[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 129 (Wednesday, September 10, 2014)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5482-S5487]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
SCHOOL CERTIFICATION
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, on Thursday this country will
commemorate the 13th anniversary of the September 11 terrorist attacks.
We learned many lessons from that day. One key lesson was that
terrorists can and will exploit our immigration system and policies to
enter and remain in the United States and now and into the future
potentially harm Americans.
The 9/11 attacks were carried out by 19 hijackers, some of whom
entered on student visas and trained in flight schools in the United
States. The 19 individuals applied for 23 visas. They lied on their
applications. They failed to abide by the terms of their visas. This
was a wake-up call that we needed better oversight of our visa
programs, especially student visas. But this wasn't our first wake-up
call.
In 1993 the American people were confronted with the first terrorist
attack on the World Trade Center. One of the instigators of that attack
was on an expired student visa.
Since 1993 we have mandated the tracking of foreign students and gave
schools and universities a responsibility to help us monitor these
programs while these students are on U.S. soil. Unfortunately, while
this tracking system is up and running today, it is still antiquated
and the Federal Government remains incapable of ensuring that those
students who enter the country are truly attending our educational
institutions.
Today nearly 10,000 schools across the country accept foreign
students, and those schools are responsible for communicating with our
government about the whereabouts of these students. Enrollment of
foreign students is increasing.
According to the Brookings Institution, the number of foreign
students on F-1 visas in U.S. colleges and universities grew from
110,000 in 2001 to 524,000 in 2012. Despite this overwhelming increase,
the technology and oversight of the student visa program has
insufficiently improved.
Now, 13 years after 9/11, we have sham schools setting up in strip
malls with no real classrooms. We have foreign nationals entering the
United States with the intent to study but then disappear and never
attend a class. I will give just two examples of sham schools.
In 2011, Tri-Valley University reported that they would bring in less
than 100 students but actually brought in over 1,500. Tri-Valley
University officials were caught giving F-1 visas to undercover agents
posing as foreign nationals who explicitly professed no intention of
ever attending classes. Students paid $5,400 per semester in tuition to
the school to obtain those student visas until that school was shut
down.
On May 29 this year, the Micropower Career Institute in New York was
raided by Federal officials. Its top officials were arrested on student
visa fraud. Allegedly, school officials did not report foreign
nationals when they didn't attend classes, and they falsified those
student records so the school could continue to collect Federal
education dollars for those students. But despite the indictment of
officials at this so-called school, it still remains open for business.
The Government Accountability Office reported to Congress in 2012
that sham schools posed a problem. We put a lot of faith in the work of
the Government Accountability Office. The GAO said the Immigration and
Customs Enforcement does not have a process to identify and analyze
risks across schools. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has
overlooked
[[Page S5483]]
major indicators of fraud, and they cannot follow trends or predict
abuse. Two years later the problems continue to exist and the Obama
administration just fiddles while the problem burns.
ABC News investigated the student visa program and made it public
last week. They said 6,000 foreign nationals on student visas have
disappeared. An ICE official acknowledged that they had ``blended into
the landscape somewhere.'' Yet this number of 6,000 is not the total
number of student visa overstays. This is the number of students that
the Immigration and Customs Enforcement is trying to locate. That ought
to be alarming news that it is only 6,000.
It is time to close the loopholes and clamp down on schools that have
a poor track record with regard to foreign students. So this week I am
introducing legislation that requires schools to be certified in order
to bring in foreign students, and it would suspend schools if there are
noncompliance issues. My bill would increase penalties for those who
perpetrate fraud and require background checks and training for school
officials. It would also put an immediate end to a flight school's
participation in the foreign student program if they are not FAA
approved.
Finally, it would require the Department of Homeland Security to
deploy an upgrade to the existing tracking system. This upgrade can be
paid for by using fees from student visas and the schools that
participate.
What I just said aren't new ideas. These are provisions that were
taken from a 2012 bipartisan bill led by the senior Senator from New
York. That bill never passed the Senate. When the Gang of 8 wrote their
misguided immigration bill, they failed to include these reforms. So I
offered an amendment during committee consideration of the immigration
bill last summer and it was included in the bill that passed the
Senate.
The bill I am introducing today is the exact same language. It has
been debated. It was accepted by unanimous consent in the Judiciary
Committee.
I hope my colleagues will seriously consider the bill I am
introducing. It is well past time that we close loopholes and be more
vigilant in the foreign student visa program, especially with the
growing terrorist threat we face.
Remembering James M. Jeffords
Madam President, I wish to pay tribute to Senator Jeffords of
Vermont, who passed away last month.
Senator Jeffords died this last August while the Senate was in
recess. Yesterday, the Senate appropriately adopted a resolution
commemorating the former Senator.
Senator Jeffords is probably best known for switching parties, from
being a Republican to an Independent and caucusing with the Democrats
back in 2001. As much as that switch hurt at the time, I always held
Jim in very high regard and I knew him to be a very honorable man.
Jim and I were both so-called Watergate babies--two of the very few
new Republican House Members who survived the 1974 election after
Nixon's resignation and subsequent pardon. So we joined the House of
Representatives together and became friends then.
It wasn't only a tough political environment back then, it was also a
physical challenge for us. During that campaign year I had surgery on
my leg and was walking on crutches. Jim had been in a car accident and
had a neck brace as a result of that accident.
An amusing story has been reported about the two of us. I didn't hear
it myself, but it had been brought up in a report on the funeral. The
amusing story is about the two of us walking down the aisle of the
House to be sworn in as freshmen after that devastating election for
Republicans--this Senator on crutches and Jim with his neck brace.
Somewhere in the Chamber, a Democratic Member yelled out, ``There's
two more that we almost got!''
The two of us laughed for years about that because of course we had
the last laugh, serving for many years and being elected to the Senate
and both becoming chairmen of committees in this body.
One of the most honorable things Jim did for me and, I believe, for
the country was in regard to the 2001 tax relief bill that was by some
measures the largest tax cut in history. Not many know the history of
that bill. I was chairman of the Finance Committee and so was in charge
of putting the bill together and getting it passed in the Senate. The
process started with a budget resolution with reconciliation
instructions to our Finance Committee.
The Bush administration pressed that year for a $1.6 trillion tax
cut. Senator Jeffords and others insisted that the number had to be cut
by $300 billion because they feared the money wouldn't be there in the
end. Of course, as we now know from history, they ended up being right
on that point a few years later when we sank into years of deficit
spending, but we needed their votes. I made it clear to President Bush
and our leadership that if we wanted to get something done and have a
historic tax cut, we had to lower our sights some and still get most of
what we wanted.
Unfortunately, I took a lot of criticism from my side for supporting
Senator Jeffords and others, but I knew where the votes were and where
the votes weren't. I remember a bunch of House Members even had a press
conference saying some not-so-nice things about me and the idea of only
accepting a $1.3 trillion tax package. But our Senate Republican
leadership wanted a good result, and they agreed to compromise in order
to get it. That is not something you see nowadays around here on very
big bills. If the majority cannot have their way, they just file
cloture and let the bill die, which is why we don't get much done
around here anymore.
But the pivotal point on the 2001 tax bill came right before the time
Senator Jeffords switched political parties. I could never really blame
Jim for his decision. I didn't agree with that decision, but I know he
felt he had been mistreated by some in our party and had strong
disagreements with some of us on issues.
During floor consideration of the tax bill that year, we were near
the end, and the Democratic minority at that time was offering
amendment after amendment to stall the bill. We had gotten to the point
where they were just changing a few words in an amendment and offering
the same amendment again.
At that point I walked over to then-minority whip--who happens to be
the current majority leader--Senator Reid and asked what was going on.
He said: Well, we think things may be changing around here very soon.
Of course, I didn't know what he was talking about and I assumed that
some votes were going to change. But of course he was talking about the
impending party switch that none of us knew anything about involving
Senator Jeffords. Remember, at that time we were split 50/50. Of
course, what that meant was the Senate leadership would change and
presumably the new Democratic leadership would pull the tax bill from
the floor and kill it. So it was important for the Democrats to stall
as long as they could on the bill, anticipating the Jeffords switch.
But to his great credit, Senator Jeffords came to me and told me that
out of respect for me and the way I worked with him on this tax bill,
he would not officially change parties until after the tax bill was
passed. So we were able to finish that historic bill and get it signed
into law.
This little-known episode demonstrates what an honorable man and true
friend Jim Jeffords was. He didn't let politics dictate whatever he was
determined to do, and he stood by his word. I only wish we could see
more of that now in today's Senate. If we did, we would all certainly
be better off, it would be a better place, our policies would be a lot
better, and we would be more productive.
I commemorate Senator Jeffords in his death. My sympathies are with
his family. I will miss him, and I wish him Godspeed.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wyoming.
Mr. BARRASSO. Thank you, Madam President.
Facing Great Challenges
As I come to the floor today, the Senate is debating a plan by which
Washington Democrats seek to restrict the First Amendment rights of
American citizens--part of the Constitution. Under this proposal
certain people would no longer enjoy the same right to free speech and
the same right to express themselves.
[[Page S5484]]
I believe this amendment is a terrible idea, and it really has no
chance of becoming law. Majority Leader Reid wants the vote anyway. He
thinks this outrageous amendment that he dreamed up will somehow help
Democrats win elections this November. The majority leader has come to
the floor repeatedly to criticize and to demonize American citizens who
don't share his views. It is nothing but political grandstanding and
showboating.
President Obama was on ``Meet the Press'' last Sunday. The President
talked about what is going on in Washington. The President said that
``people want to get stuff done.'' That is what he says the American
people want from their representatives in Congress. So if the American
people want us to get stuff done, why are the Democrats in the Senate
so determined to do nothing? Why are they wasting time on political
show votes? Why are they not allowing amendments and debate on
important bills? Why are they blocking legislation that has passed the
House of Representatives with bipartisan support and is right now
sitting on Senator Reid's desk waiting for a vote?
Our Nation faces great challenges, and many Americans are hurting.
Republicans have solutions that will create jobs while strengthening
our energy security, improving our health care, and cutting government
redtape. New numbers came out just last week that show America's labor
force participation rate is at about the lowest level it has been in
decades. The House of Representatives--where Republicans are in charge
of the schedule--has passed more than 40 bills to help get Americans
back to work. Those bills are sitting in the Senate waiting for a vote.
Is that what the President means when he says people want to get stuff
done?
There was a headline in Politico on Tuesday morning that read
``Majority say that President Obama a failure.'' A new poll found that
52 percent of Americans think the Obama Presidency has been a failure.
So what do Washington Democrats do in response? Absolutely nothing.
People want Washington to deal with the challenges that matter most
in their individual lives. We could start by doing something about the
President's health care law that is causing so much harm to people
across the country.
A bipartisan plan has already passed the House that would stop the
employer mandate that businesses provide expensive Washington-mandated
health insurance. That part of the President's health care law forces
small businesses to cut hours--therefore cutting paychecks--for the
workers and is also holding back hiring. We should take up that
legislation here in the Senate.
We should restore people's freedom to buy health insurance that
actually works for them and their families because people know what
works best for them. They don't need Washington to tell them. We should
replace the President's health care law with reforms that actually get
people the care they need from a doctor they choose at lower costs.
The people I talk with back at home in Wyoming are also worried about
energy costs--especially since it is starting to get colder in much of
the country. Washington should be looking for ways to help Americans
produce more affordable, reliable, and efficient energy right here at
home. The opportunity is there. That would mean jobs for American
families, and it would also mean energy security for our Nation.
We could start right now by approving the Keystone XL Pipeline. For 6
years the application has been sitting waiting for action. A bill to do
that passed the House of Representatives with bipartisan support. Why
aren't we voting on that today in the Senate? The Obama administration
admits the pipeline would actually support thousands of good American
jobs. The application to build the Keystone Pipeline has been stalled
for 6 years. The administration should demand action today. If the
President won't do it, Congress still could and should.
Congress should pass legislation to speed up exports of liquefied
natural gas. Our Nation has abundant supplies of natural gas, and
producers want to export it to customers around the world who are
seeking it. The Obama administration has delayed the permits to let
them do it. Democrats right here in the Senate have delayed the
bipartisan solution that has already passed the House. We should take a
vote on that bill today and pass it.
We should pass a bill that would reform the regulations blocking
energy production on Federal lands.
We should end the Obama administration's pointless and destructive
war on coal and let the men and women across this country who work in
that industry get their jobs and their lives back.
American businesses are waiting to create jobs. The only thing
standing in the way is the Senate majority leader. Senate Democrats
don't want to vote. They don't want to vote to help the millions of
Americans who are out of the labor force. They would rather protect the
Washington bureaucracy--a bureaucracy that slows down and stifles
economic growth.
Cutting through the redtape to help Americans get back to work is one
of the top priorities of Republicans, and it should be the top priority
of every Senator in this body. We could do it by passing a bill--one
that has already passed the House--that would rein in excessive
regulations that make it tougher for small businesses to invest, to
grow, and to hire.
We could pass another bill from the House that helps businesses
defend themselves against abusive patent lawsuits. That is going to
help small businesses hire more people and help them grow. There were
130 Democrats in the House who voted in favor of it. Why aren't we
voting on that today? We cannot get a simple up-or-down vote in the
Senate. The majority leader will not bring it to the floor. Why won't
he allow it?
There is one bill after another that Republicans have offered,
Republicans have passed in the House of Representatives--bipartisan
bills--and the Senate Democrats don't want to talk about them. They
don't want to talk about Republican ideas for tax reform that would
lower tax rates and make the whole tax system simpler, more fair. They
don't want to talk about Republican ideas to strengthen and stabilize
the entitlement programs--such as Social Security and Medicare--to make
sure they are there for future generations. They certainly don't want
to talk about Republican ideas to address Washington's out-of-control
debt.
Those are the kinds of measures we should be talking about today on
the floor of the Senate. That is the legislation which Republicans have
introduced and which we are going to keep fighting for in the Senate.
That is what the American people are talking about when they say they
want Washington to get stuff done. They don't mean more terrible ideas
like the President's health care law and its multiple damaging side
effects. They don't mean job-killing redtape and Washington mandates.
They don't mean political show votes that would restrict Americans'
free speech.
President Obama and Democrats in the Senate have turned their backs
on middle-class families who are desperately in need of jobs. Democrats
want to waste time while they are trying to salvage their political
careers. Republicans want to help get Americans back to work.
Thank you, Madam President.
I yield the floor, and I note the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Tribute to Priscilla A. Ross
Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, one of the joys of being an elected
member of Congress is getting to hire and know and work with dedicated
public servants who toil behind the scenes--our staffs. One of those
individuals is my policy director Priscilla Ross, who first joined my
staff over 16 years ago when I was serving in the House of
Representatives.
I rise this afternoon in a bittersweet moment to thank Priscilla for
her service to me, the citizens of Maryland, and all Americans on the
occasion of her departure from the Senate.
Starting next week she will be the senior associate director for
Federal
[[Page S5485]]
relations at the American Hospital Association, AHA, which is the
national organization that represents and serves all types of
hospitals, health care networks, and their patients and communities.
The AHA is comprised of nearly 5,000 hospitals, health care systems,
networks, other care providers, and has over 43,000 individual members.
Priscilla Ross is a consummate Senate staffer. She is extremely
intelligent. She has mastered her subject areas, which include health
care and budget. She works hard. She is both a pragmatist and an
original creative thinker. She works well with her colleagues across
the aisle and across the Hill. She is a problem solver. She sees the
big picture but pays attention to detail.
Her political acumen and sense of timing are first rate. She tells me
what I need to know and, more importantly, what I need to hear--even
when I don't want to hear it. Above all, Priscilla has been driven by a
passion to help people and make things better for Americans, especially
the disadvantaged and vulnerable among us. The disparity of health
outcomes between different communities and racial groups in this
Nation--I know--continues to concern Priscilla, who has made me more
aware of the problem.
Members of Congress, especially Senators, depend on their senior
staff to sort through the innumerable demands on our time and to help
us concentrate our time on the most important opportunities and
priorities. To do that as well as Priscilla has done for 16 years
requires not only deep policy expertise but a shrewd understanding of
the Senate and a comprehensive familiarity with the people and the
institutions of Maryland. It also demands a willingness to bring a
seasoned, respectful skepticism to the scores of requests every Senate
office receives every week to support this or that legislative
initiative and to have the judgment to sort out the strong policy cases
from the powerful interests. In that, Priscilla has excelled. I am
grateful for the high standard she has met.
Priscilla came to Capitol Hill to improve people's lives. She has
succeeded in that regard--far beyond what most of us are able to
accomplish. She has had an extraordinary career.
While I am sad that she is leaving the Senate, I take solace in the
fact that she is not leaving ``the arena.'' She will continue to find
ways to make health care better, more accessible, and more affordable
for all Americans in her new post at the AHA.
Priscilla is a proud native of the District of Columbia--born and
raised in the shadow of the Capitol building, so to speak. She likes to
reminisce about taking the number 30 bus along Independence Avenue to
her school at Tenley Circle every day. She said that as a child she
never imagined she would some day work in the Capitol building she
passed on her way to and from school.
Fortunately, at some point, she did get that idea and pursued it.
Fortunately for me, I was the one who hired her. Before that happened,
Priscilla went to Boston University before finishing her college career
at American University, where she received a B.A. in political science.
She held a summer internship in the office of Yvonne Braithwaite in
California.
She was an outstanding student. She was inducted into Pi Sigma Alpha,
which is a national political science honor society, and the Golden Key
National Honor Society. She is also a member of the Zeta Phi Beta
sorority, a national sorority founded nearly 95 years ago at Howard
University here in the District.
Before Priscilla joined my staff, she was the political affairs
manager for the American Association of Health Plans, the trade
association for more than 1,000 managed care plans across the country.
Priscilla also represented the investor-owned hospital industry as an
assistant vice president for legislation at the Federation of American
Health Systems where she lobbied Congress on issues important to 1,400
hospitals and health care systems with a specific focus on Medicaid and
Medicare reimbursement.
In that position she also represented the association in various
Washington-based health care coalitions, prepared congressional
testimony for association members, designed and coordinated the FAHA
grassroots program, staffed the legislative steering and PPS-exempt
hospital committees, and drafted comments to proposed Health Care
Financing Administration regulations affecting hospital reimbursement.
Priscilla has also worked in health care delivery settings as a new
member representative for the Harvard Community Health Plan in Boston,
as administrative services coordinator at the Psychiatric Institute of
Washington, a private 201-bed acute-care facility, and as an
information assistant with Blue Cross Blue Shield of the national
capital area. She came to me with some experience, and she used that to
help people.
With regard to Priscilla's accomplishments while working on my staff,
the list is so long and comprehensive, I will only be able to comment
on a few items.
Priscilla has staffed my efforts to repeal arbitrary and unfair
outpatient physical, occupational, speech-language therapy caps for
Medicare beneficiaries since they were enacted in 1997--first in the
House and now in the Senate. Because of Priscilla's efforts we have
been able to prevent the caps from being implemented.
With Priscilla's help, the legislation I authored to expand Medicare
to include preventive benefits, such as colorectal, prostate,
mammogram, and osteoporosis screening was enacted into law.
Thanks to Priscilla's persistence, Congress finally passed the
Patients' Bill of Rights, which means that individuals with private
health care plans will have the right to choose their primary health
care provider, that women will have direct access to obstetrics and
gynecology services and be able to pick their own providers, and that
patients with medical emergencies will be guaranteed coverage for
necessary emergency room visits in accordance with the ``prudent lay
person's standard.'' Because of Priscilla's work, we were able to move
forward in these areas.
Because of the work of Priscilla Ross, tens of thousands of retired
veterans and their spouses have access to the health care benefits to
which they are entitled, including Medicare Part B, without being
penalized for signing up too late. So let me explain.
Under current law, people who do not enroll in Medicare Part B when
they are first eligible, to do so must pay a 10-percent penalty for
every year they have not participated. But 10 years ago, military
retirees could not have anticipated the rules changes that have
occurred in military health systems since 1996 when the Department of
Defense replaced CHAMPUS with TRICARE, nor could they have known that
participation in TRICARE after 1965 would eventually require Medicare
enrollment. In some cases, the military advised retirees that Medicare
coverage was duplicative, recommending that they do not enroll. We
fixed that. I would note that a couple from Oklahoma--not Maryland--
brought this problem to Priscilla's attention and the result was we
were able to get it done.
While Priscilla has spent most of her time working on health care,
she has aptly demonstrated her ability to get things done on other
issues. Let me speak for a moment about the fiscal year 2012
consolidated appropriations bill that contained $919 million for the
Small Business Administration--$189 million more than previous years.
This was the first time in many years that the SBA got a bump-up in
their appropriation. I was on the Budget Committee at the time.
The Disaster Loan Program received an increase of $72 million. With
Priscilla's help, I authored an amendment to the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act that increased the surety bond limits from $2 million
to $5 million to help small businesses. Each of these initiatives was
started by Priscilla Ross. She marshaled them carefully through the
committee and through the process, and the end result is they became
law.
A moment ago, I mentioned that my and Priscilla's concern is about
health disparities. The United States spends nearly $1 trillion in
excess health care costs due to racial and ethnic health disparities.
Priscilla has taken the lead in fashioning policies to close the gap.
It is not just about economics; it is a social justice that strikes at
the heart
[[Page S5486]]
of who we are as a nation. At Priscilla's suggestion, I authored
provisions that establish in statute Offices of Minority Health in the
key agencies in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
including the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the Food and
Drug Administration, and the Agency for Healthcare Research and
Quality. Without the basic research needed to discover the causes of
disparities and develop new treatments, we will not be able to make
significant progress in closing the gaps, so Priscilla successfully
advocated to elevate the National Center for Minority Health and Health
Disparities to the newest institute at the National Institutes of
Health. We now have a National Institute on Minority Health and Health
Disparities, thanks to Priscilla Ross.
In 2007, shortly after I became a Senator, 12-year-old Marylander
Deamonte Driver died of a toothache just a few miles from this
building. As the Washington Post recounted:
A routine, $80 tooth extraction may have saved him. If his
mother had been insured. If this family had not lost
Medicaid. If Medicaid dentists weren't so hard to find . . .
By the time his aching tooth got any attention, the bacteria
from the abscess had spread to his brain, doctors said. After
two operations and more than six weeks in the hospital, the
Prince George's County boy died.
Priscilla was determined to turn this terrible tragedy into something
positive. She immediately began working to expand access to health care
for all Americans, regardless of their income. Thanks to Priscilla we
were able to secure guaranteed dental benefits for children in the
reauthorization of the Children's Health Insurance Program, along with
a dental education program for parents of newborns, and a new HHS Web
site and toll-free number with information about the State's dental
coverage, and a list of participating providers. We were able to secure
funding for a mobile dental health care lab dedicated in 2010 that now
carries Deamonte's name. To encourage public service activities that
promote oral health, the Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act includes
the provision ensuring that activities assisting individuals in
obtaining dental services can qualify for funding.
Each of these accomplishments was initiated by Priscilla Ross.
These are just a few of Priscilla's accomplishments. Suffice it to
say that young children across America too numerous to count now have
access to dental care, thanks to Priscilla Ross, although they will
never know her name. Suffice it to say that seniors across America will
be saved from premature death by preventive health screenings, thanks
to Priscilla Ross, although they will never know her name. Because of
Priscilla, we are closer to a more perfect union, which is the
birthright of each and every American, regardless of race, color,
creed, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, or economic status.
When Thomas Jefferson followed Benjamin Franklin to Paris as Minister
of America, he remarked that no one could replace Franklin. He,
Jefferson, was merely a successor. I feel the same way about Priscilla:
There may be a successor, but no one will be able to replace her.
I thank her for her wise counsel, indomitable spirit, outstanding
public service, and enduring friendship, and I wish her the best of
luck in her new career.
Thank you, Madam President. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Ms. HIRONO. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Paycheck Fairness Act
Ms. HIRONO. Madam President, I rise today to support the Paycheck
Fairness Act. Equal pay for equal work is the law of the land. It has
been for over 50 years. Yet the law is one thing and the reality is
quite another. Women still get paid far less than men for the same
work.
Last year Hawaii News Now, a TV station in Hawaii, shared the story
of a woman in Honolulu. She had been asking for a raise for over a
year, to no avail. Her employers acknowledged that she was underpaid,
but they didn't do anything about it. Then she found out a new male
hire with less experience would be paid $5,000 more to do the same job.
She is not alone. In Hawaii a woman makes, on average, 83 cents for
every dollar a man makes. While that is better than the national
average, it is still not equal pay for equal work.
Research shows that the gender gap in pay begins with a woman's first
job and widens from there. So when a young woman graduates and takes
her place in the workplace, her starting line is already behind that of
her male colleagues. That makes it harder for her to catch up, no
matter how hard she works.
The women I know work incredibly hard. Many of them are heads of
households and sole breadwinners, which makes the pay inequality that
much tougher for them.
The gender pay gap persists even for workers with the same level of
experience and education. The gap is even wider for older women.
Congress passed the Equal Pay Act over 50 years ago. As I said
earlier, this is the law of the land. Yet the pay gap persists. While
the gap has shrunk--not by much--women only earn 77 cents on the dollar
nationally. As Senator Mikulski often says, in 50 years, women have
only gained a few cents.
In 2009, I was proud to support and vote for the Lilly Ledbetter Act
which President Obama signed into law. It was the very first bill he
signed into law after his election. Without this law, women had only
180 days after their first discriminatory paycheck to challenge it,
even if they only found out about it years and years later. After all,
Lilly's employer did not announce they were discriminating against her
in pay. So in her case it took many years, and she was far beyond the
180 days the Supreme Court said would be the timeframe in which she
could try and get redress.
While the Lilly Ledbetter Act addressed one part of the equal pay
problem, if we are going to make sure all women get a fair shot, we
need to pass the Paycheck Fairness Act. This bill would require
employers to prove that pay gaps between men and women are based only
on a business reason and not on gender.
The Paycheck Fairness Act will make it easier for workers to compare
their salaries and figure out whether they are victims of
discrimination. Right now, without this act, employers can still fire
workers for sharing the basic information about how much they are
getting paid. This bill strengthens penalties for companies that
discriminate against women. It would bring class action protection for
women in line with other civil rights laws.
The bill includes an exemption for small businesses and a phased-in
time for businesses to learn what they are required to do.
In addition, the Paycheck Fairness Act would help prevent pay
discrimination in the first place by providing training for both
management and workers. This past April 8 was Equal Pay Day. That is
the day when women's earnings in this country caught up with men's
earnings from the previous year. In other words, it took women 16
months to catch up with what their male counterparts were making in 12
months.
The very next day, here on the Senate floor, every single Republican
Senator voted to filibuster the Paycheck Fairness Act, which failed on
a procedural vote. I hope our Republican friends will reconsider their
position on this important issue this time around.
This year President Obama signed an Executive order to implement
parts of the Paycheck Fairness Act for Federal contractors. That is a
major step forward for thousands of women. But there are millions more
who are not covered by this executive action. Today in the Senate we
have another chance to give the women of our country a fair shot,
another chance for us to live up to a law that we passed 50 years ago.
I urge my colleagues to pass the Paycheck Fairness Act without delay.
Fifty years is long enough to wait.
I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Coons). The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
[[Page S5487]]
Mr. REID. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call
be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Under the previous order, all postcloture time on the motion to
proceed to S.J. Res. 19 is expired.
The question is on agreeing to the motion to proceed.
The motion was agreed to.
____________________