[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 176 (Tuesday, November 5, 2019)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6369-S6371]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                         Defense Appropriations

  Madam President, last week we saw our Democratic colleagues once 
again playing politics ahead of the defense of our great Nation. They 
are putting their actions ahead of the support that we need to give to 
those who defend our Nation. For the second time this year, as has 
already been stated today, Senate Democrats have blocked funding for 
our servicemembers. The kicker, folks, is that the vote they blocked 
was one that would have simply allowed us to debate the issue. It 
sounds unbelievable even while saying it now, folks, but it is the sad 
reality of where we are today.
  What message does it send to our men and women in uniform when every 
single Senator of the Democratic Party votes against providing the 
funding our troops need for training, for new defense programs critical 
to our national defense strategy, for the largest military pay raise in 
10 years--which our troops more than deserve after nearly two decades 
of fighting for their country.
  When I was deployed to Kuwait and Iraq in the early days of the war 
on terror, the most important thing was not only to ensure my soldiers 
and I had the right training and equipment to carry out our missions 
but knowing, without a doubt, that the American people and the 
policymakers of government who sent us to war stood behind us and 
supported us every step of the way. It was placing faith in our 
country's leadership to make the sound decisions to effectively employ 
military force and to have the will, the resolve, and the tenacity to 
make tough decisions without regard to politics.
  The decision of the Democrats last week to not even open debate on 
what our troops need to fight and win is so sorely disappointing. What 
will it take in order to get our servicemembers at home and abroad the 
resources they need? Will we really deprive our troops of critical 
training opportunities to hone their readiness in the most dangerous 
strategic environment since the end of the Cold War?
  Will we actively aid our enemies by failing to fund those things 
which we have identified as critical to maintaining an edge against our 
adversaries? It is absolutely unacceptable that Democrats would even 
entertain these possibilities.
  If they want to have a debate, then let's have a debate, but to say 
they support the troops and then obstruct the ability to discuss in 
this Chamber what our servicemembers need doesn't even add up.
  That is why I am on the floor today to call upon all of my colleagues 
who sank the prospects of defense funding to come down and do the job 
that all of us were sworn to do when we took our oath of office. It is 
time to give our troops what they need to do their jobs, and it is time 
to stop running this government through wasteful continuing resolutions 
in an increasingly dangerous world.
  I yield the floor.
  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. CARDIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Scott of Florida). Without objection, it 
is so ordered.


                  Unanimous Consent Request--H.R. 2486

  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, we need to pass the FUTURE Act to help 
students in historically Black colleges and universities, minority-
serving institutions, and we need to do that now.
  I am here to advocate on behalf of Maryland's four HBCUs that face a 
funding cliff due to congressional inaction. Without the immediate 
passage of the FUTURE Act, Bowie State University, Coppin State 
University, Morgan State University, and the University of Maryland 
Eastern Shore face a collective $4.2 million funding shortfall now that 
the Higher Education Act's authorization for mandatory funding for 
these institutions lapsed October 1 of this year.
  This clean, bipartisan, and paid-for 2-year authorization gives 
breathing room to continue to negotiate the full reauthorization of the 
Higher Education Act without holding these historically underfunded 
institutions hostage.
  Our HBCUs and MSIs know they can count on this mandatory funding each 
year to strengthen their course offerings and in-demand STEM programs, 
make infrastructure improvements, and provide academic counseling and 
student support services to first-generation and historically 
underrepresented students.
  Throwing the budgets of these institutions into chaos directly harms 
their ability to serve their students and communities. Institutions 
would have to make decisions about potentially reducing levels of 
academic services, delaying needed infrastructure investments, and make 
longstanding staffing decisions. These decisions are being made all 
across the country at schools of each of our States. Collectively, the 
MSIs risk losing out on $255 million in mandatory funding. This is an 
unnecessary obstacle our HBCUs and MSIs do not need to face. We have a 
paid-for available for us today to address this issue.
  We can get this done now. The House is prepared to accept this 2-year 
extension, which gives us a chance to negotiate a complete 
reauthorization of the Higher Education Act but does not hold these 
institutions hostage with the mandatory funding that is provided by 
law.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the 
immediate consideration of Calendar No. 212, H.R. 2486; that the Murray 
amendment at the desk be agreed to; that the bill, as amended, be 
considered read a third time and passed; and that the motion to 
reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  The Senator from Tennessee.
  Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, reserving the right to object.
  I thank the distinguished Senator from Maryland for giving me this 
opportunity to present the right way to help historically Black 
colleges and universities, and I intend to do that when he is finished 
speaking about this and explain what we can do together.
  Unfortunately, the bill he proposes is a shortcut the House took, 
which has no way to pass the Senate. It is based upon a budget gimmick 
and uses a method of funding that many Senators object to. It creates a 
new funding cliff within 23 months, and it is unnecessary because the 
Secretary of Education has written all of the heads of historically 
Black colleges and universities to say that there are sufficient funds 
until next September so there is no funding problem.
  This gives me an opportunity--which I will do in a just a moment--to 
suggest the right way to do it. The right way to do it is to do 
permanent funding of historically Black colleges and universities in a 
package of bills I have introduced. That package includes other 
legislation--which I will discuss when my time comes--which include 
simplifying the FAFSA.
  It is a bill Senator Jones and I have introduced which will help 20 
million families, including almost every student at a historically 
Black college or minority-serving institution. The bill package also 
includes grants for prisoners and short-term Pell grants, and it 
simplifies the student aid letters.
  This package is ready. It includes short-term Pell grants, as I 
mentioned. This package has been put together by a number of Democratic 
and Republican Senators. It is ready to pass the Senate and ready for 
the President to sign it. It permanently funds Black colleges and 
universities instead of this shortcut.
  In a moment, I will talk more about that, but in the meantime, I 
object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  The Senator from Maryland.

[[Page S6370]]

  

  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I greatly respect the chairman of the 
committee. I know of his sincerity in dealing with higher education and 
education in our country, but the issue is pretty simple. Without the 
continuation of mandatory funding as provided by current law, 
historically Black colleges and universities and minority-serving 
institutions cannot rely upon the funding source the chairman is 
talking about. There are going to be tough decisions that have to be 
made on infrastructure improvements, tough decisions on staffing, and 
there is no need for it.
  We all agree that mandatory funding should continue. I am all for 
permanent extension. This UC will give us the 2-year window to make 
sure we pass the Higher Education Act reauthorization to fund that.
  The issues the chairman is going to talk about are all matters that 
are under discussion and debate that have to be worked out between the 
members of his committee, the floor, and reconciliation between the 
House and the Senate. In the meantime, historically Black colleges and 
universities and minority-serving institutions will suffer.
  I fully support what the chairman is trying to do getting matters 
accomplished, but if I understand the unanimous consent he will be 
asking for, it doesn't deal with all the issues that need to be dealt 
with. We have to fully address the challenges students face with 
college access, affordability, accountability, and campus safety. The 
chairman's bill does not meet that test and limits what we could do in 
the future to meaningfully address the cost of attending and succeeding 
in colleges. The bill continues to let the realities of getting a 
college degree--the challenges of childcare, housing, food, textbooks--
go unaddressed for our country's growing diversity of students, 
including student veterans, students with disabilities, students of 
color, and students of low-income families or those who are the first 
in their families to attend college.
  I agree with the chairman. Let's bring the Higher Education Act 
forward and debate it but don't hold these institutions that have 
historically been discriminated against hostage to a program we all 
agree needs to be continued.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Tennessee.
  Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, why would we hold hostage bipartisan 
legislation that would simplify the FAFSA from 108 questions to 18 to 
30--the Federal aid that 20 million families fill out every year in 
this country--unnecessarily? Why are we holding that hostage? Why are 
we holding hostage the legislation introduced by Senator Portman and 
Senator Kaine and cosponsored by Cardin, Gillibrand, Hassan, Klobuchar, 
Stabenow, Baldwin, Brown--these are all Democrats--here is a 
Republican, Capito, Coons, Ernst, Jones, Moran, Shaheen, Sinema, Smith, 
Wicker, and Braun.
  This is legislation we all agree on--or at least that many agree on--
on short-term Pell grants. Then we have Senators Grassley, Smith, 
Cassidy, Ernst, Hassan, Jones, Klobuchar, Manchin, and Rubio, who would 
like to simplify the Federal aid letters so you don't get a letter in 
the mail, if you are living in Maryland or Tennessee, and think you 
have a grant you don't have to pay back, when in fact it is a loan you 
do have to pay back.
  We also agree on increasing the maximum Pell grant. We also agree on 
how to pay for it. We also agree on permanent funding for the 
historically Black colleges and institutions in a way that the Budget 
Committee can easily approve, and it can pass the Senate.
  If we can agree on all that and it all helps students at historically 
Black colleges and minority-serving institutions, then why don't we 
pass it? Why don't we do that? Why do we come up with a short-term, 
gimmick-supported, House-passed bill that sets up a new cliff? Why 
don't we take a permanent funding, with a Budget Committee-approved way 
of paying for it, and do some other things that we have been working on 
for 5 years in a bipartisan way? This is not an Alexander proposal. 
This is a package of proposals by 29 Senators--17 Democrats and 12 
Republicans. It is ready to pass the Senate; it is ready to be worked 
on with the House of Representatives; and it is ready to be signed by 
the President of the United States.
  Let me add to this. The Secretary of Education, and people seem to 
ignore this, has written all the presidents of the historically Black 
colleges and said there is enough money in the bank to pay for all 
their funding until next September. So we have nearly a year to do this 
the right way instead of the wrong way. We are not on vacation. I know 
everybody is talking about impeachment, but we have lots of students 
around this country who would like to have a simpler way to go to 
college. We have lots of historically Black institutions and minority-
serving institutions that would like to have a permanent method of 
funding. We have lots of employers and potential employees who want a 
short-term Pell grant.
  Simplifying FAFSA would actually add, according to the Congressional 
Budget Office, 250,000 Pell grants, and it would increase the number of 
Americans who are eligible for the maximum Pell grant. All that is 
ready to go. All that is ready to go so why don't we do that instead?
  I thank the Senator from Maryland for giving me an opportunity and a 
reason to bring up my package of bills with permanent funding of the 
historically Black colleges and universities paid for, not by a 
gimmick, but by a Budget Committee-approved method that President Trump 
and President Obama both had in their budgets.


                   Unanimous Consent Request--S. 2557

  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Health, 
Education, Labor, and Pensions be discharged from further consideration 
of S. 2557--that is my bill--and that the Senate proceed to its 
immediate consideration. I ask unanimous consent that the bill 
providing permanent funding for historically Black colleges and 
universities and other matters be considered read a third time and 
passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid 
upon the table.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  The Senator from Maryland.
  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, in reserving the right to object and for 
the reasons I have already stated, there will be ample time to bring up 
the permanent reauthorization of the funding for historically Black 
colleges and universities and minority institutions. That is why the 
unanimous consent for which I asked was for 2 years.
  My party doesn't control the activities on the floor of the Senate. 
This reauthorization bill is going to take some time on the floor. We 
are going to have to deal with amendments, and we are going to have to 
reconcile the differences between the House and the Senate. There is no 
other category of expenditures that is mandatory of this nature to 
underserved and historically discriminated institutions that is being 
held hostage as we debate a broader bill. I think this is a truly 
unique circumstance and should not be held hostage.
  We need to have a way of debating the issues to make sure that in a 
reauthorization that occurs only every so often within the Higher 
Education Act that we deal with the current gaps we have for 
diversity--for students with disabilities, for students of color, for 
students from low-income families, and for those who are the first in 
their families to attend college.
  For those reasons, I object to the request.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  The Senator from Tennessee.
  Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, we have been working for 5 years, for 
example, on simplifying the Federal aid form that students fill out to 
go to college--5 years. We have bipartisan support for it in the Senate 
and in the House. We have families who, in my State, will be 
discouraged from going to college because of this complex form.
  Why don't we pass it? It is important to fund historically Black 
colleges; that is true. They have funding for another year. So why 
don't we add to that the simplifying of the FAFSA form, which, I would 
imagine, 95 percent of the students in historically Black colleges have 
to fill out every year? In addition to that, they have this 
verification process that they go through during which somebody catches 
them telling the IRS one thing and the Department of Education another 
so that they jerk their aid. They think that is important.

[[Page S6371]]

  I have the president of a community college in Memphis who tells me 
he loses 1,500 students a year because of the burdensome nature of the 
application.
  Former Governor Bill Haslam, of Tennessee--our State--has the highest 
percentage of students who fill out the FAFSA, which is the Federal aid 
form for grants and loans. He says the single biggest impediment toward 
there being free tuition for 2 years of college in our State is the 
complex FAFSA.
  I don't think it is unreasonable to say, while we help students at 
historically Black colleges, that we help those same students by 
simplifying their FAFSAs. Why don't we give them the short-term Pell 
grant that Senator Kaine and Senator Portman and a dozen other 
Senators, including the Senator from Maryland, have introduced? Why 
don't we increase the size of the Pell grant in a way that we agree in 
a bipartisan way?
  In other words, we don't have to discuss something until we find 
something we can't agree on. Why don't we take the things we do agree 
on, which are considered in the package that the Senator just objected 
to, and pass them?
  There are 29 Senators--more Democrats than Republicans--who have 
formed these bills. If we can add to that other pieces of legislation, 
let's do it. Yet let's take the permanent funding for historically 
Black colleges--the simplification of the FAFSA, the short-term Pell 
grants, and the Pell grants for prisoners--and pass that.
  As I said, we are not on vacation. We should be able to do this in 
the next few weeks or in the next few months. I mean, how long does it 
take just to pass something we already agree on? It shouldn't take us 
very long.
  I am disappointed that the Senator has objected. I hope to keep 
coming to the floor and asking for the Senate to approve it. More 
importantly, I hope to keep working with the distinguished Senator from 
Washington State on our Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 
Pensions. We have often been able to work these matters out even when 
they are contentious and offered to the Senate a bipartisan package. I 
hope we can do that.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Utah.