving solely and single-mindedly to keep itself in power at all
costs, in fact, whatever the cost in the slaughter and displacement of
its own people.
______
By Mr. KAINE (for himself and Mr. Chambliss):
S. 1717. A bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to improve
oversight of educational assistance provided under laws administered by
the Secretary of Veterans Affairs and the Secretary of Defense, and for
other purposes; to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
Mr. KAINE. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Servicemember
Education Reform and Vocational Act of 2013, SERVE. I am pleased
Senator Chambliss joins me in introducing this bill. This bipartisan
legislation will improve the quality of education for our veterans and
military members.
To date, over one million veterans have taken advantage of the Post-
9/11 GI Bill and $30 billion has been invested. Yet graduation rates
remain a concern and the unemployment rate among veterans, especially
young veterans who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan, remains higher
than the national average.
As the United States begins to draw down its forces after more than a
decade at war, it is more important than ever to demonstrate our
commitment to the brave men and women who have served and sacrificed to
protect our Nation. An important part of this commitment is ensuring
our Nation's veterans are prepared for their transition from military
service to civilian life.
In Virginia, one in every nine individuals is a veteran, and we have
27 installations across the State, making Virginia as connected to the
military as any State in the country.
As I have travelled throughout Virginia and have had the opportunity
to meet with servicemembers, veterans, and their families, I have
listened to their concerns and ideas. These conversations have
reinforced my commitment to fight persistent barriers to veterans'
employment, and ensure that veterans have access to quality education
programs that yield results.
For these reasons, it is our responsibility to ensure that the
Nation's investment in veteran education and training yields successful
results and gives these men and women the tools they need to succeed in
the workforce.
I am a strong believer that education is the best investment that any
country can make to ensure the success of its citizens. This is why my
first bill, the TROOP Talent Act, focused on assisting our
servicemembers and veterans in their efforts to gain civilian
credentials and transition into the workforce.
The bill I am introducing today, the SERVE Act, is companion
legislation that will raise the bar on minimum standards that
educational institutions
[[Page S8055]]
must meet to ensure servicemembers are getting a quality education.
The bill will require institutions to disclose information such as
graduation rates, withdrawal policies, and program costs to students
and ensure programs fully deliver what they advertise.
The bill will require institutions to provide access to academic and/
or career counseling for military and veteran students in hopes of not
only improving their chances of graduating, but also helping prepare
them for future careers.
The bill will facilitate the use of VA and DoD educational benefits
for employment training programs by creating a 5-State pilot program.
States will be charged with developing best practices needed to ensure
that quality employment training, apprenticeship, and on-the-job
training programs are available and accessible for beneficiaries of the
post-9/11 GI Bill program.
The bill will require an annual report to relevant Senate and House
Committees with disaggregated information on which schools and programs
veteran and military students are putting their educational benefits
toward.
Today's veterans have been referred to as ``the next Greatest
Generation.'' They answered the call to serve our Nation.
They have put it all on the line and invested heavily and personally
in the future of our country. Let us do everything we can to capitalize
on their experience and character and prepare them for the challenges
they and our Nation will face in the future.
The SERVE Act will ensure that the educational benefits our veterans
and military members earned are being spent on quality education.
____________________