[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 159 (2013), Part 8]
[Senate]
[Pages 10924-10927]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




KEEP STUDENT LOANS AFFORDABLE ACT OF 2013--MOTION TO PROCEED--Continued

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, it is my understanding a motion to proceed 
to S. 1238 is now pending; is that correct?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct.

[[Page 10925]]




                             Cloture Motion

  Mr. REID. I have a cloture motion at the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The cloture motion having been presented under 
rule XXII, the Chair directs the clerk to read the motion.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

                             Cloture Motion

       We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the 
     provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate, 
     hereby move to bring to a close the debate on the motion to 
     proceed to calendar No. 124, S. 1238, a bill to amend the 
     Higher Education Act of 1965 to extend the current reduced 
     interest rate for undergraduate Federal Direct Stafford Loans 
     for 1 year, to modify required distribution rules for pension 
     plans, and for other purposes.
         Harry Reid, Tom Harkin, Jack Reed, Kirsten E. Gillibrand, 
           Patrick J. Leahy, Amy Klobuchar, Tom Udall, Sheldon 
           Whitehouse, Ron Wyden, Benjamin L. Cardin, Richard 
           Blumenthal, Christopher A. Coons, Sherrod Brown, Robert 
           P. Casey Jr., Elizabeth Warren, Al Franken, Richard J. 
           Durbin, Debbie Stabenow.

  Mr. REID. I ask unanimous consent the mandatory quorum required under 
rule XXII be waived.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The Senator from California.
  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, as I understand it, the majority leader 
has just filed cloture on a bill that would keep us at a 3.4-percent 
student loan rate for Stafford loans, which impact about 7 million 
Americans, for a year. Am I correct on that?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The cloture motion is on the motion to 
proceed.
  Mrs. BOXER. That is a very important cloture motion. I hope we will 
move forward on this bill in a bipartisan way. As of now, student loan 
rates have doubled on Stafford loans. In my State of California, 
550,000 Californians are facing a doubling of their student loans, from 
3.4 percent to 6.8 percent. I have asked my students to contact me and 
talk to me about their real-world stories and what it means to them to 
see a doubling of their student loan interest rate.
  I will tell you they are more eloquent than I could ever be. They 
talk about how they look at their dreams and maybe they will become 
fantasy dreams. They talk about what it would be to believe you are in 
a ball and chain of student loan debt that is so large it overwhelms 
you.
  In the name of those students and all the students across the 
country, I hope the majority leader's move to resolve this for at least 
a year and keep those loans at 3.4 percent--I hope that motion to 
proceed will go forward and that the bill itself will pass.
  What are the alternatives? Every alternative I have heard from the 
Republicans leads to higher interest rates with no cap. I don't know if 
you remember the years that interest rates rose after a period of low 
rates, and they went up to 7, 8, 9, 10, double digits--12 percent. I 
remember those days. It is hard for our people to remember that, but 
those were crushing interest rates.
  If we do not have a cap on student loan interest rates, we are facing 
a real problem in the future, a problem that is going to impact the 
quality of life of our families. We are already seeing the Fed put out 
statements saying the crush of the burden of student loans without 
these high interest rates is having an impact on our economic recovery. 
I have read stories of young people who were putting off marriage and 
having families because of the crush of student loan debt.
  I am very pleased we are moving forward on this commonsense proposal 
to keep these rates at 3.4 percent. We offset the costs by closing tax 
loopholes that hardly affect anybody at all. It has to do with 
inheritance on a 401(k), and it will pay for this proposal.
  I am very supportive of the immigration bill, but at the last minute 
my Republican friends came forward with an enormous proposal to build 
an even bigger fence and wider fence and stronger fence. I guess the 
song ``Don't Fence Me In''--it is an old song--doesn't apply anymore. 
We are going to be fenced in. The cost of that is $20 billion, $30 
billion, $40 billion. Surely we can find $4 billion for a year to make 
sure our students do not have to face a doubling of these rates.


                          McCarthy Nomination

  I also come to the floor to speak about Gina McCarthy. For those 
people who have not followed this debate, Gina McCarthy has been 
nominated by President Obama to lead the Environmental Protection 
Agency. To me she is the poster child of bipartisanship and one of the 
best qualified candidates I have ever seen for this position.
  She is experienced; she is smart; she understands the law; she 
understands energy; she understands everything she has to understand to 
undertake this job; she understands court decisions; she understands 
the health impacts of dirty air; she also understands that without a 
clean environment and a healthy environment we cannot have economic 
growth.
  I often retell the story that when the walls came down in Eastern 
Europe, the air was so thick you could not even see the people. One of 
the first things they did is ask us how to clean up their air. We have 
made great strides, and we will continue to do that.
  Yes, we have to face carbon pollution and the President is taking a 
stand to say he wants to preserve this planet and he is going to follow 
the signs. Some people have said: We do not like that. Therefore, maybe 
we should not vote for Gina McCarthy.
  Can I just say this? The President has his policies, and you do not 
have to agree with them--or you can. I do. If you do not, that is fair. 
That is fine. But somebody has to run the Environmental Protection 
Agency. If you have a problem with those policies, you are going to 
have to go to someone who is intelligent and wise and bipartisan in 
nature to talk to, and Gina McCarthy is one of those people.
  This is the second time Gina McCarthy has been nominated for a top 
position at the EPA. She was confirmed by the Senate for her current 
position, which is the Assistant Administrator for the Office of Air 
and Radiation, without one ``no'' vote. Let me reiterate that. No one 
stood up and said no. Everyone supported her.
  The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee reported out her 
nomination on May 16. It is July. This is the longest period that EPA 
has ever gone without an Administrator, and the full Senate should 
confirm this nominee as soon as possible.
  When I say Gina McCarthy is the poster child for bipartisanship, I 
mean what I say. She has over three decades of public service at the 
local, State, and Federal levels. She has demonstrated a record of 
working with Republicans and Democrats. Let me just run through the 
Republicans: The Republican Governor of Connecticut Jodi Rell, four 
Republican Governors of Massachusetts, William Weld, Paul Cellucci, 
Jane Swift, and Mitt Romney; and then a Democratic President, Barack 
Obama.
  Let's look at what former Republican Governor Jane Swift said about 
Gina McCarthy in an opinion piece that ran in the Boston Globe. 
Remember, this is a former Republican Governor. She said:

       Gina McCarthy . . . would bring competence, fairness and 
     bipartisanship to Washington. . . .

  And:

       McCarthy's track record of accomplishment and her 
     collaborative, pragmatic approach to policymaking are the 
     reason she enjoys such [strong] support.

  This former Republican Governor goes on to say:

       [T]he Senate has an immediate opportunity to strike a blow 
     for good government and bureaucratic competence by swiftly 
     approving McCarthy's nomination.

  The title of Governor Swift's article in support of Gina reads, ``A 
qualified nominee for the EPA.'' This was written on May 23, 2013.
  Christine Todd Whitman--we all know her, she was the former EPA 
Administrator, a Republican--called for a fair confirmation process.
  You can look at 59 businesses, health officials, environmental 
organizations, scientists--they all support Gina McCarthy. For example, 
Dr. Georges Benjamin, Executive Director of the American Public Health 
Association, said:


[[Page 10926]]

       Ms. McCarthy has been a true champion for public health and 
     has consistently demonstrated her leadership in developing 
     sensible safeguards to protect the public's health from 
     pollution. . . . [She] is well respected by both the public 
     health community and industry and has a solid record of 
     working across the aisle with Democrats and Republicans. . . 
     .

  That is a very strong statement. Then there is Gloria Bergquist, vice 
president of the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers. Here is an EPA 
Administrator nominee getting the support of the vice president of the 
Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers. That is a rarity. This is what 
she said:

       She's a pragmatic policymaker. She has aspirational 
     environmental goals, but she accepts real-world economics.

  That is why this nominee should be embraced by everyone. Yes, she has 
aspirational environmental goals for her grandchildren--someday when 
she has them--she wants them to breathe clean air and so on, drink 
clean water, but she understands the pragmatics that go into making 
policy. I believe Gina will lead the EPA to transparency, she will 
follow the science and the law, and, yes, she will be straight from the 
shoulder and she will tell Republicans and Democrats alike how she sees 
the issue; when we do not agree, how we can reach agreement. By the 
way, Gina has answered more than 1,000 questions from Republicans on 
the EPW employment.
  The EPA has provided extensive information to Members of the Senate 
in connection with this nomination. This is the longest the EPA has 
gone without an Administrator. How is this the right thing to do? This 
is the United States of America. This President deserves to have his 
people in place the same as a Republican President.
  Gina McCarthy has a deep understanding that the health and safety of 
the American people and a growing economy go hand in hand. She will 
lead the EPA in a manner consistent with her past track record of 
success.
  From my perspective, approving Gina McCarthy to head the EPA is a 
very important step toward helping the health of our children as well 
as future generations, and that is our most sacred obligation. We need 
her strong bipartisan approach to lead the EPA.
  It is no great secret that in this last election both parties were 
fighting for the votes of women. It was a knockdown, drag-out battle. 
The Democrats won the women's vote, which helped to elect President 
Obama--by a lot. The Republicans said: You know what, we have to 
change, we have to reach out. This is their chance.
  This woman deserves a promotion. There is nothing in her record that 
should make anyone fear her. She is a good woman and a hard-working 
person. She has won unanimous support from this body before, and there 
is no reason why we should not confirm her.
  I am going to continue to speak out for Gina. I really do believe my 
colleagues are hearing the truth about Gina. I think they are getting 
the message that she is quite bipartisan. She has strong support in the 
business community as well as among scientists and others in the health 
community.
  I am very hopeful, first of all, that there will not be a filibuster. 
This woman deserves an up-or-down vote. Secondly, my colleagues will 
think long and hard, and they will agree with so many Republican 
lawmakers and former Governors who served with Gina and will stand up 
and say: She is a good woman and deserves this promotion.
  I note the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, I wish to thank my colleague from 
California Senator Boxer for her very eloquent and powerful words on 
behalf of my client and friend Gina McCarthy and her appointment as 
Administrator of the EPA. I don't make any pretense of matching the 
persuasiveness of her statement on behalf of Gina McCarthy, but I am 
going to be speaking throughout this week and for as long as it takes 
about Gina McCarthy because she is not only a client and friend, she is 
a consummate public servant and environmental protector.
  I have known Gina McCarthy for many years. In fact, I was her lawyer, 
which is why I say she was a client. As her lawyer, as attorney general 
of the State, she became a friend, not just because of her personal 
qualities of integrity and intelligence but because of her 
professionalism as an environmental protector who has sought always to 
recognize the need for a balance between environmental activism and 
economic growth. She recognizes a balance involving ardent and 
passionate protection of environmental values as much as anyone could 
possibly bring to this task. She also brings a willingness to listen, a 
willingness to hear all sides and consider all facts and, in fact, act 
as a passionate fact finder and lawyer as well as someone who respects 
the letter and spirit of the law.
  I wish to speak to my colleagues about her respect for the law. It 
isn't just the letter of the law she follows; it is the spirit and 
intent of the legislature. I think that is important and should be 
important to this body because she has reflected throughout her career, 
working for two Republican Governors in Massachusetts and Connecticut, 
her dedication to public interests and to the legislative intent of the 
laws she fulfills.
  She is truly an environmental protector for all seasons. She is a 
woman for all seasons and a public servant for all seasons. Over the 
years we worked together she was consistently tough, fair, and smart as 
an environmental law enforcer. She recognized the need to balance 
environmental activism with economic growth, and she also understood 
that the two are almost always mutually supportive.
  I am proud and delighted she has demonstrated her willingness to 
assume this critical position and to face the kind of difficult path 
this confirmation process has imposed. Achieving confirmation, which I 
actively support, should be truly bipartisan. Blocking a vote on her 
nomination is disappointing and destructive. It is paralyzing partisan 
gamesmanship at its worst.
  My former colleague is well respected in the environmental and 
business community in my State of Connecticut and around the country 
for her dedication to listening and developing public leadership and 
practical solutions to environmental challenges. She protects 
environmental values and policies while enhancing economic opportunity. 
She is no foe of the business community or economic progress and job 
creation. In fact, she sees how protecting economic values is 
complementary and supportive to environmental activism.
  The President couldn't have picked a more qualified person to lead 
the EPA at this critical time. The combination of her experience, 
intelligence, energy, and unquestioned expertise will make Gina 
McCarthy an effective EPA Administrator. She has a deep understanding 
that the health and safety of the American people depends on clean air 
and clean water. The American people, more than ever, understand that 
fact. She is the right person for this job at this time.
  I urge my colleagues to move forward with her confirmation, to avoid 
obstructionist tactics, and to embrace this nomination as good for all 
of the American people, for all of the interests she has sought to 
represent. I urge us to move forward as quickly as possible so this 
critical agency will have the kind of leadership that is so important 
at this point in our history.
  I urge my colleagues to support my friend and the President's choice 
to lead the EPA. I assure my colleagues they will not be disappointed.
  I thank the Chair. I yield the floor and I suggest the absence of a 
quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

[[Page 10927]]



                          ____________________