[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 182 (Wednesday, November 8, 2017)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7077-S7078]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                          GI Bill Fairness Act

  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, one of the great privileges of this job and 
the honor of representing Oregon in the U.S. Senate is seeing the way 
Oregonians of all backgrounds and beliefs come together to support 
those who wear or have worn the uniform of the U.S. military. When it 
comes to honoring our veterans, Oregonians and so many across the 
country think in terms of patriotism, not politics and certainly not 
partisanship. There is not a Democratic or a Republican way to support 
our veterans; there is an American way.
  Recently, I was very pleased to join Senator Moran and Senator Tester 
to introduce bipartisan legislation that would expand the presumption 
to veterans exposed to Agent Orange in the Korean Demilitarized Zone. 
The VA currently presumes that veterans who served in the Korean DMZ 
from 1968 to 1971 were exposed to Agent Orange, but there is evidence 
that veterans were exposed to toxins all the way back to 1967. Our 
bipartisan bill would extend the presumption date back, making it 
easier for veterans to apply for and receive care and benefits.
  It is a good bill. It is a bipartisan bill. As we head to Veterans 
Day, I want to make it clear that I am going to do everything I can to 
make this bill law soon.
  Given the fact that we will all be home this weekend, I also want to 
take a few minutes to discuss another bipartisan piece of legislation 
that is important to the welfare of our veterans and a proposal that 
recently became law.
  A few years ago, I learned that wounded members of the National Guard 
and Reserve were losing out on benefits under the GI Bill for time they 
spent in rehabilitation and recovery. These are men and women who put 
their lives on hold to serve our country abroad, and when they suffered 
injuries in the line of duty, their time spent recovering didn't count 
toward GI Bill benefits, even though it did for Active-Duty 
servicemembers in the same situation.
  I think it is an understatement to say that is certainly a real head-
scratcher, to not stand up for our Guard and Reserve to make sure they 
are not losing out on benefits under the GI Bill for the time they 
spend in recovery and rehab. In effect, the Federal law was adding 
insult to injury by robbing wounded guardsmen and reservists of 
benefits they earned and should have been receiving all along. 
Estimates show that more than 20,000 servicemembers across our country 
were affected.
  I approached our friend and colleague from Arkansas, Senator Boozman, 
and he graciously agreed to team up with me. Senator Boozman made it 
clear that a fellow from Arkansas and a fellow from Oregon were going 
to team up, leave the politics behind, and fix an injustice. We brought 
together a bipartisan group. We worked with the Committee on Veterans' 
Affairs, and we were able to get the bill across the finish line. As of 
now, wounded guardsmen and reservists will get the education benefits 
they have rightly earned.
  Especially today, when people are asking about the divisiveness and 
polarization that now consumes so much of the political debate, I 
wanted Senators to know that I really appreciate Senator Boozman always 
trying to be constructive and a problem-solver. And this is one problem 
that is getting solved.
  The law will apply retroactively, meaning that eligible veterans who 
already lost out will be made whole. Because it is so counterintuitive 
for servicemembers to lose benefits for being wounded--just think about 
that, servicemembers losing benefits for being wounded--many of our 
veterans haven't learned they were missing out. They never knew they 
were missing out. That is why I am very pleased, as I know Senator 
Boozman is, that our law applies retroactively to all service after the 
9/11 attacks.
  I think it is true that success has a thousand parents, and if I 
thanked everybody on both sides of the aisle for all the work that went 
into this important bill, we would be here until suppertime tonight. 
But I do especially want to thank our colleagues, Senators Markey and 
McCain. They lent important support along the way, as did Chairman 
Johnny Isakson and Ranking Member Jon Tester. Representative Mark 
Takano of California has also been an exceptional advocate in the other 
body.
  I also wish to give a special thank-you to MAJ Steve Warren, a 
Department of Defense fellow in my office at the dawn of the process. 
He is considered a real rock star in terms of working for veterans. He 
did so much to bring this injustice to light and then worked diligently 
toward a solution. I think it is the judgment of everybody involved 
that without Steve's inspiration and perspiration, it would have been 
hard to see this injustice fixed and our even being here today, as we 
head to Veterans Day, to talk about it.
  I close by way of saying that in this time of partisan rancor and the 
back-and-forth that consumes so much of the political debate in 
Washington, I think what we have shown with this piece of legislation 
and its importance is that our veterans continue to be a unifying 
force. This good will comes from a deep respect for the All-Volunteer 
Force and for the sacrifices made by military families. It also stems 
from an appreciation for the role our veterans play in so many 
communities. In Oregon, our vets are small business owners, coders, 
mill workers, and educators. They help students at the Youth Challenge 
Program in Bend, and they help us fight fires. And suffice it to say, 
this year those fires were big, they were long, they were brutal, and 
we saw fires nobody could have even believed could happen, such as the 
one that jumped the Columbia River.
  It doesn't mean that Congress, even with this legislation, always 
gets it right with respect to veterans. There is a whole lot more to be 
done, particularly ensuring timely access to top-quality healthcare 
through the VA or outside of it and ensuring that guardsmen and 
reservists get treated fairly and equitably.
  I want to say this again on the eve of our taking time out 
specifically to honor veterans--although in our State, we believe that 
every day is really Veterans Day--I want to renew my pledge to the 
people of Oregon that I and my staff will keep working until our vets 
receive the care and treatment they have earned. We hope the success of 
our GI Bill Fairness Act demonstrates what can be done when the 
Congress sets aside all this business of trying to point score on 
partisanship and puts veterans first.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I come to the floor to do what the Trump 
administration has failed to do; that is, to stand up for working 
families and fight for an economy that actually works for all, not just 
for the richest among us.
  On the campaign trail, President Trump made promise after promise to 
workers. He promised to put them first and bring back good-paying jobs 
to their communities. Yet, since day one of his Presidency, we have 
seen him do just the opposite. His administration has rolled back 
protections for workers and families and prioritized corporate profits 
over working families' financial security.
  He has put forth nominee after nominee who puts industry interests 
above the needs of families, like William Wehrum, President Trump's 
nominee to lead the EPA's Office of Air and Radiation. Mr. Wehrum is 
someone who

[[Page S7078]]

has worked to undermine the core mission of the office he would 
oversee. He is a nominee who has demonstrated a willingness to side 
with protecting Big Business instead of protecting our Nation's most 
valuable resources and whose independence is truly in question.
  Unfortunately, when looking at President Trump's record as a 
businessman, these decisions do not come as a surprise. President Trump 
spent decades as a real estate developer, cheating workers and 
contractors out of their hard-earned pay, and he refused to allow his 
own hotel workers to join together and advocate for safer working 
conditions and better wages.
  President Trump's vision of our economy is one in which workers bear 
the burden, and the people who live in gilded towers get the benefit. 
The contrast with Democrats could not be clearer. Last week, Democrats 
rolled out an ambitious agenda to reform our labor laws to, once again, 
empower workers to join together, make their voices heard, and fight 
for better wages and benefits.
  Currently, it is extremely difficult for workers to seek justice when 
corporations violate their rights, and if we want to rebuild the middle 
class, we have to change that because workers having the right to 
organize and join unions helped to build the middle class we have 
today. For many workers in the 20th century, good union jobs helped 
them to support their families and climb the economic ladder, but over 
the past few decades, our economy has worked in favor of corporations 
and those at the top. As corporate management and special interests 
have undermined workers in their right to collectively bargain, we have 
seen, of course, a decline in unions and union membership across the 
country. This has allowed President Trump and billionaires like him to 
take advantage of their workers, and it has given workers little 
recourse in standing up and fighting for better working conditions.
  The preamble of the National Labor Relations Act clearly states that 
it is the policy of the United States to encourage collective 
bargaining to give workers a voice, allowing them to speak up for fair 
wages and safe working conditions, and it is the responsibility of the 
NLRB to ensure that workers' rights are protected so they are not taken 
advantage of. The NLRB gives workers the opportunity to file charges 
against corporations when they are illegally fired or retaliated 
against for exercising their rights, and because President Trump's own 
businesses have had complaints filed against them numerous times, it is 
so critical now that the Board is independent and committed to that 
core mission.
  Unfortunately, I have serious concerns about Mr. Robb's commitment to 
that core mission and to supporting workers' rights so more families, 
not fewer, have financial security. Mr. Robb has spent most of his 
career as a corporate lawyer, representing Big Business and seeking to 
limit the rights that workers are guaranteed under the National Labor 
Relations Act--the very law he is now asking to be in charge of and 
enforce. He has defended companies against unfair labor allegations, 
age and discrimination charges, and unfair wage and hour claims. If he 
is confirmed, Mr. Robb will have the sole decision-making power as to 
which cases will be brought before the NLRB.
  Given his long history of defending corporations, I don't believe 
workers can trust him to act with their best interests at heart or to 
stand up to President Trump and his vision of an economy that works for 
those at the top but that undercuts workers' wages, safety, and rights.
  I will be voting no on Mr. Robb's nomination, and I urge my 
colleagues to do the same. I know every single one of my colleagues has 
spoken to working families in his State who feel left behind today--
families who work full time and who are saving what they can. They are 
struggling to make ends meet. It is time that we stop prioritizing 
corporate profits and start focusing on those workers and our middle 
class. We can only strengthen our economy if we give workers a voice in 
it.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.