[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 93 (Thursday, June 11, 2015)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4105-S4109]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. DAINES:
S. 1552. A bill to authorize the Dry-Redwater Regional Water
Authority System and the Musselshell-Judith Rural Water System in the
State of Montana, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy
and Natural Resources.
Mr. DAINES. 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. 1552
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 ``Clean Water for Rural
Communities Act''.
SEC. 2. PURPOSE.
The purpose of this Act is to ensure a safe and adequate
municipal, rural, and industrial water supply for the
citizens of--
(1) Dawson, Garfield, McCone, Prairie, Richland, Judith
Basin, Wheatland, Golden Valley, Fergus, Yellowstone, and
Musselshell Counties in the State of Montana; and
(2) McKenzie County, North Dakota.
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Administrator.--The term ``Administrator'' means the
Administrator of the Western Area Power Administration.
(2) Authority.--The term ``Authority'' means--
(A) in the case of the Dry-Redwater Regional Water
Authority System--
(i) the Dry-Redwater Regional Water Authority, which is a
publicly owned nonprofit water authority formed in accordance
with Mont. Code Ann. Sec. 75-6-302 (2007); and
(ii) any nonprofit successor entity to the Authority
described in clause (i); and
(B) in the case of the Musselshell-Judith Rural Water
System--
(i) the Central Montana Regional Water Authority, which is
a publicly owned nonprofit water authority formed in
accordance with Mont. Code Ann. Sec. 75-6-302 (2007); and
(ii) any nonprofit successor entity to the Authority
described in clause (i).
(3) Dry-redwater regional water authority system.--The term
``Dry-Redwater Regional Water Authority System'' means the
Dry-Redwater Regional Water Authority System authorized under
section 4(a)(1) with a project service area that includes--
(A) Garfield and McCone Counties in the State;
(B) the area west of the Yellowstone River in Dawson and
Richland Counties in the State;
(C) T. 15 N. (including the area north of the Township) in
Prairie County in the State; and
(D) the portion of McKenzie County, North Dakota, that
includes all land that is located west of the Yellowstone
River in the State of North Dakota.
(4) Integrated system.--The term ``integrated system''
means the transmission system owned by the Western Area Power
Administration Basin Electric Power District and the
Heartland Consumers Power District.
(5) Musselshell-judith rural water system.--The term
``Musselshell-Judith Rural Water System'' means the
Musselshell-Judith Rural Water System authorized under
section 4(a)(2) with a project service area that includes--
(A) Judith Basin, Wheatland, Golden Valley, and Musselshell
Counties in the State;
(B) the portion of Yellowstone County in the State within 2
miles of State Highway 3 and within 4 miles of the county
line between Golden Valley and Yellowstone Counties in the
State, inclusive of the Town of Broadview, Montana; and
[[Page S4106]]
(C) the portion of Fergus County in the State within 2
miles of US Highway 87 and within 4 miles of the county line
between Fergus and Judith Basin Counties in the State,
inclusive of the Town of Moore, Montana.
(6) Non-federal distribution system.--The term ``non-
Federal distribution system'' means a non-Federal utility
that provides electricity to the counties covered by the Dry-
Redwater Regional Water Authority System.
(7) Pick-sloan program.--The term ``Pick-Sloan program''
means the Pick-Sloan Missouri River Basin Program (authorized
by section 9 of the Act of December 22, 1944 (commonly known
as the ``Flood Control Act of 1944'') (58 Stat. 891, chapter
665)).
(8) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of the Interior.
(9) State.--The term ``State'' means the State of Montana.
(10) Water system.--The term ``Water System'' means--
(A) the Dry-Redwater Regional Water Authority System; and
(B) the Musselshell-Judith Rural Water System.
SEC. 4. DRY-REDWATER REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY SYSTEM AND
MUSSELSHELL-JUDITH RURAL WATER SYSTEM.
(a) Authorization.--The Secretary may carry out--
(1) the project entitled the ``Dry-Redwater Regional Water
Authority System'' in a manner that is substantially in
accordance with the feasibility study entitled ``Dry-Redwater
Regional Water System Feasibility Study'' (including
revisions of the study), which received funding from the
Bureau of Reclamation on September 1, 2010; and
(2) the project entitled the ``Musselshell-Judith Rural
Water System'' in a manner that is substantially in
accordance with the feasibility report entitled
``Musselshell-Judith Rural Water System Feasibility Report''
(including any and all revisions of the report).
(b) Cooperative Agreement.--The Secretary shall enter into
a cooperative agreement with the Authority to provide Federal
assistance for the planning, design, and construction of the
Water Systems.
(c) Cost-sharing Requirement.--
(1) Federal share.--
(A) In general.--The Federal share of the costs relating to
the planning, design, and construction of the Water Systems
shall not exceed--
(i) in the case of the Dry-Redwater Regional Water
Authority System--
(I) 75 percent of the total cost of the Dry-Redwater
Regional Water Authority System; or
(II) such other lesser amount as may be determined by the
Secretary, acting through the Commissioner of Reclamation, in
a feasibility report; or
(ii) in the case of the Musselshell-Judith Rural Water
System, 75 percent of the total cost of the Musselshell-
Judith Rural Water System.
(B) Limitation.--Amounts made available under subparagraph
(A) shall not be returnable or reimbursable under the
reclamation laws.
(2) Use of federal funds.--
(A) General uses.--Subject to subparagraphs (B) and (C),
the Water Systems may use Federal funds made available to
carry out this section for--
(i) facilities relating to--
(I) water pumping;
(II) water treatment; and
(III) water storage;
(ii) transmission pipelines;
(iii) pumping stations;
(iv) appurtenant buildings, maintenance equipment, and
access roads;
(v) any interconnection facility that connects a pipeline
of the Water System to a pipeline of a public water system;
(vi) electrical power transmission and distribution
facilities required for the operation and maintenance of the
Water System;
(vii) any other facility or service required for the
development of a rural water distribution system, as
determined by the Secretary; and
(viii) any property or property right required for the
construction or operation of a facility described in this
subsection.
(B) Additional uses.--In addition to the uses described in
subparagraph (A)--
(i) the Dry-Redwater Regional Water Authority System may
use Federal funds made available to carry out this section
for--
(I) facilities relating to water intake; and
(II) distribution, pumping, and storage facilities that--
(aa) serve the needs of citizens who use public water
systems;
(bb) are in existence on the date of enactment of this Act;
and
(cc) may be purchased, improved, and repaired in accordance
with a cooperative agreement entered into by the Secretary
under subsection (b); and
(ii) the Musselshell-Judith Rural Water System may use
Federal funds made available to carry out this section for--
(I) facilities relating to--
(aa) water supply wells; and
(bb) distribution pipelines; and
(II) control systems.
(C) Limitation.--Federal funds made available to carry out
this section shall not be used for the operation,
maintenance, or replacement of the Water Systems.
(D) Title.--Title to the Water Systems shall be held by the
Authority.
SEC. 5. USE OF POWER FROM PICK-SLOAN PROGRAM BY THE DRY-
REDWATER REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY SYSTEM.
(a) Finding.--Congress finds that--
(1) McCone and Garfield Counties in the State were
designated as impact counties during the period in which the
Fort Peck Dam was constructed; and
(2) as a result of the designation, the Counties referred
to in paragraph (1) were to receive impact mitigation
benefits in accordance with the Pick-Sloan program.
(b) Availability of Power.--
(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), the
Administrator shall make available to the Dry-Redwater
Regional Water Authority System a quantity of power required,
of up to 1\1/2\ megawatt capacity, to meet the pumping and
incidental operation requirements of the Dry-Redwater
Regional Water Authority System during the period beginning
on May 1 and ending on October 31 of each year--
(A) from the water intake facilities; and
(B) through all pumping stations, water treatment
facilities, reservoirs, storage tanks, and pipelines up to
the point of delivery of water by the water supply system to
all storage reservoirs and tanks and each entity that
distributes water at retail to individual users.
(2) Eligibility.--The Dry-Redwater Regional Water Authority
System shall be eligible to receive power under paragraph (1)
if the Dry-Redwater Regional Water Authority System--
(A) operates on a not-for-profit basis; and
(B) is constructed pursuant to a cooperative agreement
entered into by the Secretary under section 4(b).
(3) Rate.--The Administrator shall establish the cost of
the power described in paragraph (1) at the firm power rate.
(4) Additional power.--
(A) In general.--If power, in addition to that made
available to the Dry-Redwater Regional Water Authority System
under paragraph (1), is necessary to meet the pumping
requirements of the Dry-Redwater Regional Water Authority,
the Administrator may purchase the necessary additional power
at the best available rate.
(B) Reimbursement.--The cost of purchasing additional power
shall be reimbursed to the Administrator by the Dry-Redwater
Regional Water Authority.
(5) Responsibility for power charges.--The Dry-Redwater
Regional Water Authority shall be responsible for the payment
of the power charge described in paragraph (4) and non-
Federal delivery costs described in paragraph (6).
(6) Transmission arrangements.--
(A) In general.--The Dry-Redwater Regional Water Authority
System shall be responsible for all non-Federal transmission
and distribution system delivery and service arrangements.
(B) Upgrades.--The Dry-Redwater Regional Water Authority
System shall be responsible for funding any transmission
upgrades, if required, to the integrated system necessary to
deliver power to the Dry-Redwater Regional Water Authority
System.
SEC. 6. WATER RIGHTS.
Nothing in this Act--
(1) preempts or affects any State water law; or
(2) affects any authority of a State, as in effect on the
date of enactment of this Act, to manage water resources
within that State.
SEC. 7. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
(a) Authorization.--There are authorized to be appropriated
such sums as are necessary to carry out the planning, design,
and construction of the Water Systems, substantially in
accordance with the cost estimate set forth in the applicable
feasibility study or feasibility report described in section
4(a).
(b) Cost Indexing.--
(1) In general.--The amount authorized to be appropriated
under subsection (a) may be increased or decreased in
accordance with ordinary fluctuations in development costs
incurred after the applicable date specified in paragraph
(2), as indicated by any available engineering cost indices
applicable to construction activities that are similar to the
construction of the Water Systems.
(2) Applicable dates.--The date referred to in paragraph
(1) is--
(A) in the case of the Dry-Redwater Regional Water
Authority System, January 1, 2008; and
(B) in the case of the Musselshell-Judith Rural Water
Authority System, November 1, 2014.
______
By Mr. DURBIN (for himself and Mr. Franken):
S. 1556. A bill to amend section 455(m) of the Higher Education Act
of 1965 in order to allow adjunct faculty members to qualify for public
service loan forgiveness; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor,
and Pensions.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, today I introduced the Adjunct Faculty
Loan Fairness Act, a bill that would enable faculty working less than
full-time to participate in the Public Service Student Loan Forgiveness
Program.
Contingent faculty members are like full-time instructors. They have
advanced degrees. They teach classes and
[[Page S4107]]
spend many hours outside the classroom preparing for class. They hold
office hours, grade papers and give feedback to students. They provide
advice and write letters of recommendation. Students rely on them.
Since most adjuncts have advanced degrees and, as almost 75 percent of
graduate degree recipients have an average of $61,000 in student loans,
they are also among the 40 million Americans with student debt.
The Public Service Loan Forgiveness program is meant to encourage
graduates to go into public service by offering student loan
forgiveness for eligible federal loans after 10 years of full-time work
in government or the nonprofit sector. Public service fields like
nursing, military service, and public health qualify. Many education
jobs qualify, including full-time work at public universities and part-
time work at community colleges in high-needs subject areas or areas of
shortage. But other faculty members, those who work part-time, are not
eligible for loan forgiveness because the law requires an annual
average of 30 hours per week to qualify for the program. For adjunct
faculty working at several schools on a contingent basis, this
requirement can be difficult or impossible to meet, even when they are
putting in more than 30 hours of work each week.
The number of faculty hours given for each class is calculated
differently at different schools. Some give one hour per hour in the
classroom while others actually take into consideration the time
required outside the classroom. So, even as these faculty members are
working hard and as their options for tenured, full-time positions
become slimmer, more of them are overworked and undervalued for their
work in public service.
The Adjunct Faculty Loan Fairness Act of 2015 would solve this by
amending the Higher Education Act to expand the definition of a
``public service job'' to include a part-time faculty member who
teaches at least one course at an eligible institution of higher
education. They would still have to meet all the other requirements to
qualify for the program, including making 120 on-time payments while
employed at a qualifying institution, and they could not be employed
full-time elsewhere at the same time.
This bill would benefit someone like Alyson, an adjunct professor
from Chicago, IL, who graduated with $65,000 in student loan debt and,
after 10 years of on-time payments, has over $56,000 left. Like most
adjuncts, Alyson strings together multiple teaching assignments along
with part-time work to afford her monthly living expenses and minimum
student loan payment. She comes from a family of educators and
considers teaching her dream job. Alyson would like to participate in
the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program. This bill would ensure
that Alyson and many thousands like her, could obtain credit towards
the Public Service Loan Program for loan payments she made while
teaching, whether she was teaching one course or seven.
Unfortunately, for all their contributions to the college programs
and the students they work with, adjunct faculty don't have the same
employment benefits or job security as their colleagues. The number of
classes they teach every semester varies. To make ends meet, these
professors often end up teaching classes at more than one school in the
same semester, getting paid about $3,000 per class and making an
average annual income that hovers around minimum wage. This also means
that, in some parts of the country, they spend as much time commuting
as they do teaching.
Nationally, over half of all higher education faculty work on a
contingent basis, facing low pay with little or no benefits or job
security. In the past, these were a minority of professors who were
hired to teach an occasional class because they could bring experience
to the classroom in a specific field or industry. Over time, as
university budgets have tightened and it has gotten more expensive to
hire full-time, tenure track professors, higher education institutions
have increasingly hired adjuncts.
From 1991 to 2011, the number of part-time faculty in the U.S.
increased two and a half times from 291,000 to over 760,000. At the
same time, the percentage of professors holding tenure-track positions
has been steadily decreasing--from 45 percent of all instructors in
1975 to only 24 percent in 2011. The number of full-time instructors,
tenured and non-tenured, now makes up only about 50 percent of
professors on U.S. campuses. The other 50 percent of the 1.5 million
faculty employees at public and non-profit colleges and universities in
the U.S. work on a part-time, contingent basis.
Illinois colleges rely heavily on adjuncts. In 2012, 53 percent of
all faculty at public and not-for-profit colleges and universities in
the State, more than 30,400 faculty employees, worked on a part-time
basis. This is a 52.6 percent increase in part-time faculty in Illinois
compared to a 13 percent increase in full-time faculty since 2002.
Not surprisingly, in Illinois, 69 percent of all part-time faculty
work in Chicago, where the cost of living is 16 percent higher than the
U.S. average. Based on an average payment of $3,000 per class an
adjunct professor must teach between 17 and 30 classes a year to pay
for rent and utilities in Chicago.
They would have to teach up to seven classes to afford groceries for
a family of four and two to four classes per year just to cover student
loan payments. Because they are part-time, they are not eligible for
vacation time, paid sick days, or group health-care. So they would have
to teach an additional two to three classes to afford family coverage
from the lowest priced health insurance offered on Get Covered
Illinois, the official health marketplace.
Even though these professors are working in a relatively low-paying
field, teaching our students, their part-time status also means they
aren't eligible for the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program
This bill does not completely fix this growing reliance on part-time
professors who are underpaid and undervalued. But it would ensure that
members of the contingent faculty workforce are no longer excluded from
the loan forgiveness program for public servants. I would like to thank
my colleague, Senator Al Franken from Minnesota for joining me in this
effort. I hope my other colleagues will also join me to provide this
benefit to faculty members who provide our students with a quality
education.
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. 1556
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 ``Adjunct Faculty Loan
Fairness Act of 2015''.
SEC. 2. LOAN FORGIVENESS FOR ADJUNCT FACULTY.
Section 455(m)(3)(B)(ii) of the Higher Education Act of
1965 (20 U.S.C. 1087e(m)(3)(B)(ii)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``teaching as'' and inserting the
following: ``teaching--
``(I) as'';
(2) by striking ``, foreign language faculty, and part-time
faculty at community colleges), as determined by the
Secretary.'' and inserting ``and foreign language faculty),
as determined by the Secretary; or''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(II) as a part-time faculty member or instructor who--
``(aa) teaches not less than 1 course at an institution of
higher education (as defined in section 101(a)), a
postsecondary vocational institution (as defined in section
102(c)), or a Tribal College or University (as defined in
section 316(b)); and
``(bb) is not employed on a full-time basis by any other
employer.''.
______
By Mr. DURBIN (for himself, Mr. Blumenthal, Mr. Brown, Mr.
Markey, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Tester, and Mr. Whitehouse):
S. 1557. A bill to amend the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act to
extend the interest rate limitation on debt entered into during
military service to debt incurred during military service to
consolidate or refinance student loans incurred before military
service, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
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. 1557
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
[[Page S4108]]
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Servicemember Student Loan
Affordability Act of 2015''.
SEC. 2. INTEREST RATE LIMITATION ON DEBT ENTERED INTO DURING
MILITARY SERVICE TO CONSOLIDATE OR REFINANCE
STUDENT LOANS INCURRED BEFORE MILITARY SERVICE.
(a) In General.--Subsection (a) of section 207 of the
Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (50 U.S.C. App. 527) is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``on debt incurred
before service'' after ``Limitation to 6 percent'';
(2) by redesignating paragraphs (2) and (3) as paragraphs
(3) and (4), respectively;
(3) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following new
paragraph (2):
``(2) Limitation to 6 percent on debt incurred during
service to consolidate or refinance student loans incurred
before service.--An obligation or liability bearing interest
at a rate in excess of 6 percent per year that is incurred by
a servicemember, or the servicemember and the servicemember's
spouse jointly, during military service to consolidate or
refinance one or more student loans incurred by the
servicemember before such military service shall not bear an
interest at a rate in excess of 6 percent during the period
of military service.'';
(4) in paragraph (3), as redesignated by paragraph (2) of
this subsection, by inserting ``or (2)'' after ``paragraph
(1)''; and
(5) in paragraph (4), as so redesignated, by striking
``paragraph (2)'' and inserting ``paragraph (3)''.
(b) Implementation of Limitation.--Subsection (b) of such
section is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``the interest rate
limitation in subsection (a)'' and inserting ``an interest
rate limitation in paragraph (1) or (2) of subsection (a)'';
and
(2) in paragraph (2)--
(A) in the paragraph heading, by striking ``as of date of
order to active duty''; and
(B) by inserting before the period at the end the
following: ``in the case of an obligation or liability
covered by subsection (a)(1), or as of the date the
servicemember (or servicemember and spouse jointly) incurs
the obligation or liability concerned under subsection
(a)(2)''.
(c) Student Loan Defined.--Subsection (d) of such section
is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(3) Student loan.--The term `student loan' means the
following:
``(A) A Federal student loan made, insured, or guaranteed
under title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
1070 et seq.).
``(B) A private student loan as that term is defined in
section 140(a) of the Truth in Lending Act (15 U.S.C.
1650(a)).''.
______
By Mr. SANDERS:
S. 1564. A bill to require that employers provide not less than 10
days of paid vacation time to eligible employees, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. SANDERS. Mr. President, I want to say a few words about family
values. ``Family values'' is an expression that has been used for many
years by my Republican colleagues. Generally speaking, what they mean
by ``family values'' is opposition to a woman's right to choose,
opposition to contraception, opposition to gay rights. I happen to
strongly disagree with many of my Republican colleagues on those
issues. Let me take the opportunity to briefly give a somewhat
different perspective on family values--on real family values, on the
values that really matter to millions of families in this country.
When a mother gives birth to a baby and is unable to spend time with
that newborn child during the first weeks and months of that baby's
life because she does not have the money to stay home and is forced to
go back to work, which is the case for millions of mothers in this
country, that is not a family value. Separating a mother from a newborn
baby for economic reasons is not a family value. In fact, that is an
attack on everything that a family is supposed to stand for.
When a wife is diagnosed with cancer and her husband cannot get time
off of work to take care of her because he does not have any family or
medical leave time or sick leave time, that is not a family value. That
is an attack on everything that a family is supposed to stand for.
When a husband, wife, and kids, during the course of an entire year,
are unable to spend any time on a vacation, when they cannot get
together in leisure activity, when they cannot relax and spend quality
time with each other, that is not a family value.
Let us be very clear in understanding that, in fact, in terms of
protecting the needs of our families, in terms of real family values,
in many, many respects the United States of America lags behind
virtually every other major country on earth.
When you look at other major countries, what you find is that the
United States is the only advanced economy that does not guarantee its
workers some form of paid family leave, some form of paid sick time,
some form of paid vacation time. In other words, when it comes to basic
workplace protections and family benefits, workers in every other major
industrialized country in the world get a better deal than our workers
here in the United States. That is wrong. That is a travesty, and that
has got to change.
Last place is no place for America. It is time for us to join the
rest of the industrialized world by showing the people of this country
that we are not just a nation that talks about family values but that
we are a nation that is prepared to live up to these ideals by making
sure that workers in this country have access to paid family leave,
paid sick time, and paid vacations, just like workers in virtually
every other major country on earth.
Simply stated, it is unacceptable that millions of women in this
country give birth and are forced back to work because they do not have
the income to stay home with their newborn babies.
When we talk about family values, what is more important than for
mothers and fathers to bond with their babies at a time when almost
every psychologist will tell you those are the most important weeks and
months of a human being's life? What kind of family value is it when
you tell a woman who has just had a baby that she cannot spend time
with her child because she has to go back to work? This is not a family
value. That is an insult to every mother, every father, and every
newborn child in this country, and we have to change that.
The reality is that the Family and Medical Leave Act that was signed
into law in 1993 is totally inadequate. Today, nearly 8 out of 10
workers in this country who are eligible to take time off under this
law cannot do so because they cannot afford to do so, according to the
Department of Labor. Even worse, 40 percent of American workers are not
even eligible to receive this unpaid leave because they work for a
company with fewer than 50 employees.
In my view, every worker in this country should be guaranteed at
least 12 weeks of paid family and medical leave, and that is why I am a
proud cosponsor of the FAMILY Act, introduced by Kirsten Gillibrand.
The FAMILY Act would guarantee employees 12 weeks of paid family and
medical leave to take care of a baby, to help a family member who is
diagnosed with cancer or has some other serious medical condition or to
take care of themselves if they become seriously ill. Just like Social
Security retirement and disability, it is an insurance program that
workers would pay into at a price of about one cup of coffee a week.
That is not all. We have to make certain that in this country workers
have paid sick time. It is absurd that low-wage workers in McDonald's
and Burger King and low-wage employees all over this country who get
sick are forced to work because they cannot afford to take time off.
Not only is this unfair to the workers, it is also a public health
issue. I do not know about you, but I am not crazy about the idea of
somebody who is sick coming to work and preparing the food that I eat
in a restaurant.
That is why I am supporting the Healthy Families Act, introduced by
Senator Patty Murray, which guarantees 7 days of paid sick leave to
American workers. This bill would benefit 43 million Americans who
today do not have access to paid sick leave, and it would create a
permanent floor in workplaces where employers already provide some paid
sick leave.
Last but not least, when we talk about the disappearing American
middle class, we are talking about millions of American workers working
longer hours for lower wages. We are talking about Americans who are
overworked, underpaid and, in many cases, living under enormous stress.
In my State of Vermont, I see it every week I am home. You talk to
people who work not one job but who are working two jobs or sometimes
three jobs in order to cobble together some income and some health
care.
Here is an amazing irony. Many of us can remember in school reading
about workers protesting, taking to the
[[Page S4109]]
streets 100 years ago, and they held up large banners. Do you know what
those banners said 100 years ago? They said: We want a 40-hour
workweek. A 40-hour workweek was the demand 100 years ago. Today, we
still have not achieved that goal.
In fact, today 85 percent of men who are working and 66 percent of
working women are working more than 40 hours a week. In fact, in
America today--not widely known but true--our people are working the
longest hours of any major country on Earth, because as real wages go
down, people have to work 50 hours or they have to work 60 hours.
Husbands are working here, and wives are working there--all to cobble
together some income in order to provide for the family.
Today Americans are working 137 hours a year more than workers in
Japan--and the Japanese are very hard workers. We are working 260 hours
more than the British and almost 500 hours a year more than French
workers.
That is why I am introducing legislation today to require employers
to provide at least 10 days of paid vacation to workers in this
country. This is already done in almost every other major country on
Earth. It is one more way to demonstrate our commitment to real family
values. What we are saying is that if families are overworked and if
husbands and wives do not even have the time to spend together with
their kids, what family values are about is that at least for 2 weeks a
year, people can come together under a relaxed environment and enjoy
the family. That is a family value that I want to see happen in this
country.
The time is long overdue for us to start talking about real family
values, not about abortion, not about gay rights but the values the
American people want to see inscribed in law to protect their families.
Let us make sure every American worker is entitled to paid family and
medical leave, paid sick time, and guaranteed at least some vacation
time. Those are real family values. Let's go forward and make that
happen.
______
By Mr. REED (for himself, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Menendez, Mr. Warner,
Mr. Merkley, Ms. Warren, Mr. Blumenthal, Mr. Franken, Mr.
Durbin, Mr. Kaine, and Ms. Hirono):
S. 1565. A bill to allow the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection
to provide greater protection to servicemembers; to the Committee on
Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Mr. REED. Mr. President, today, along with Senators Schumer,
Menendez, Warner, Merkley, Warren, Blumenthal, Franken, Durbin, Kaine,
and Hirono, I am introducing the Military Consumer Protection Act,
which reinforces our commitment to consumer protections for
servicemembers.
Our country has a strong tradition of ensuring that our
servicemembers are protected while they sacrifice to keep our Nation
safe. Building on such efforts, Congress passed the Soldiers' and
Sailor's Civil Relief Act as World War II escalated to provide crucial
financial protections for servicemembers to ``enable such persons to
devote their entire energy to the defense needs of the Nation.'' Now
called the Servicemember Civil Relief Act, SCRA, this law includes such
protections as prohibiting the eviction of servicemembers and their
dependents from rental or mortgaged properties and capping the interest
at 6 percent on debts incurred prior to an individual entering active
duty military service.
Despite the SCRA's importance, enforcement of this critical law has
been found to be inconsistent and subject to the discretion of our
financial regulators. Indeed, misinformation, lapses, and mistakes that
the SCRA was intended to fix continue to persist. Moreover, according
to a July 2012 report from the Government Accountability Office, ``in
2010, examinations for SCRA compliance occurred in an estimated 26
percent of all [financial] institutions, compared with 2007 when about
4 percent of all institutions were reviewed for SCRA.''
Without a change in the law, SCRA enforcement will continue to be
subject to the changing priorities of the financial regulators. Simply
put, prioritizing the consumer protection of our servicemembers should
not be discretionary. It should be mandatory, and my legislation
ensures that SCRA enforcement will be a permanent priority for the
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, CFPB, which Congress created to
enforce Federal consumer financial protection laws.
In 2010, as we were debating the creation of the CFPB, I led the
bipartisan effort to ensure it would contain a key role in protecting
servicemembers through the establishment of an Office of Servicemember
Affairs. Since that time, the CFPB has coordinated with other
enforcement agencies and regulators to help servicemembers recover
millions in relief from unscrupulous actors in the financial
marketplace. With this demonstrated record of success in protecting our
servicemembers, the CFPB is an ideal focal point for enforcement of
certain key SCRA provisions, such as the protections against default
judgments and the maximum rate of interest on debts incurred before
military service.
As we take steps to protect our servicemembers, we should do all we
can to make sure there is a strong watchdog on the beat that can
enforce the protections we have put in place. Our legislation is
supported by the National Guard Association of the United States, the
National Military Family Association, the Military Officers Association
of America, Americans for Financial Reform, the Consumer Federation of
America, Consumer Action, the National Consumer Law Center, and the
U.S. Public Interest Research Group. I urge our colleagues to help
honor our commitment to our Nation's servicemembers by joining us in
this effort to improve the supervision and enforcement of the SCRA.
____________________