[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 159 (2013), Part 12]
[Senate]
[Pages 17130-17134]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. DURBIN (for himself and Mr. Franken):
  S. 1704. A bill to expand the use of open textbooks in order to 
achieve savings for students; to the Committee on Health, Education, 
Labor, and Pensions.
  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. 1704

       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 ``Affordable College Textbook 
     Act''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds the following:
       (1) The high cost of college textbooks continues to be a 
     barrier for many students in achieving higher education.
       (2) According to the College Board, during the 2012-2013 
     academic year, the average student budget for college books 
     and supplies was $1,200.
       (3) The Government Accountability Office found that new 
     textbook prices increased 82 percent over the last decade and 
     that although Federal efforts to increase price transparency 
     have provided students and families with more and better 
     information, more must be done to address rising costs.
       (4) The growth of the Internet has enabled the creation and 
     sharing of digital content, including open educational 
     resources that can be freely used by students, teachers, and 
     members of the public.
       (5) Using open educational resources in place of 
     traditional materials in large-enrollment college courses can 
     reduce textbook costs by 80 to 100 percent.
       (6) Federal investment in expanding the use of open 
     educational resources could significantly lower college 
     textbook costs and reduce financial barriers to higher 
     education, while making efficient use of taxpayer funds.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Educational resource.--The term ``educational 
     resource'' means an educational material that can be used in 
     postsecondary instruction, including textbooks and other 
     written or audiovisual works.
       (2) Institution of higher education.--The term 
     ``institution of higher education'' has the meaning given the 
     term in section 101 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 
     U.S.C. 1001).
       (3) Open educational resource.--The term ``open educational 
     resource'' means an educational resource that is licensed 
     under an open license and made freely available online to the 
     public.
       (4) Open license.--The term ``open license'' means a 
     worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive, perpetual, 
     irrevocable copyright license granting the public permission 
     to access, reproduce, publicly perform, publicly display, 
     adapt, distribute, and otherwise use the work and adaptations 
     of the work for any purpose, conditioned only on the 
     requirement that attribution be given to authors as 
     designated.
       (5) Open textbook.--The term ``open textbook'' means an 
     open educational resource or set of open educational 
     resources that either is a textbook or can be used in place 
     of a textbook for a postsecondary course at an institution of 
     higher education.
       (6) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of Education.

     SEC. 4. GRANT PROGRAM.

       (a) Grants Authorized.--From the amounts appropriated under 
     subsection (i), the Secretary shall make grants, on a 
     competitive basis, to eligible entities to support pilot 
     programs that expand the use of open textbooks in order to 
     achieve savings for students.
       (b) Eligible Entity.--In this section, the term ``eligible 
     entity'' means an institution of higher education or group of 
     institutions of higher education.
       (c) Applications.--
       (1) In general.--Each eligible entity desiring a grant 
     under this section, after consultation with relevant faculty 
     (including those engaged in the creation of open educational 
     resources), shall submit an application to the Secretary at 
     such time, in such manner, and accompanied by such 
     information as the Secretary may reasonably require.
       (2) Contents.--Each application submitted under paragraph 
     (1) shall include a description of the project to be 
     completed with grant funds and--
       (A) a plan for promoting and tracking the use of open 
     textbooks in postsecondary courses offered by the eligible 
     entity, including an estimate of the projected savings that 
     will be achieved for students;
       (B) a plan for evaluating, before creating new open 
     educational resources, whether existing open educational 
     resources could be used or adapted for the same purpose;
       (C) a plan for quality review and review of accuracy of any 
     open educational resources to be created or adapted through 
     the grant;
       (D) a plan for disseminating information about the results 
     of the project to institutions of higher education outside of 
     the eligible entity, including promoting the adoption of any 
     open textbooks created or adapted through the grant; and
       (E) a statement on consultation with relevant faculty, 
     including those engaged in the creation of open educational 
     resources, in the development of the application.
       (d) Special Consideration.--In awarding grants under this 
     section, the Secretary shall give special consideration to 
     applications that demonstrate the greatest potential to--
       (1) achieve the highest level of savings for students 
     through sustainable expanded use of open textbooks in 
     postsecondary courses offered by the eligible entity;
       (2) expand the use of open textbooks at institutions of 
     higher education outside of the eligible entity; and
       (3) produce--
       (A) the highest quality open textbooks;
       (B) open textbooks that can be most easily utilized and 
     adapted by faculty members at institutions of higher 
     education;

[[Page 17131]]

       (C) open textbooks that correspond to the highest 
     enrollment courses at institutions of higher education; and
       (D) open textbooks created or adapted in partnership with 
     entities, including campus bookstores, that will assist in 
     marketing and distribution of the open textbook.
       (e) Use of Funds.--An eligible entity that receives a grant 
     under this section shall use the grant funds to carry out any 
     of the following activities to expand the use of open 
     textbooks:
       (1) Professional development for faculty and staff members 
     at institutions of higher education, including the search for 
     and review of open textbooks.
       (2) Creation or adaptation of open educational resources, 
     especially open textbooks.
       (3) Development or improvement of tools and informational 
     resources that support the use of open textbooks.
       (4) Research evaluating the efficacy of the use of open 
     textbooks for achieving savings for students.
       (5) Partnerships with other entities, including other 
     institutions of higher education, for-profit organizations, 
     or nonprofit organizations, to carry out any of the 
     activities described in paragraphs (1) through (4).
       (f) License.--Educational resources created or adapted 
     under subsection (e) shall be licensed under an open license.
       (g) Access and Distribution.--The full and complete digital 
     content of each educational resource created or adapted under 
     subsection (e) shall be made available free of charge to the 
     public--
       (1) on an easily accessible and interoperable website, 
     which shall be identified to the Secretary by the eligible 
     entity; and
       (2) in a machine readable, digital format that anyone can 
     directly download, edit, and redistribute.
       (h) Report.--Upon an eligible entity's completion of a 
     project supported under this section, the eligible entity 
     shall prepare and submit a report to the Secretary 
     regarding--
       (1) the effectiveness of the pilot program in expanding the 
     use of open textbooks and in achieving savings for students;
       (2) the impact of the pilot program on expanding the use of 
     open textbooks at institutions of higher education outside of 
     the eligible entity;
       (3) educational resources created or adapted under the 
     grant, including instructions on where the public can access 
     each educational resource under the terms of subsection (g); 
     and
       (4) all project costs, including the value of any volunteer 
     labor and institutional capital used for the project.
       (i) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out 
     this section for each of the 5 succeeding fiscal years after 
     the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 5. PRICE INFORMATION.

       Section 133(b) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 
     U.S.C. 1015b(b)) is amended--
       (1) by striking paragraph (6); and
       (2) in paragraph (9);
       (A) by striking subparagraphs (A) and (B); and
       (B) by striking ``a college textbook that--'' and inserting 
     ``a college textbook that may include printed materials, 
     computer disks, website access, and electronically 
     distributed materials.''.

     SEC. 6. SENSE OF CONGRESS.

       It is the sense of Congress that institutions of higher 
     education should encourage the consideration of open 
     textbooks by faculty within the generally accepted principles 
     of academic freedom that establishes the right and 
     responsibility of faculty members, individually and 
     collectively, to select course materials that are 
     pedagogically most appropriate for their classes.

     SEC. 7. REPORT TO CONGRESS.

       Not later than July 1, 2016, the Secretary shall prepare 
     and submit a report to the Committee on Health, Education, 
     Labor, and Pensions of the Senate and the Committee on 
     Education and the Workforce of the House of Representatives 
     detailing--
       (1) the open textbooks created or adapted under this Act;
       (2) the adoption of such open textbooks; and
       (3) the savings generated for students, States, and the 
     Federal Government through the use of open textbooks.

     SEC. 8. GAO REPORT.

       Not later than July 1, 2017, the Comptroller General of the 
     United States shall prepare and submit a report to the 
     Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the 
     Senate and the Committee on Education and the Workforce of 
     the House of Representatives on the cost of textbooks to 
     students at institutions of higher education. The report 
     shall particularly examine--
       (1) the change of the cost of textbooks;
       (2) the factors that have contributed to the change of the 
     cost of textbooks;
       (3) the extent to which open textbooks are used at 
     institutions of higher education; and
       (4) the impact of open textbooks on the cost of textbooks.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DURBIN (for himself, Mrs. Gillibrand, and Mr. Markey):
  S. 1705. A bill to provide a Federal charter for the National Fab Lab 
Network, a national network of local digital fabrication facilities 
providing community access to advanced manufacturing tools for learning 
skills, developing inventions, creating businesses, and producing 
personalized products; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
  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. 1705

       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 ``National Fab Lab Network Act 
     of 2013''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds the following:
       (1) Scientific discoveries and technical innovations are 
     critical to the economic and national security of the United 
     States.
       (2) Maintaining the leadership of the United States in 
     science, technology, engineering, and mathematics will 
     require a diverse population with the skills, interest, and 
     access to tools required to advance these fields.
       (3) Just as earlier digital revolutions in communications 
     and computation provided individuals with the Internet and 
     personal computers, a digital revolution in fabrication will 
     allow anyone to make almost anything, anywhere.
       (4) Fab labs like the Center for Bits and Atoms at the 
     Massachusetts Institute of Technology provide a model for a 
     new kind of national laboratory that links local facilities 
     for advanced manufacturing to expand access and empower 
     communities.
       (5) A coordinated national public-private partnership will 
     be the most effective way to accelerate the provision of this 
     infrastructure for learning skills, developing inventions, 
     creating businesses, and producing personalized products.

     SEC. 3. ESTABLISHMENT OF NATIONAL FAB LAB NETWORK.

       (a) Definitions.--In this section--
       (1) the term ``fab lab'' means a facility--
       (A) equipped with an integrated suite of fabrication tools 
     to convert digital designs into functional physical things 
     and scanning tools to convert physical things into digital 
     designs; and
       (B) available for a range of individual and collaborative 
     educational, commercial, creative, and social purposes, based 
     on guidelines established by the NFLN relating to sustainable 
     operation; and
       (2) the term ``NFLN'' means the National Fab Lab Network.
       (b) Federal Charter.--The National Fab Lab Network is a 
     federally charted nonprofit corporation, which shall 
     facilitate the creation of a national network of local fab 
     labs and serve as a resource to assist stakeholders with the 
     effective operation of fab labs.
       (c) Membership and Organization.--
       (1) In general.--Eligibility for membership in the NFLN and 
     the rights and privileges of members shall be as provided in 
     the constitution and bylaws of the NFLN. The Board of 
     Directors, officers, and other employees of the NFLN, and 
     their powers and duties, shall be provided in the bylaws of 
     the NFLN.
       (2) Board of directors.--The Board of Directors of the NFLN 
     shall include--
       (A) the Director of the Fab Foundation;
       (B) members of the manufacturing sector and entrepreneurial 
     community; and
       (C) leaders in science, technology, engineering, and 
     mathematics education.
       (3) Coordination.--When appropriate, the NFLN should work 
     with Manufacturing Extension Partnership Centers of the 
     National Institute of Standards and Technology, the Small 
     Business Administration, and other agencies of the Federal 
     Government to provide additional resources to fab lab users.
       (d) Functions.--The NFLN shall--
       (1) serve as the coordinating body for the creation of a 
     national network of local fab labs in the United States;
       (2) provide a first point of contact for organizations and 
     communities seeking to create fab labs, providing 
     information, assessing suitability, advising on the lab 
     lifecycle, and maintaining descriptions of prospective and 
     operating sites;
       (3) link funders and sites with operational entities that 
     can source and install fab labs, provide training, assist 
     with operations, account for spending, and assess impact;
       (4) perform outreach for individuals and communities on the 
     benefits available through the NFLN;
       (5) facilitate use of the NFLN in synergistic programs, 
     such as workforce training, job creation, research broader 
     impacts, and the production of civic infrastructure; and
       (6) offer transparency in the management, governance, and 
     operation of the NFLN.
       (e) Purposes.--In carrying out its functions, the NFLN's 
     purposes and goals shall be to--

[[Page 17132]]

       (1) create a national network of connected local fab labs 
     to empower individuals and communities in the United States; 
     and
       (2) foster the use of distributed digital fabrication tools 
     to promote science, technology, engineering and math skills, 
     increase invention and innovation, create businesses and 
     jobs, and fulfill needs.
       (f) Funding.--The NFLN may accept gifts from private 
     individuals, corporations, government agencies, or other 
     organizations.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. KIRK (for himself, Mr. Coons, Mr. Brown, and Mr. Blunt):
  S. 1709. A bill to require the Committee on Technology of the 
National Science and Technology Council to develop and update a 
national manufacturing competitiveness strategic plan, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
  Mr. COONS. Mr. President, I come to the floor again today to talk 
about jobs, about manufacturing jobs, about the high-quality, high-
skill wage jobs America needs for today and for the future.
  Today I have introduced a bill which shows that dealing with our 
ongoing challenges of supporting our manufacturing sector and growing 
jobs in our manufacturing sector can have bipartisan solutions. Senator 
Mark Kirk of Illinois joined me in introducing the American 
Manufacturing Competitiveness Act, which has a simple but important 
objective: to require the creation of a national manufacturing 
strategy.
  Today more than 12 million Americans are directly employed in 
manufacturing. As I have said on the floor before as part of our 
Manufacturing Jobs for America Initiative, manufacturing jobs are good 
jobs. They are high-skilled jobs, they are high-wage jobs, they are 
high-benefit jobs, and they have a terrific secondary benefit in terms 
of the other support and service sector jobs that come along with 
manufacturing jobs in a community.
  We need to know the direction we are heading as a country as we try 
to support the growth of manufacturing. We have grown more than half a 
million manufacturing jobs in the last 3 years. That is an encouraging 
sign. We are one of the most productive in the output of our 
manufacturing sector of all the countries in the world.
  What we have lacked is a very coordinated strategy between the 
Federal Government, State governments, and the private sector to align 
all of our investments--our investments in research and development, 
our investments in new skills, our investments in infrastructure--to 
make sure they are all heading in the right direction.
  Do our competitors have national manufacturing strategies? 
Absolutely. Germany, China, India, South Africa, and Russia all have 
thoroughly developed, deeply researched, and prominently successful 
strategies for how to accelerate and sustain manufacturing as a key 
part of their economies.
  This bill would amend the America COMPETES Act. It would require 
every 4 years that the Secretary of Commerce, advised by a board of 15 
different folks, pull together and think through, research, and then 
deliver a national manufacturing strategy. This doesn't require new 
programs. It doesn't even necessarily require new funding or new 
Federal expenditures. It only requires that we coordinate all the 
different areas where the Federal Government is investing in supporting 
manufacturing and where State and local governments are working in 
partnership with the private sector. This may be a small but vital step 
toward giving the lift we need for our manufacturing sector to continue 
its sustained growth of the last few years.
  Why is a manufacturing strategy essential? Because we have a couple 
of areas where, frankly, we are falling short--in infrastructure, in 
access to capital, and in skills. Having a highly skilled manufacturing 
workforce is one of the things we need to do if we are going to win the 
fight to regain our international prominence as the leading global 
manufacturing country.
  The Manufacturing Institute and Deloitte, a global consulting firm, 
have both independently concluded that there are as many as 600,000 
manufacturing jobs in America today that are unfilled because of a lack 
of a workforce with the relevant skills. The Society of Manufacturing 
Engineers estimates that number could increased to 3 million by 2015.
  So a focus through a national strategy and through some facilitating 
investments and legislation by this body and the House and by enactment 
by the President and investments across-the-board could deal with these 
important skill gaps.
  Why are there skill gaps in manufacturing? Many Americans have a 
misconception about what manufacturing is like today. They have a 
picture in their heads of manufacturing from 10, 20, or 30 years ago 
when it required simple labor, when it required repeated routine tasks 
such as simply putting on a bolt or affixing a particular piece onto a 
vehicle, where there wasn't any teamwork, there wasn't any continuous 
improvement required, and there weren't analytical skills required. 
That was the manufacturing line of the past, not of today and certainly 
not of the future. In fact, the skills required to be successful in 
modern advanced manufacturing are quite different from what they were 
10, 20, or 30 years ago. Today one has to work as part of a team and be 
able to troubleshoot and problem-solve.
  There are fewer people working on manufacturing lines, but they are 
higher in productivity because the analytical skills they are bringing 
to the job are greater than they have ever been before. That is also 
why manufacturing can be a more satisfying career, a more rewarding 
place to work than it was in the past, because it engages the whole 
human being. It engages the whole worker. It allows them to have 
ownership of the quality of the finished product.
  One of the lessons American automobile manufacturing learned in the 
1970s, 1980s, and 1990s as it faced the threat of higher quality auto 
manufacturing elsewhere in the world was to not only retool the 
manufacturing line but to empower the individual worker to be engaged 
in quality control.
  Those of us here in the Senate who worked in the manufacturing 
industry know what it meant to have gone through a process where we had 
to certify. You had to go through a searching auditing process to be 
able to demonstrate, if you were a component supplier or if you were 
part of a supply chain, that you were meeting world-class standards. In 
fact, the ISO 9000 system--the International Organization for 
Standardization--and its 9000 series audits that swept through the 
country over 20 years and ended up resulting in a higher quality of 
manufacturing was just the first of a number of steps toward requiring 
those who were working in manufacturing facilities to have a higher 
level of skills.
  One of the ways in which we have an ongoing challenge is that 
manufacturers--medium and small manufacturers with whom I visited up 
and down the State of Delaware--don't know the level of skills and the 
quality of skills of young people they wish to hire who may have just 
finished high school or might have taken a certificate course with a 
community college. We don't have a transportable, translatable 
certificate for basic manufacturing skills.
  One of the innovations of the IT industry was a whole series of 
skills certifications that allow someone to know, when they are hiring 
a young person to do office support for IT or when they are hiring 
someone to be a network administrator, whether they have the practical 
skills they need to do that job and do it well. They can't guess that 
by where they went to high school or what courses they took at a 
college. We don't have a similar sort of reliable, transportable, 
translatable, manufacturing skill certification process. That may be a 
part of this national manufacturing strategy.
  We certainly have heard from manufacturers large and small--not only 
in Delaware but around the country--about what they need, what would 
put a floor beneath their growth and would allow them to be globally 
competitive. No. 1 would be a stronger, skilled workforce; No. 2 would 
be more access to capital; and No. 3 would be more and better access on 
a fair basis to a global market and a global economy.

[[Page 17133]]

  We have had a great first couple of weeks with the Manufacturing Jobs 
for America Initiative. More than 25 Senators have contributed more 
than 40 bills. Many of these are broad or bold or bipartisan bills that 
contain the ideas that I think can sustain and grow manufacturing in 
the United States going forward. It is a growing menu of bills--bills 
that are bipartisan and that I believe not only need but deserve a vote 
on the floor later in this Congress.
  I am grateful to Senator Kirk for partnering with me in introducing 
this bill today, the American Manufacturing Competitiveness Act, and I 
am hopeful it will pick up more bipartisan sponsors in the days and 
weeks ahead. I also hope, working in partnership with the Manufacturing 
Caucus, ably led by Senator Stabenow and Senator Graham, we will begin 
to hammer out the bipartisan bills that will deserve a vote on this 
floor and that will ultimately reach enactment through the Congress and 
by signature of our President. With that, we might well be able to 
deliver on what we hear most often from our constituents: Help us grow 
high-quality jobs in this country.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BLUMENTHAL (for himself, Ms. Ayotte, Mr. Cornyn, and Mr. 
        Casey):
  S. 1714. A bill to impose sanctions with respect to Syria, to expand 
existing sanctions with respect to Syria, and for other purposes; to 
the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
  Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, I am here to talk about the Syria 
Sanctions Enhancement Act of 2013, which I am very proud to introduce 
today, with bipartisan support, joined by my colleagues Senators 
Ayotte, Cornyn, and Casey. This bill is a comprehensive effort to 
update our existing system of sanctions and to reflect the reality that 
President Bashar al-Assad and his murderous regime continue to engage 
in a horrible civil war against the Syrian people.
  This bill builds upon the longstanding U.S. sanctions regime against 
Syria begun in 2004 to deal with that government's policies supporting 
terrorism, continuing its occupation of Lebanon, pursuing weapons of 
mass destruction and missile programs, and undermining U.S. and 
international efforts to stabilize Iraq. Following events in Syria 
beginning in March of 2011, a series of executive orders have been 
issued to address the ongoing violence and human rights abuses that 
have been supported and perpetrated relentlessly by the Assad regime. 
Fortunately, Congress has come together on a bipartisan basis to 
sanction many people who are committing terrible atrocities. Now is the 
time to add to those sanctions, to enhance and enforce them, and ensure 
they encompass everyone who is enabling Assad to continue his massacres 
against his own people.
  I have seen some of the effects of this cruel war in person. Earlier 
this year, I traveled to the Zaatari refugee camp in Jordan, with 
Senator McCain and Senator Graham, where I saw firsthand how the Assad 
regime has torn families and lives apart. I returned home from that 
trip convinced, along with my colleagues, that the United States cannot 
stand idle while this war rages on and over 1 million Syrians are 
displaced from their country--a substantial part--the estimates are 30 
percent of its entire population displaced from their homes. I remain 
convinced the United States should take action not only with sanctions 
but with more effective humanitarian relief. Sanctions are an effective 
way to cut off Assad's financing and therefore his source of power. 
Humanitarian relief is necessary to aid the Syrian people who have 
become refugees in such enormous numbers, even as we pursue those 
sanctions.
  Thankfully, most of the world has come together to denounce and 
isolate Assad for his horrible abuses. Appallingly, though, a few--most 
notably Russian banks--finance Assad and enable his continued 
atrocities.
  In September, Senators Ayotte, Cornyn, Shaheen, and I urged the 
Treasury Department to sanction those Russian banks that are 
perpetrating war in Syria. They are enabling that war as well as the 
atrocities it has spawned, and there is significant evidence that some 
Russian banks, including VTB, VEB, and Gazprombank, have given 
financial cover to Assad and may still be hiding his assets. This bill, 
the Syria Sanctions Enhancement Act, would ensure that those actors do 
not go unpunished. It would sanction financial institutions doing 
business with Assad and his senior officials, and it would also provide 
for a full accounting of all Assad's assets. If Assad is hiding money 
in Russian banks or elsewhere, we need to know where that money is, 
because it rightly belongs to the people of Syria, not to its murderous 
dictator.
  But our actions against Assad must be wider in scope than simply the 
financial sector. Therefore, the Syria Sanctions Enhancement Act looks 
at all the perpetrators of horrific violence who empower Assad and it 
creates sanctions against them. This bill codifies existing executive 
orders that sanction senior Syrian officials and people who sell or 
invest in the Syrian Government. It sanctions anyone who helps the 
Assad government develop weapons of mass destruction or provides them 
with conventional weapons. They are responsible for the majority of 
killings in Syria. They are complicit, and knowingly, purposefully--
they are not merely the enablers, they are the providers of those 
assets used by Assad against his own people.
  We have seen how some unscrupulous arms dealers continue to provide 
arms to the Assad regime that enable his killing. Just yesterday, I was 
pleased to announce that the Defense Department will stop doing 
business with Rosoboronexport, the arms dealer that is selling weapons 
to Assad. Think of it: The U.S. Government was financing, with U.S. 
taxpayer money, purchases of helicopters for the Afghan Government, to 
go to the Afghans with the knowledge that that same Russian export 
agency was selling weapons to Assad. It was stopped, but it is just one 
example of a company that allows Assad to continue killing his own 
people.
  This bill also requires the President to submit a list of people 
responsible for human rights abuses committed against the people of 
Syria. The President must submit a list of those culpable individuals 
who should be held accountable for human rights abuses committed by 
Assad against his own people, and the bill will sanction anyone who has 
provided goods, services or support to enable human rights abuses.
  As my colleagues can see, this bill would do quite a few things, but 
there are a number of important things it will not do. It will not 
prevent the United States from supporting the moderates who are 
fighting against the Assad regime, and it would not jeopardize our 
ongoing efforts to destroy Syria's chemical weapons stockpile; rather, 
it creates a strategic framework to ensure that the prolonged 
dismantling of chemical weapons does not serve as a cover for the 
international community to ignore the brutal reality of these 
slaughters throughout Syria. The bill is carefully crafted to ensure 
that the sanctions do not target the people of Syria themselves who are 
just trying to survive during a difficult time. That is why 
humanitarian relief from this country is of such paramount importance.
  Over the past few months, there has been a lot of debate over what 
the United States should or should not do in Syria.
  Over these past months, the debate has focused on military force and 
many have been hesitant to use such military force in Syria. But that 
does not mean the United States can or should stand idle on the 
sidelines as hundreds of thousands of people are dying and the war 
threatens to create a wider conflict in the Middle East. I think we can 
all agree, on both sides of the aisle, that we should be strengthening 
sanctions against the human rights abusers and supporters of Assad and 
his military that is tirelessly, relentlessly, and purposefully 
murdering his own people.
  This bill is a bipartisan attempt to move forward around the common 
concerns of helping the Syrian people. In the coming days, I look 
forward to a debate on this bill and the way forward

[[Page 17134]]

in Syria as we consider Iran's nuclear program and other important 
factors. There will be a meeting in Geneva upcoming. I view this bill 
as a means of strengthening our government's hand as we seek peace in 
Syria and seek to strengthen those forces in Syria that seek to protect 
their own people.
  I look forward to working with my colleagues on this important effort 
to ensure that the United States continues to stand up and speak out 
strongly on the side of the people of Syria against a regime that is 
striving solely and single-mindedly to keep itself in power at all 
costs, in fact, whatever the cost in the slaughter and displacement of 
its own people.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. KAINE (for himself and Mr. Chambliss):
  S. 1717. A bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to improve 
oversight of educational assistance provided under laws administered by 
the Secretary of Veterans Affairs and the Secretary of Defense, and for 
other purposes; to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
  Mr. KAINE. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Servicemember 
Education Reform and Vocational Act of 2013, SERVE. I am pleased 
Senator Chambliss joins me in introducing this bill. This bipartisan 
legislation will improve the quality of education for our veterans and 
military members.
  To date, over one million veterans have taken advantage of the Post-
9/11 GI Bill and $30 billion has been invested. Yet graduation rates 
remain a concern and the unemployment rate among veterans, especially 
young veterans who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan, remains higher 
than the national average.
  As the United States begins to draw down its forces after more than a 
decade at war, it is more important than ever to demonstrate our 
commitment to the brave men and women who have served and sacrificed to 
protect our Nation. An important part of this commitment is ensuring 
our Nation's veterans are prepared for their transition from military 
service to civilian life.
  In Virginia, one in every nine individuals is a veteran, and we have 
27 installations across the State, making Virginia as connected to the 
military as any State in the country.
  As I have travelled throughout Virginia and have had the opportunity 
to meet with servicemembers, veterans, and their families, I have 
listened to their concerns and ideas. These conversations have 
reinforced my commitment to fight persistent barriers to veterans' 
employment, and ensure that veterans have access to quality education 
programs that yield results.
  For these reasons, it is our responsibility to ensure that the 
Nation's investment in veteran education and training yields successful 
results and gives these men and women the tools they need to succeed in 
the workforce.
  I am a strong believer that education is the best investment that any 
country can make to ensure the success of its citizens. This is why my 
first bill, the TROOP Talent Act, focused on assisting our 
servicemembers and veterans in their efforts to gain civilian 
credentials and transition into the workforce.
  The bill I am introducing today, the SERVE Act, is companion 
legislation that will raise the bar on minimum standards that 
educational institutions must meet to ensure servicemembers are getting 
a quality education.
  The bill will require institutions to disclose information such as 
graduation rates, withdrawal policies, and program costs to students 
and ensure programs fully deliver what they advertise.
  The bill will require institutions to provide access to academic and/
or career counseling for military and veteran students in hopes of not 
only improving their chances of graduating, but also helping prepare 
them for future careers.
  The bill will facilitate the use of VA and DoD educational benefits 
for employment training programs by creating a 5-State pilot program. 
States will be charged with developing best practices needed to ensure 
that quality employment training, apprenticeship, and on-the-job 
training programs are available and accessible for beneficiaries of the 
post-9/11 GI Bill program.
  The bill will require an annual report to relevant Senate and House 
Committees with disaggregated information on which schools and programs 
veteran and military students are putting their educational benefits 
toward.
  Today's veterans have been referred to as ``the next Greatest 
Generation.'' They answered the call to serve our Nation.
  They have put it all on the line and invested heavily and personally 
in the future of our country. Let us do everything we can to capitalize 
on their experience and character and prepare them for the challenges 
they and our Nation will face in the future.
  The SERVE Act will ensure that the educational benefits our veterans 
and military members earned are being spent on quality education.

                          ____________________