[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 18 (Tuesday, January 29, 2019)]
[Senate]
[Pages S730-S732]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




STRENGTHENING AMERICA'S SECURITY IN THE MIDDLE EAST ACT OF 2019--MOTION 
                         TO PROCEED--Continued

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate will come to order.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that 
notwithstanding rule XXII, at 3 o'clock p.m. today, all postcloture 
time on the motion to proceed to S. 1 expire and the

[[Page S731]]

Senate proceed to a vote on the motion to proceed to S. 1.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. McCONNELL. For information of all of our colleagues, the vote 
will be at 3 o'clock.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


             Resolution of Disapproval on Russia Sanctions

  Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, a vote earlier this month on the 
administration's decision to ease sanctions on a Russian oligarch puts 
the Senate on record on where its Members stand in terms of holding 
Russia accountable for its continued actions against the United States.
  We need to be clear about what we are facing. Not only did Russia 
conduct what I believe to be a cyber act of war against the United 
States during the 2016 election cycle, it continues to do so with the 
President and his administration, apparently, indifferent.
  Make no mistake. Russia tried to interfere in the recent midterm 
elections, and it continues to do so against our democratic allies in 
Europe. What has been the response of this body--the U.S. Senate--sworn 
to uphold the Constitution, to protect against enemies, foreign and 
domestic? Other than the belated passage of a Russia sanctions bill in 
the last Congress--a bill whose sanction provisions this administration 
has been slow or unwilling to enforce--we have done almost nothing.
  Let's start in 2016 when top officials from the administration's 
national security and intelligence community came and warned 
congressional leadership of Russia's ongoing and serious attack on our 
election--this was during the election campaign--rightly asking for a 
bipartisan statement to tell Russian dictator Putin to stop.
  What was Senate Majority Leader McConnell's response to this request 
to protect our Nation?
  No thanks; not going to do it.
  History will no doubt look back with amazement at that decision.
  What about the Senate Foreign Relations Committee--a historically 
celebrated body with jurisdiction over this Russian attack on the 
United States? It did not even conduct an investigation into Russia's 
actions in the last Congress. To date, I have heard no plans to do so 
in this Congress. That is incredible.
  We have stunning reports--reports that normally would bring this city 
to a halt--of an FBI counterintelligence investigation opened on 
President Trump--whether the President called for the destruction of 
notes after meetings with Russian leaders . . . something unheard of in 
the history of that office . . . and that Trump has been asking about 
how the United States could possibly withdraw from the NATO alliance.
  These are stunning developments, and they are not alone. For anyone 
paying attention, they shouldn't be surprised that our President is, in 
fact, pursuing policies the Russians could only dream of. They include 
the weakening of our democratic institutions; the weakening of our 
Western security alliance; the withdrawing of U.S. leadership on the 
global stage and ceding influence to Russia, Iran, and China; silence 
when Russia attacked Ukrainian naval ships; entertaining the idea of 
turning over an American ambassador to Russia for an absurd line of 
questioning; cozying up to global dictators and ignoring American 
values of democracy of human rights; and, of course, the President 
saying publicly and privately to Putin that he believes him instead of 
our intelligence experts when it comes to denying any attacks on 
democracy.
  We also know that President Trump was incredibly suggesting such 
Russia-friendly policies during his campaign while at the same time 
pursuing business interests in that country.
  I end with a question I have asked before on this floor. How can the 
party of Ronald Reagan continue to sit by while this President pursues 
policies aligned with a former KGB agent? Why are the first bills in 
this new Senate under Republican control not dealing with the serious 
threats to our Nation? Why isn't the Senate Foreign Relations Committee 
holding urgent hearings on these stunning developments between an 
American President and a Russian dictator, not to mention moving 
bipartisan legislation to protect U.S. membership in NATO?
  Quite simply, with the government finally back open we need deal with 
these serious threats to our nation and democracy that we have heard 
involving our White House. When we are elected to office in Congress, 
we take an oath. In it, we swear to uphold and defend the Constitution 
of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. The 
President similarly swears to preserve, protect, and defend our 
Constitution. As such, it is time for all of us--Democrats and 
Republicans--to speak up and fulfill our constitutional responsibility.


                          For-Profit Colleges

  Madam President, for anyone who thought the upheaval in the for-
profit college industry was over or it was driven by an overzealous 
Obama administration determined to kill the industry, as some accused 
just a few short months ago, it is time to think again.
  Just last month, amid the loving regulatory embrace of the for-profit 
college industry by President Trump's DeVos-led Department of 
Education, two major for-profit college chains have collapsed. It 
proves true the recent warning by the Department of Education inspector 
general, Kathleen Tighe, that for-profit colleges represent a 
disproportionate risk to both students and American taxpayers.
  The rot in the for-profit college industry runs much deeper than just 
the failures of Corinthian and ITT Tech. On December 17, for-profit 
college company Vatterott Colleges announced the immediate closure of 
its campuses nationwide, leaving 2,300 students stranded, including 200 
at its campus in Fairview Heights, IL. The company had been in 
financial trouble for some time. It had already closed a number of 
campuses, including one in Quincy, IL.
  The Department of Education must now provide Illinois and other 
Vatterott students with clear information about their options, 
including their eligibility to receive a closed school discharge of 
their Federal student loans and option to file a claim for a borrower 
defense discharge if they believe they were defrauded by the 
university.
  In addition, the Department must make sure these students are not put 
at risk a second time by assuring that they have affordable, quality 
options to continue their education, such as community colleges. It 
would be adding insult to injury to allow these students to be lured by 
other predatory or financially shaky for-profit colleges, especially 
those facing State and Federal investigations.
  Early in December, Education Corporation of America closed 75 
campuses nationwide, affecting some 20,000 students. I am pleased, in 
this case, that the Department of Education developed a page on its 
website to inform ECA students about closed school discharges. It must 
do more to communicate with affected students and ensure they are able 
to continue their studies at quality, affordable institutions.
  The vultures are already circling these students.
  In a recent letter, Steve Gunderson, a former Member of the U.S. 
House of Representatives and lead lobbyist for the for-profit colleges 
and universities, announced that for-profit colleges are working to 
assist the students who were victims of these collapsed for-profit 
schools and that 20 for-profit colleges had already expressed interest 
in taking on these ECA students. It is simply double jeopardy to ask 
students, once defrauded by this industry, to be somehow rescued and 
lured into another contractual obligation by another school in the for-
profit college industry.
  Over the holiday season, around 30 campuses owned by Dream Center 
Education Holdings closed. They include the Argosy campus in 
Schaumburg, IL, and the Illinois Institute of Art--not to be confused 
with the School of the Art Institute of Chicago, a reputable 
organization.
  In August, I led several of my colleagues in writing to Secretary 
DeVos,

[[Page S732]]

asking her to provide immediate assistance to these students who had 
borrowed money to go to these worthless schools. We were concerned that 
Dream Center was not providing students with information about closed 
school discharges and was pushing them into other bad options, like 
enrolling in another for-profit school. Among other things, we asked 
the Department to post an information page on its website to inform the 
students. Even weeks after the closure, we have yet to receive a 
response to this letter from the Department of Education.
  Adding to the confusion for students in Illinois is the fact that for 
months Dream Center misrepresented that the Illinois Institute of Art 
campuses were accredited, even when its accreditor had made clear that 
was not the case. I have called on Secretary DeVos to investigate this 
misrepresentation, especially as it relates to these students' 
eligibility for borrower defense discharges. The National Student Loan 
Defense Network has filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of Illinois 
borrowers against the company for this misrepresentation, while the 
Department of Education and Washington remain silent.
  Now, reports have surfaced of a new restructuring of these schools, 
with few details but major implications for students. The Department of 
Education must immediately inform students and the public about these 
changes.
  Earlier this month, 48 State attorneys general, including our own 
Illinois attorney general, now retired, Lisa Madigan, and the District 
of Columbia reached a settlement with for-profit giant Career Education 
Corporation over consumer violations by the company. Under the 
settlement, Career Education Corporation agreed to forgo collecting 
$493 million owed to it by 180,000 students nationally--$48 million in 
relief for 17,000 students in Illinois who had been exploited by this 
for-profit school. I have long spoken out about these abuses and the 
misconduct of Career Education Corporation schools, especially their 
infamous and now defunct Le Cordon Bleu, Harrington College of Design, 
and Sanford-Brown brands. These fellows really dream up some wonderful 
names for worthless schools.
  Just last week, for-profit college operator National American 
University Holdings announced ``substantial doubt'' that its finances 
would allow it to remain in business over the next year. The company, 
which has faced lawsuits related to deceptive practices, runs campuses 
in about a dozen States and online. Its closure would affect thousands 
of students.
  How many more for-profit college collapses, closures, and State legal 
actions will it take before we get serious at the Federal level, both 
in Congress and at the Department of Education, about protecting 
students and taxpayers from this industry?
  It just amazes me that so many people in this body stand back and 
watch the so-called for-profit colleges and universities exploit 
students and their families, watch them run up debts they will never be 
able to pay back, wait until they default, and then threaten them with 
lawsuits and collection agencies, instead of realizing at the outset 
that these schools are not reputable. These students are lured with 
promises the schools can't keep, and they are also lured into debt they 
will never be able to repay. They will never end up with a job that 
allows them to pay back the debt.
  Don't take my word for it; think of two simple numbers. Nine percent 
of all postsecondary students go to for-profit colleges and 
universities--9 percent. Thirty-four percent of all federal student 
loan defaults are students from for-profit colleges and universities. 
Nine percent of the students; 34 percent of the defaults. Why would 
that be happening? Well, because they overcharge the students, and they 
provide them with a worthless diploma if they stick it out and don't 
drop out.
  These schools are a blight on higher education and an exploitation of 
innocent students and their families. Who are the ultimate losers when 
their debts are discharged? American taxpayers who subsidize these 
miserable, good-for-nothing schools and then watch as they are not 
repaying their debts because the students can't, and the taxpayers end 
up the losers again. If that is capitalism at work, save this country, 
because it is a terrible outcome for the students, for their families, 
and for American taxpayers.
  I yield the floor.
  Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. INHOFE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. INHOFE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to waive the 
time and start the vote now.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The question is on agreeing to the motion to proceed.
  Mr. INHOFE. Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk called the roll.
  Mr. THUNE. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator 
from Kansas (Mr. Moran) and the Senator from Kentucky (Mr. Paul).
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Blackburn). Are there any other Senators 
in the Chamber desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 76, nays 22, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 12 Leg.]

                                YEAS--76

     Alexander
     Barrasso
     Bennet
     Blackburn
     Blumenthal
     Blunt
     Boozman
     Braun
     Burr
     Cantwell
     Capito
     Cardin
     Casey
     Cassidy
     Collins
     Coons
     Cornyn
     Cortez Masto
     Cotton
     Cramer
     Crapo
     Cruz
     Daines
     Duckworth
     Enzi
     Ernst
     Fischer
     Gardner
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hassan
     Hawley
     Hoeven
     Hyde-Smith
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Johnson
     Jones
     Kennedy
     King
     Klobuchar
     Lankford
     Lee
     Manchin
     Markey
     McConnell
     McSally
     Menendez
     Murkowski
     Murray
     Perdue
     Portman
     Risch
     Roberts
     Romney
     Rosen
     Rounds
     Rubio
     Sasse
     Schumer
     Scott (FL)
     Scott (SC)
     Shelby
     Sinema
     Smith
     Stabenow
     Sullivan
     Tester
     Thune
     Tillis
     Toomey
     Warner
     Whitehouse
     Wicker
     Wyden
     Young

                                NAYS--22

     Baldwin
     Booker
     Brown
     Carper
     Durbin
     Feinstein
     Gillibrand
     Harris
     Heinrich
     Hirono
     Kaine
     Leahy
     Merkley
     Murphy
     Peters
     Reed
     Sanders
     Schatz
     Shaheen
     Udall
     Van Hollen
     Warren

                             NOT VOTING--2

     Moran
       
     Paul
       
  The motion is agreed to.

                          ____________________