[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 185 (Tuesday, November 19, 2019)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6644-S6648]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                         Remembering Kay Hagan

  Mr. BENNET. Madam President, I want to spend a few minutes 
recognizing our late colleague and my friend Senator Kay Hagan.
  Kay and I both came to the Senate in 2009. I had the privilege of 
working with her on two committees--HELP and Banking. As a former vice 
president of the North Carolina National Bank, she had a lot more to 
offer to that committee than I had, and I tried to learn from her 
whenever I could. Kay and I both came to the Senate in the middle of 
the worst recession since the Great Depression. We were losing 700,000 
jobs a month, and millions were losing their homes. It was an 
incredibly difficult moment for the country, but it brought out all of 
Kay's best qualities.
  Everyone knew that Kay faced some of the toughest politics of any 
Member of our caucus, but in those early days, I saw her take vote 
after vote on some of the hardest issues. She never wavered. She voted 
for the Recovery Act to save the economy when we were in free fall. She 
voted for Dodd-Frank to restore confidence and accountability to the 
financial sector, which was something she knew quite a lot about. She 
spoke out against amendment No. 1 in North Carolina and for marriage 
equality. She also cast a decisive vote for the Affordable Care Act.
  As a Democratic Senator from North Carolina and as a freshman 
Senator, none of those positions were easy to take, but she knew they 
were the right places to be for her State and for the country. Because 
Kay did what she did, millions of Americans kept jobs they would have 
lost, and millions of Americans gained quality, affordable health 
insurance for the first time in their lives. In her home State, the 
LGBT community had a Senator in Washington who, for the first time in 
history, was willing to fight for their full and equal rights.
  One of our colleagues, the senior Senator from Tennessee, likes to 
say: If you have come to Washington just to hear yourself talk, just 
stay home and get a job on the radio. It is not worth the trouble of 
your coming all the way here.
  Kay didn't come to Washington to talk. She came to work and to lead.
  Over her term, Kay was a fierce and principled advocate for North 
Carolina. As a member of the Committee on Armed Services, she helped to 
prevent cuts to tuition programs for veterans. She sponsored the Lilly 
Ledbetter Fair Pay Act to help close the gender pay gap across the 
country. She worked across the aisle to promote conservation and 
outdoor recreation, which is something we appreciate in my home State 
of Colorado.
  She was a lot less interested in the empty politics of this town and 
a lot more interested in making progress for the people of North 
Carolina and for our country. She was a voice of reason, pragmatism, 
and humility in this body, which sorely lacks all three. In other 
words, Kay took her job seriously but never herself, and no matter how 
difficult it might have been, she never failed to put the people of 
North Carolina ahead of the politics of the moment. It is why she 
earned deep respect from both sides of the aisle, not only for her work 
ethic but for her kindness, her warmth, and her grace. There was not a 
room in this complex, including the one I am standing in right now, 
that wasn't brightened the moment that Kay Hagan walked in.
  To Chip, her husband, and to their kids--Jeanette, Tilden, and 
Carrie--I hope you know how proud we all are of Kay. She represented 
the best qualities of North Carolina. It is why her colleagues adored 
her. It is why her staff loved her and revered her, and it is why all 
of us who had the privilege of working with her in this body will miss 
her terribly.
  I yield the floor.

[[Page S6645]]

  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. WICKER. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


  Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act Reauthorization Act

  Mr. WICKER. Madam President, I rise this afternoon because there is a 
legislative deadline in front of this body that we dare not miss. Even 
as I speak, our colleagues in the House Energy and Commerce Committee 
are considering the Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act 
Reauthorization, or STELAR. For 30 years, STELAR and previous versions 
of the law have allowed people who live beyond the reach of a broadcast 
signal to receive broadcast programming nonetheless.
  Some Senators believe that in 2019, STELAR has outlived its 
usefulness and want it to expire, but other Senators want to extend 
some of these provisions--at least in the short term--to prevent 
consumers from losing these broadcast signals; still others want to use 
the STELAR reauthorization legislation as a vehicle to implement other 
reforms.
  I have introduced new legislation, the Satellite Television Access 
Reauthorization--or STAR--Act to move this process forward. The 
existing STELAR statute expires December 31. So absent congressional 
action before the end of the year, the provisions included in STELAR 
that enable nearly 870,000 Americans to access broadcasting TV signals 
will no longer be the law of the land. These Americans who depend on 
STELAR are mostly in rural parts of this country, like my home State of 
Mississippi. They include truckers, tailgaters, and RV drivers, and 
they include Americans living in very remote areas.
  I say to my colleagues, now is the time for Senators to make their 
positions clear. Over the course of this year, I have been polling 
Members to ascertain what this body wants. As chairman of the Senate 
Commerce Committee, I will act according to the majority wishes, but 
time is running short. Many people point to the fact that the media 
landscape is changing. There are more options for video content than 
ever before. New programming is coming out every day that is being 
streamed through new services. Those are all great things.
  As I said at a June Commerce Committee hearing, we are living in the 
golden age of television. The Commerce Committee has been working to 
close the digital divide between rural and urban America to make sure 
all families can access those choices and all families can be a part of 
the golden age, but there are still Americans without Internet access 
and without broadcast signals. They deserve the ability to view basic 
television services just like everyone else.
  Without the reauthorization of STELAR, many Americans will not be 
able to watch broadcast news or enjoy access to programming that is 
available for the rest of the country. They will be on the wrong side 
of the digital divide, and there will be a wide cultural divide, as 
they would be cut off from the flow of programs and information.
  If Members of this body are of a mind to move forward with some 
extension of this statute, we will work with our colleagues in the 
House. That may include improvements and enhancements to STELAR that 
address good faith requirements, level the playing field in the 
marketplace, promote access to programming, and ensure robust 
competition, but we don't have much time.
  After this week, Senators will go home for Thanksgiving. Many of 
those across the country who benefit from STELAR in our States will 
watch football games and the Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade, thanks to 
the STELAR law. They will enjoy time with their families, and I look 
forward to doing the same, but when Congress returns, there will be 
just 2 weeks--10 legislative days--to finalize any legislation and send 
it to the President for his signature.
  In this body, taking no action is easy. It comes naturally. But in 
this case, no action equals the repeal of the STELAR law in its 
entirety, and Members should know that. They have 10 days to ensure 
870,000 Americans will be able to watch the same programs next year 
that they are seeing this year, or we can let STELAR expire and take 
the risk of letting the chips fall where they may.
  To repeat, my colleagues should be advised they need to make a voice 
that is heard on whether the STELAR legislation needs to be extended or 
expire.
  Thank you, Madam President.
  I yield the floor. I suggest the absence a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Cassidy). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.


                  Unanimous Consent Request--H.R. 2486

  Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I rise today to urge immediate passage of 
the bipartisan FUTURE Act, which is H.R. 2486, to restore critical 
funding for historically Black colleges and universities, known by the 
acronym here in Washington as HBCUs, as well as minority-serving 
institutions, so-called MSIs.
  The $255 million in funding that HBCUs and MSIs rely on lapsed on 
September 30 of this year. Both the historically Black colleges and 
universities and the minority-serving institutions are underresourced 
and don't have the flexibility to operate in the red in the hopes of 
potential reimbursement later on.
  Campuses are already feeling this impact. Just 2 weeks after this 
program expired, some campuses notified employees that their positions 
and programs may be terminated. We are talking about real people losing 
their jobs and programs being cut that play a critical role in 
graduating and retaining students in the STEM field--science, 
technology, engineering, and math fields. All of this is impacting 
students across the country. Presidents of some of these institutions 
have told us that planning has ``all but stopped.'' This funding lapse 
is urgent, and it must be addressed now.
  From the perspective of my home State of Pennsylvania, we have two of 
the oldest historically Black colleges and universities--two of the 
oldest in the whole country--Cheyney University, as well as Lincoln 
University, and, in addition to that, a growing Hispanic-serving 
institution, in this case, the Reading Area Community College.
  We know that the investment made by the FUTURE Act will support 
college completion and academic opportunities at these and all 
historically Black colleges and universities and minority-serving 
institutions across the country. The FUTURE Act is fully paid for. It 
would not add to the deficit. It has strong bipartisan support in both 
Chambers.
  My colleagues in the majority are holding this funding hostage in an 
effort to pass what I would argue is a partisan bill. That is not just 
my argument or my opinion; some of my Republican colleagues have said 
this is the reason they are holding up this critical legislation.
  Instead of passing a bipartisan comprehensive reauthorization of our 
future higher education law, which my colleague Senator Murray is 
pushing for, some Republicans want to force Democrats to support a 
partisan bill.
  Instead of working in a bipartisan fashion to fix our current system 
so it works better for students, families, and teachers, they want us 
to support a so-called micropackage, the Student Aid Improvement Act. 
This act, in my judgment and the judgment of others, fails to address a 
number of critical areas, including improved campus safety and access 
to higher education affordability and accountability. Because of that, 
it maintains the status quo.
  Make no mistake, the Student Aid Improvement Act is a partisan bill. 
The bill fails to address the challenges students are facing in 
obtaining a college degree--including childcare, housing, food and 
mental health, among others--nor does it address the needs of first-
generation students, students of color, and students with disabilities.

[[Page S6646]]

  Let's debate these issues. Let's come to the table to negotiate on a 
bipartisan overhaul, but let's not hold historically Black colleges and 
universities and minority-serving institutions hostage in the meantime. 
We can get something done in the short run that would be beneficial to 
these institutions.
  We need to ensure that colleges and universities have the resources 
to provide support to all students they serve, including students with 
disabilities. A couple of examples of some of my bills--the Higher 
Education Mental Health Act, which is supported by over 250 college and 
university presidents, including 15 of the historically Black colleges 
and universities--would help institutions of higher education identify 
the resources and services needed to support their students with mental 
health needs.
  A second bill of mine, the RISE Act, would make it easier for 
colleges to provide support to students with disabilities by accepting 
student assessments from high school and smoothing the transition to 
higher education.
  A third bill, my Expanding Disability Access to Higher Education Act, 
would increase the funding for TRIO Programs that serve first-
generation students with disabilities and make higher education more 
accessible.
  These bills would provide the resources needed for students to be 
successful as they pursue higher education, but without a comprehensive 
bill, the needs of these students will continue to go unmet. Rather 
than blocking vital resources from flowing to our Nation's historically 
Black colleges and universities, we should immediately pass the FUTURE 
Act. This would restore funding, while providing us time to work on a 
comprehensive reauthorization that addresses the needs of all students.

  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that as in legislative 
session, the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar 
No. 212, H.R. 2486. I ask unanimous consent 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 motions to reconsider be 
considered made and laid upon the table.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Tennessee.
  Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, I am reserving the right to object.
  I have a better idea, which I am going to offer to the Senate once 
again. It is permanent funding for historically Black colleges at the 
level of $255 million a year. The distinguished Senator from 
Pennsylvania has stated he doesn't want a piecemeal bill. He wants a 
more comprehensive bill. I have offered such a bill and introduced it 
in the Senate. I will describe it in a few moments when I ask unanimous 
consent to pass it, and it will include not a 2-year short-term fix 
based upon a budget gimmick, which will have difficulty passing the 
Senate, but permanent funding of historically Black colleges and 
minority-serving institutions.
  It will include simplification of the FAFSA, the form that 8 million 
minority students fill out every year, which in our State is the 
biggest obstacle to minority students having an opportunity for higher 
education and a variety of other bipartisan proposals.
  I am ready to pass a comprehensive bill. I offered one before. It was 
blocked by my Democratic friends. I am going to offer it again in a 
minute, and we will see if they agree to it, but I don't think we 
should pass a piecemeal bill. I agree with the Senator from 
Pennsylvania. I think we should be more comprehensive, and not only 
that, we should do permanent funding of historically Black colleges.
  The last point I will make before I object is that the U.S. 
Department of Education has written all the presidents of the 
historically Black and minority-serving institutions and said there is 
sufficient funding in the Federal Government for the rest of the year--
fiscal year--until October 1 of next year. So while we need to finish 
our work, there is no crisis at the moment, so let's do the job right.
  I will offer, in just a moment, the way to do that, which is 
permanent funding of historically Black colleges and minority-serving 
institutions. I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection is heard.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Tennessee.


                   Unanimous Consent Request--S. 2557

  Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, for the convenience of the Senator from 
Pennsylvania, I am going to offer my unanimous consent agreement at the 
beginning of my remarks, and then if he wishes to stay, he can, but if 
he has another place to go in his schedule, he may do that.
  Let me just say that the provision I am going to--let me preface it 
in this way. I know very well the value of historically Black colleges. 
One of my favorite stories is the story that the late author, Alex 
Haley, the author of ``Roots'' and ``The Autobiography of Malcolm X''--
I suppose the two best selling books ever on the history of the African 
American--used to tell about his father, Simon P. Haley, who was wasted 
as a child. That was the word they used.
  He was allowed to go to college, and he went to North Carolina A&T 
where he was ready to drop out. He came back, got a summer job on a 
Pullman train to Chicago, and a man talked to him at night asking him 
for a glass of warm milk. He got the glass of warm milk and thought 
nothing more about it. He went back to North Carolina A&T, a 
historically Black college.
  The principal called him in. He thought he was in real trouble, as 
the president of the college called him in. Simon P. Haley thought he 
was in real trouble. The President of the college said that the man on 
the train had sent enough money for Simon P. Haley to graduate--to pay 
his tuition to graduate from college.
  So Alex Haley wrote for the Reader's Digest the story of the man on 
the train who helped his father. That father went to Cornell and became 
the first Black graduate of Cornell's agricultural college. He came 
back to Lane College, one of the six historically Black colleges in 
Tennessee, where he taught and raised a son, who is a lawyer, later 
Ambassador to Gambia; two daughters, one a teacher; he raised another 
son, an architect; and then he raised a son he thought wouldn't amount 
to anything who joined the Coast Guard and ended up writing a Pulitzer 
Prize-winning book, ``Roots,'' and ``The Autobiography of Malcolm X.''
  I know the value of Lane College, Fisk University, Tennessee State 
University, Lemoyne-Owen College, Meharry Medical College, and America 
Baptist College, and I want to help them. The request I am going to 
make is that the Senate pass a small package of bills that are 
sponsored by Democrats and Republicans, 29 Senators--17 Democrats and 
12 Republicans. The first provision would be permanent funding. That is 
$255 million every year permanently for historically Black colleges and 
minority-serving institutions. A second provision--I ask consent to use 
this document on the Senate floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. ALEXANDER. That is the FAFSA. This is the document that 20 
million Americans fill out every year. We know how to reduce it. It is 
the biggest impediment to minority students going to college today. We 
are ready to pass it. Eight million minority students fill this out. 
The president of the Southwest Community College from Memphis tells me 
he loses 1,500 students a semester because of the complexity of that.
  There are other provisions in this package, which include the 
Portman-Kaine provision for short-term Pell grants sponsored by about 
20 Senators, many of them Democrats; the provision for Pell grants for 
prisoners who are eligible for parole; an increase in the number of 
Pell grants; an increase in the amount of Pell grants. All of that is 
in this package that I have offered, but it starts with permanent 
funding for historically black colleges. Since there is time until 
October 1 of next year, the Department of Education has said that there 
is plenty of Federal funding for all of those institutions. There is no 
reason we can't agree to my package today, send it over to the House of 
Representatives, send it to the President, and let all of these 
institutions know they don't have to worry about funding permanently 
instead of just for 2 years.

[[Page S6647]]

  So, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on 
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions be discharged from further 
consideration of S. 2557 and the Senate proceed to its immediate 
consideration. I ask unanimous consent that the bill 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 Pennsylvania.
  Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I just want 
to make a couple of comments by way of response.
  I really want to go back to what we said earlier. There is no reason 
we can't at least get this piece of legislation done. I will say it 
again: These institutions are underresourced. They don't have the 
flexibility to operate in the red in the hopes of potential 
reimbursement later on.
  We are also told by the institutions themselves that planning has 
``all but stopped.'' Campuses are feeling this impact already. Just 2 
weeks after this program expired, some campuses informed employees that 
their positions and programs may be terminated. So I would argue that 
the present circumstance is not acceptable.
  I realize the chairman wants to proceed to other issues, and I 
respect that, but when you consider what he is proposing, there are 
some changes that should be pointed out.
  First of all, when considering the proposal he has, in comparing what 
it would do, for example, on the Second Chance Pell proposal, that only 
contains a limited repeal of the ban rather than a full repeal of the 
ban. Any reference to the JOBS Act making short-term programs eligible 
for Pell grants--a bipartisan bill that was introduced--excludes for-
profit colleges. In this micropackage that the chairman is proposing, 
the for-profit colleges are added back in.
  No. 3, just by way of some examples, in the Grassley-Smith bill on 
financial aid award letters, some changes were made to that on 
financial aid award letters that weren't contemplated by the bill's 
original authors.
  Our legislation is fully paid for. It reinvests up to $55 million in 
recovery programs. For several reasons, by way of contrast but also by 
way of what is happening right now with regard to these institutions--
for those and other reasons, I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  The Senator from Tennessee.
  Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, I know this Senate is a deliberative 
body, but we have been working on higher education for 5 years in our 
committee, and suddenly, out of the blue, comes a bill out of the House 
which says that we have an emergency in one provision of the Higher 
Education Act; don't take it through committee. That is the way we 
usually do things.
  The distinguished Senator from Louisiana is a member of this 
committee, and the Senator from Pennsylvania is a valued member of the 
committee. We have a pretty good reputation for working together, 
despite our differences, in fixing No Child Left Behind, 21st Century 
Cures, opioid legislation. Healthcare is a contentious issue, but by a 
vote of 20 to 3, we brought out a bill to lower healthcare costs.
  Yet the suggestion is that we take this bill to the Senate floor 
without any consideration by the committee. That is not the way we 
usually do things.
  Let me reemphasize that the U.S. Department of Education has told 
every one of the historically Black colleges and minority-serving 
institutions that there is sufficient Federal funding between now and 
October 1 of next year. There is no reason to cut anybody's pay and no 
reason to stop planning. That is what the Federal Government has told 
those institutions. That is plenty of time for us to take a provision--
such as the one I have proposed or such as the one that the 
distinguished Senator from Pennsylvania has proposed--through our 
committee and recommend to the full Senate what we ought to do.
  Let's not minimize what else there is to do. I mean, we literally 
have been working for 5 years on simplifying this FAFSA. There are 8 
million minority students who fill it out every year. I think we should 
be concerned about the 300,000 students who attend historically Black 
colleges and universities. Many of them fill this out. I am told by the 
former Governor of Tennessee that filling out this complicated form is 
the single biggest impediment for low-income students having an 
opportunity to go to college because their families think it is too 
complicated.

  Well, we know what to do about this. Senator Bennet, the Democratic 
Senator from Colorado, and I began working on this 5 years ago. Senator 
Murray, the Democratic Senator from Washington, and I recommended that 
the Senate pass legislation getting rid of 22 questions that were 
double reporting. You have to tell the IRS some facts, and you have to 
tell the Department of Education the same facts, and then they come in 
the middle of the semester and try to catch you having one answer here 
and another answer there. So at East Tennessee State University, 70 
percent of the student body has their Pell grant verified, and some of 
them lose their Federal funding while they check to see if the 
information they had to give to two Federal agencies is different. We 
passed the Senate with that--Senator Murray and I did that last year.
  So why should we wait on this? I don't think we should wait on 
permanent funding for historically Black colleges, but why hold this 
hostage to that?
  I am ready to move ahead on permanent funding for historically Black 
colleges. I am ready to move ahead on simplifying the FAFSA for 8 
million students who fill this out every year. I am ready to move ahead 
on short-term Pell grants. I have been working with the Senator from 
Washington on this and with other Members of the Senate. I think we are 
moving to a consensus. We have time to do this right. Let's take it 
through committee and send back to the House of Representatives a 
permanent solution.
  I think it is very important that we make clear to all of the 
presidents and all of the students at historically Black colleges and 
minority-serving institutions, No. 1, you have a year of funding ahead 
of you; No. 2, you have a proposal by the chairman of the Education 
Committee that will permanently fund what you are doing; and No. 3, our 
Democratic friends are asking that the Senate pass short-term funding 
that will create another funding cliff within a matter of months and 
that is funded by a budget gimmick that will never pass muster in the 
Senate. That is not going to happen.
  So we need to work together as we normally do and come to a 
conclusion on the Higher Education Act, including permanent funding of 
historically Black colleges and minority institutions. I am ready to 
keep doing that. But I am also ready to encourage the passage not only 
of the provisions that I have introduced and that I asked for 
permission to pass today, which the Senator objected to, but other 
provisions that might be included.
  I think 5 years is long enough to work on the Higher Education Act. I 
am coming to the conclusion we have time to do it, and I look forward 
to saying to our six historically Black colleges in Tennessee that the 
result of our hard work and debate and discussion has been permanent 
funding, so you don't have to worry about Federal funding.
  Mr. BURR. Mr. Chairman, will the Senator yield?
  Mr. ALEXANDER. I will yield.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Carolina.
  Mr. BURR. Mr. President, I thank the chairman for yielding, and I am 
here as living proof that he is not the Lone Ranger on this. The 
committee has worked diligently. We may not be as passionate as he is, 
but the committee has worked diligently to get higher education done.
  It is a farce to come in here and think that we are going to pass a 
2-year House bill to fund historically Black colleges. Nobody has more 
historically Black colleges in their State than I do. What they want--
they want predictability, permanent funding. The chairman is willing to 
do that, but part of the condition to do that is to sit down and, now, 
quit talking and pass higher education. Reduce the FAFSA application to 
one page. Let these students go out--and their parents--and be able to 
fill this out and not miss an education because they can't go through 
the laborious process.

[[Page S6648]]

  What the chairman has laid on the table is reasonable. The committee 
has talked about it for years. Now it is time to act. It is not time to 
act on one little piece of it for temporary funding. It is time to 
provide permanent funding for that and to do the rest of higher 
education.
  As proud as I am of our being the home of the majority of Black 
colleges and universities, I also have about 70 other colleges and 
universities in North Carolina, and they are the beneficiaries of 
everything else that is in this education bill.
  Compromise is not about ``Take what I have'' and not give anything 
else. We have been trying to work, with the chairman and the ranking 
member working together, to find compromise for 5 years. Many times the 
chairman has come to me and said: I think we can do it this year. Well, 
we have to have willing partners on the other side of the aisle. Today 
is a live example of where it is either their way or no way.

  I hope we can get back, and, before we leave this year, we can get 
this package passed. It is really simple: Just commit to do what we all 
have sat down and talked about for 5 years. If there are minor changes 
that need to be made, let's make them in the next day or two. But to 
say that we are going to wait until next year and be here a year from 
now when that timeframe has run out, let me assure you, if the chairman 
is not here to object to this request, I will be here to object to this 
request.
  The time to talk is over. The time to act is now.
  I thank the chairman for yielding.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. CASEY. Just a couple of points on where we are: There is no 
question that, in my judgment, if you have more time to consider these 
issues for a full reauthorization, we could address some of the 
shortcomings that have been proposed already. I mentioned earlier 
issues that are not addressed, such as childcare, housing, food and 
mental health, the needs of first-generation students, needs of 
students of color, and students with disabilities. We can do that if we 
can get through this short-term period. We are asking for help only for 
a very limited timeframe so that we can work through these other 
issues.
  The second point I would make is, I can't stand in the shoes of the 
leaders of these institutions, but when they tell us that they are in a 
difficult circumstance in the short run, I will take their word for it. 
The word of the Department of Education--just from my point of view--
doesn't compare to what these institutions are telling us. So I think 
we should rely upon the representations by the leaders of the 
institutions and act in a short-term fashion, all the while committing 
ourselves to have a longer process to fully explore and try to reach 
consensus on a range of issues that come under the broad purview of 
reauthorization.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Tennessee.
  Mr. ALEXANDER. I want to thank the Senator from Pennsylvania for 
coming to the floor today on an issue I know he cares about. I thank 
the Senator from North Carolina.
  We are accustomed to working together. We are accustomed to getting 
results, and I want to get a result on this.
  I agree with both Senators in this sense: I think it is time to send 
a signal to historically Black colleges and minority-serving 
institutions that they don't have to worry about funding for the 
future. For the next year, the Department of Education has told them: 
You have the money for the next year. It shouldn't take us a year to 
finish our work.
  So I look forward to sitting down with the Senator from North 
Carolina and the Senator from Pennsylvania and working out their 
differences on the provisions that we have. We have the basis for a 
very good higher education bill--the permanent funding for historically 
Black colleges, the simplification of the FAFSA, which affects 20 
million families every year. We have broad bipartisan consensus on 
simplifying how you pay back student loans. There are nine different 
ways now. We could reduce that to two. That affects 43 million 
families.
  The short-term Pell grants make a big difference.
  So we have a number of provisions, and I am working well, as I always 
do, with the Senator from Washington, Mrs. Murray. I would like to 
bring this to a conclusion as rapidly as we can. I think this debate 
has been useful to do that. I look forward to continuing it.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island.