[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 161 (2015), Part 7]
[Senate]
[Pages 9343-9347]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. DAINES:
  S. 1552. A bill to authorize the Dry-Redwater Regional Water 
Authority System and the Musselshell-Judith Rural Water System in the 
State of Montana, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy 
and Natural Resources.
  Mr. DAINES. 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. 1552

       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 ``Clean Water for Rural 
     Communities Act''.

     SEC. 2. PURPOSE.

       The purpose of this Act is to ensure a safe and adequate 
     municipal, rural, and industrial water supply for the 
     citizens of--
       (1) Dawson, Garfield, McCone, Prairie, Richland, Judith 
     Basin, Wheatland, Golden Valley, Fergus, Yellowstone, and 
     Musselshell Counties in the State of Montana; and
       (2) McKenzie County, North Dakota.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Administrator.--The term ``Administrator'' means the 
     Administrator of the Western Area Power Administration.
       (2) Authority.--The term ``Authority'' means--
       (A) in the case of the Dry-Redwater Regional Water 
     Authority System--
       (i) the Dry-Redwater Regional Water Authority, which is a 
     publicly owned nonprofit water authority formed in accordance 
     with Mont. Code Ann. Sec.  75-6-302 (2007); and
       (ii) any nonprofit successor entity to the Authority 
     described in clause (i); and
       (B) in the case of the Musselshell-Judith Rural Water 
     System--
       (i) the Central Montana Regional Water Authority, which is 
     a publicly owned nonprofit water authority formed in 
     accordance with Mont. Code Ann. Sec.  75-6-302 (2007); and
       (ii) any nonprofit successor entity to the Authority 
     described in clause (i).
       (3) Dry-redwater regional water authority system.--The term 
     ``Dry-Redwater Regional Water Authority System'' means the 
     Dry-Redwater Regional Water Authority System authorized under 
     section 4(a)(1) with a project service area that includes--
       (A) Garfield and McCone Counties in the State;
       (B) the area west of the Yellowstone River in Dawson and 
     Richland Counties in the State;
       (C) T. 15 N. (including the area north of the Township) in 
     Prairie County in the State; and
       (D) the portion of McKenzie County, North Dakota, that 
     includes all land that is located west of the Yellowstone 
     River in the State of North Dakota.
       (4) Integrated system.--The term ``integrated system'' 
     means the transmission system owned by the Western Area Power 
     Administration Basin Electric Power District and the 
     Heartland Consumers Power District.
       (5) Musselshell-judith rural water system.--The term 
     ``Musselshell-Judith Rural Water System'' means the 
     Musselshell-Judith Rural Water System authorized under 
     section 4(a)(2) with a project service area that includes--
       (A) Judith Basin, Wheatland, Golden Valley, and Musselshell 
     Counties in the State;
       (B) the portion of Yellowstone County in the State within 2 
     miles of State Highway 3 and within 4 miles of the county 
     line between Golden Valley and Yellowstone Counties in the 
     State, inclusive of the Town of Broadview, Montana; and
       (C) the portion of Fergus County in the State within 2 
     miles of US Highway 87 and within 4 miles of the county line 
     between Fergus and Judith Basin Counties in the State, 
     inclusive of the Town of Moore, Montana.
       (6) Non-federal distribution system.--The term ``non-
     Federal distribution system'' means a non-Federal utility 
     that provides electricity to the counties covered by the Dry-
     Redwater Regional Water Authority System.
       (7) Pick-sloan program.--The term ``Pick-Sloan program'' 
     means the Pick-Sloan Missouri River Basin Program (authorized 
     by section 9 of the Act of December 22, 1944 (commonly known 
     as the ``Flood Control Act of 1944'') (58 Stat. 891, chapter 
     665)).
       (8) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of the Interior.
       (9) State.--The term ``State'' means the State of Montana.
       (10) Water system.--The term ``Water System'' means--
       (A) the Dry-Redwater Regional Water Authority System; and
       (B) the Musselshell-Judith Rural Water System.

     SEC. 4. DRY-REDWATER REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY SYSTEM AND 
                   MUSSELSHELL-JUDITH RURAL WATER SYSTEM.

       (a) Authorization.--The Secretary may carry out--
       (1) the project entitled the ``Dry-Redwater Regional Water 
     Authority System'' in a manner that is substantially in 
     accordance with the feasibility study entitled ``Dry-Redwater 
     Regional Water System Feasibility Study'' (including 
     revisions of the study), which received funding from the 
     Bureau of Reclamation on September 1, 2010; and
       (2) the project entitled the ``Musselshell-Judith Rural 
     Water System'' in a manner that is substantially in 
     accordance with the feasibility report entitled 
     ``Musselshell-Judith Rural Water System Feasibility Report'' 
     (including any and all revisions of the report).
       (b) Cooperative Agreement.--The Secretary shall enter into 
     a cooperative agreement with the Authority to provide Federal 
     assistance for the planning, design, and construction of the 
     Water Systems.
       (c) Cost-sharing Requirement.--
       (1) Federal share.--
       (A) In general.--The Federal share of the costs relating to 
     the planning, design, and construction of the Water Systems 
     shall not exceed--
       (i) in the case of the Dry-Redwater Regional Water 
     Authority System--

       (I) 75 percent of the total cost of the Dry-Redwater 
     Regional Water Authority System; or
       (II) such other lesser amount as may be determined by the 
     Secretary, acting through the Commissioner of Reclamation, in 
     a feasibility report; or

       (ii) in the case of the Musselshell-Judith Rural Water 
     System, 75 percent of the total cost of the Musselshell-
     Judith Rural Water System.
       (B) Limitation.--Amounts made available under subparagraph 
     (A) shall not be returnable or reimbursable under the 
     reclamation laws.
       (2) Use of federal funds.--
       (A) General uses.--Subject to subparagraphs (B) and (C), 
     the Water Systems may use Federal funds made available to 
     carry out this section for--
       (i) facilities relating to--

       (I) water pumping;
       (II) water treatment; and
       (III) water storage;

       (ii) transmission pipelines;
       (iii) pumping stations;
       (iv) appurtenant buildings, maintenance equipment, and 
     access roads;
       (v) any interconnection facility that connects a pipeline 
     of the Water System to a pipeline of a public water system;
       (vi) electrical power transmission and distribution 
     facilities required for the operation and maintenance of the 
     Water System;
       (vii) any other facility or service required for the 
     development of a rural water distribution system, as 
     determined by the Secretary; and
       (viii) any property or property right required for the 
     construction or operation of a facility described in this 
     subsection.
       (B) Additional uses.--In addition to the uses described in 
     subparagraph (A)--
       (i) the Dry-Redwater Regional Water Authority System may 
     use Federal funds made available to carry out this section 
     for--

       (I) facilities relating to water intake; and
       (II) distribution, pumping, and storage facilities that--

       (aa) serve the needs of citizens who use public water 
     systems;
       (bb) are in existence on the date of enactment of this Act; 
     and
       (cc) may be purchased, improved, and repaired in accordance 
     with a cooperative agreement entered into by the Secretary 
     under subsection (b); and
       (ii) the Musselshell-Judith Rural Water System may use 
     Federal funds made available to carry out this section for--

       (I) facilities relating to--

       (aa) water supply wells; and
       (bb) distribution pipelines; and

       (II) control systems.

       (C) Limitation.--Federal funds made available to carry out 
     this section shall not be used for the operation, 
     maintenance, or replacement of the Water Systems.
       (D) Title.--Title to the Water Systems shall be held by the 
     Authority.

[[Page 9344]]



     SEC. 5. USE OF POWER FROM PICK-SLOAN PROGRAM BY THE DRY-
                   REDWATER REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY SYSTEM.

       (a) Finding.--Congress finds that--
       (1) McCone and Garfield Counties in the State were 
     designated as impact counties during the period in which the 
     Fort Peck Dam was constructed; and
       (2) as a result of the designation, the Counties referred 
     to in paragraph (1) were to receive impact mitigation 
     benefits in accordance with the Pick-Sloan program.
       (b) Availability of Power.--
       (1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), the 
     Administrator shall make available to the Dry-Redwater 
     Regional Water Authority System a quantity of power required, 
     of up to 1\1/2\ megawatt capacity, to meet the pumping and 
     incidental operation requirements of the Dry-Redwater 
     Regional Water Authority System during the period beginning 
     on May 1 and ending on October 31 of each year--
       (A) from the water intake facilities; and
       (B) through all pumping stations, water treatment 
     facilities, reservoirs, storage tanks, and pipelines up to 
     the point of delivery of water by the water supply system to 
     all storage reservoirs and tanks and each entity that 
     distributes water at retail to individual users.
       (2) Eligibility.--The Dry-Redwater Regional Water Authority 
     System shall be eligible to receive power under paragraph (1) 
     if the Dry-Redwater Regional Water Authority System--
       (A) operates on a not-for-profit basis; and
       (B) is constructed pursuant to a cooperative agreement 
     entered into by the Secretary under section 4(b).
       (3) Rate.--The Administrator shall establish the cost of 
     the power described in paragraph (1) at the firm power rate.
       (4) Additional power.--
       (A) In general.--If power, in addition to that made 
     available to the Dry-Redwater Regional Water Authority System 
     under paragraph (1), is necessary to meet the pumping 
     requirements of the Dry-Redwater Regional Water Authority, 
     the Administrator may purchase the necessary additional power 
     at the best available rate.
       (B) Reimbursement.--The cost of purchasing additional power 
     shall be reimbursed to the Administrator by the Dry-Redwater 
     Regional Water Authority.
       (5) Responsibility for power charges.--The Dry-Redwater 
     Regional Water Authority shall be responsible for the payment 
     of the power charge described in paragraph (4) and non-
     Federal delivery costs described in paragraph (6).
       (6) Transmission arrangements.--
       (A) In general.--The Dry-Redwater Regional Water Authority 
     System shall be responsible for all non-Federal transmission 
     and distribution system delivery and service arrangements.
       (B) Upgrades.--The Dry-Redwater Regional Water Authority 
     System shall be responsible for funding any transmission 
     upgrades, if required, to the integrated system necessary to 
     deliver power to the Dry-Redwater Regional Water Authority 
     System.

     SEC. 6. WATER RIGHTS.

       Nothing in this Act--
       (1) preempts or affects any State water law; or
       (2) affects any authority of a State, as in effect on the 
     date of enactment of this Act, to manage water resources 
     within that State.

     SEC. 7. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) Authorization.--There are authorized to be appropriated 
     such sums as are necessary to carry out the planning, design, 
     and construction of the Water Systems, substantially in 
     accordance with the cost estimate set forth in the applicable 
     feasibility study or feasibility report described in section 
     4(a).
       (b) Cost Indexing.--
       (1) In general.--The amount authorized to be appropriated 
     under subsection (a) may be increased or decreased in 
     accordance with ordinary fluctuations in development costs 
     incurred after the applicable date specified in paragraph 
     (2), as indicated by any available engineering cost indices 
     applicable to construction activities that are similar to the 
     construction of the Water Systems.
       (2) Applicable dates.--The date referred to in paragraph 
     (1) is--
       (A) in the case of the Dry-Redwater Regional Water 
     Authority System, January 1, 2008; and
       (B) in the case of the Musselshell-Judith Rural Water 
     Authority System, November 1, 2014.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DURBIN (for himself and Mr. Franken):
  S. 1556. A bill to amend section 455(m) of the Higher Education Act 
of 1965 in order to allow adjunct faculty members to qualify for public 
service loan forgiveness; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, 
and Pensions.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, today I introduced the Adjunct Faculty 
Loan Fairness Act, a bill that would enable faculty working less than 
full-time to participate in the Public Service Student Loan Forgiveness 
Program.
  Contingent faculty members are like full-time instructors. They have 
advanced degrees. They teach classes and spend many hours outside the 
classroom preparing for class. They hold office hours, grade papers and 
give feedback to students. They provide advice and write letters of 
recommendation. Students rely on them. Since most adjuncts have 
advanced degrees and, as almost 75 percent of graduate degree 
recipients have an average of $61,000 in student loans, they are also 
among the 40 million Americans with student debt.
  The Public Service Loan Forgiveness program is meant to encourage 
graduates to go into public service by offering student loan 
forgiveness for eligible federal loans after 10 years of full-time work 
in government or the nonprofit sector. Public service fields like 
nursing, military service, and public health qualify. Many education 
jobs qualify, including full-time work at public universities and part-
time work at community colleges in high-needs subject areas or areas of 
shortage. But other faculty members, those who work part-time, are not 
eligible for loan forgiveness because the law requires an annual 
average of 30 hours per week to qualify for the program. For adjunct 
faculty working at several schools on a contingent basis, this 
requirement can be difficult or impossible to meet, even when they are 
putting in more than 30 hours of work each week.
  The number of faculty hours given for each class is calculated 
differently at different schools. Some give one hour per hour in the 
classroom while others actually take into consideration the time 
required outside the classroom. So, even as these faculty members are 
working hard and as their options for tenured, full-time positions 
become slimmer, more of them are overworked and undervalued for their 
work in public service.
  The Adjunct Faculty Loan Fairness Act of 2015 would solve this by 
amending the Higher Education Act to expand the definition of a 
``public service job'' to include a part-time faculty member who 
teaches at least one course at an eligible institution of higher 
education. They would still have to meet all the other requirements to 
qualify for the program, including making 120 on-time payments while 
employed at a qualifying institution, and they could not be employed 
full-time elsewhere at the same time.
  This bill would benefit someone like Alyson, an adjunct professor 
from Chicago, IL, who graduated with $65,000 in student loan debt and, 
after 10 years of on-time payments, has over $56,000 left. Like most 
adjuncts, Alyson strings together multiple teaching assignments along 
with part-time work to afford her monthly living expenses and minimum 
student loan payment. She comes from a family of educators and 
considers teaching her dream job. Alyson would like to participate in 
the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program. This bill would ensure 
that Alyson and many thousands like her, could obtain credit towards 
the Public Service Loan Program for loan payments she made while 
teaching, whether she was teaching one course or seven.
  Unfortunately, for all their contributions to the college programs 
and the students they work with, adjunct faculty don't have the same 
employment benefits or job security as their colleagues. The number of 
classes they teach every semester varies. To make ends meet, these 
professors often end up teaching classes at more than one school in the 
same semester, getting paid about $3,000 per class and making an 
average annual income that hovers around minimum wage. This also means 
that, in some parts of the country, they spend as much time commuting 
as they do teaching.
  Nationally, over half of all higher education faculty work on a 
contingent basis, facing low pay with little or no benefits or job 
security. In the past, these were a minority of professors who were 
hired to teach an occasional class because they could bring experience 
to the classroom in a specific field or industry. Over time, as 
university budgets have tightened and it has gotten more expensive to 
hire full-time,

[[Page 9345]]

tenure track professors, higher education institutions have 
increasingly hired adjuncts.
  From 1991 to 2011, the number of part-time faculty in the U.S. 
increased two and a half times from 291,000 to over 760,000. At the 
same time, the percentage of professors holding tenure-track positions 
has been steadily decreasing--from 45 percent of all instructors in 
1975 to only 24 percent in 2011. The number of full-time instructors, 
tenured and non-tenured, now makes up only about 50 percent of 
professors on U.S. campuses. The other 50 percent of the 1.5 million 
faculty employees at public and non-profit colleges and universities in 
the U.S. work on a part-time, contingent basis.
  Illinois colleges rely heavily on adjuncts. In 2012, 53 percent of 
all faculty at public and not-for-profit colleges and universities in 
the State, more than 30,400 faculty employees, worked on a part-time 
basis. This is a 52.6 percent increase in part-time faculty in Illinois 
compared to a 13 percent increase in full-time faculty since 2002.
  Not surprisingly, in Illinois, 69 percent of all part-time faculty 
work in Chicago, where the cost of living is 16 percent higher than the 
U.S. average. Based on an average payment of $3,000 per class an 
adjunct professor must teach between 17 and 30 classes a year to pay 
for rent and utilities in Chicago.
  They would have to teach up to seven classes to afford groceries for 
a family of four and two to four classes per year just to cover student 
loan payments. Because they are part-time, they are not eligible for 
vacation time, paid sick days, or group health-care. So they would have 
to teach an additional two to three classes to afford family coverage 
from the lowest priced health insurance offered on Get Covered 
Illinois, the official health marketplace.
  Even though these professors are working in a relatively low-paying 
field, teaching our students, their part-time status also means they 
aren't eligible for the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program
  This bill does not completely fix this growing reliance on part-time 
professors who are underpaid and undervalued. But it would ensure that 
members of the contingent faculty workforce are no longer excluded from 
the loan forgiveness program for public servants. I would like to thank 
my colleague, Senator Al Franken from Minnesota for joining me in this 
effort. I hope my other colleagues will also join me to provide this 
benefit to faculty members who provide our students with a quality 
education.
  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. 1556

       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 ``Adjunct Faculty Loan 
     Fairness Act of 2015''.

     SEC. 2. LOAN FORGIVENESS FOR ADJUNCT FACULTY.

       Section 455(m)(3)(B)(ii) of the Higher Education Act of 
     1965 (20 U.S.C. 1087e(m)(3)(B)(ii)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``teaching as'' and inserting the 
     following: ``teaching--

       ``(I) as'';

       (2) by striking ``, foreign language faculty, and part-time 
     faculty at community colleges), as determined by the 
     Secretary.'' and inserting ``and foreign language faculty), 
     as determined by the Secretary; or''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:

       ``(II) as a part-time faculty member or instructor who--

       ``(aa) teaches not less than 1 course at an institution of 
     higher education (as defined in section 101(a)), a 
     postsecondary vocational institution (as defined in section 
     102(c)), or a Tribal College or University (as defined in 
     section 316(b)); and
       ``(bb) is not employed on a full-time basis by any other 
     employer.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DURBIN (for himself, Mr. Blumenthal, Mr. Brown, Mr. 
        Markey, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Tester, and Mr. Whitehouse):
  S. 1557. A bill to amend the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act to 
extend the interest rate limitation on debt entered into during 
military service to debt incurred during military service to 
consolidate or refinance student loans incurred before military 
service, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
  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. 1557

       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 ``Servicemember Student Loan 
     Affordability Act of 2015''.

     SEC. 2. INTEREST RATE LIMITATION ON DEBT ENTERED INTO DURING 
                   MILITARY SERVICE TO CONSOLIDATE OR REFINANCE 
                   STUDENT LOANS INCURRED BEFORE MILITARY SERVICE.

       (a) In General.--Subsection (a) of section 207 of the 
     Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (50 U.S.C. App. 527) is 
     amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``on debt incurred 
     before service'' after ``Limitation to 6 percent'';
       (2) by redesignating paragraphs (2) and (3) as paragraphs 
     (3) and (4), respectively;
       (3) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following new 
     paragraph (2):
       ``(2) Limitation to 6 percent on debt incurred during 
     service to consolidate or refinance student loans incurred 
     before service.--An obligation or liability bearing interest 
     at a rate in excess of 6 percent per year that is incurred by 
     a servicemember, or the servicemember and the servicemember's 
     spouse jointly, during military service to consolidate or 
     refinance one or more student loans incurred by the 
     servicemember before such military service shall not bear an 
     interest at a rate in excess of 6 percent during the period 
     of military service.'';
       (4) in paragraph (3), as redesignated by paragraph (2) of 
     this subsection, by inserting ``or (2)'' after ``paragraph 
     (1)''; and
       (5) in paragraph (4), as so redesignated, by striking 
     ``paragraph (2)'' and inserting ``paragraph (3)''.
       (b) Implementation of Limitation.--Subsection (b) of such 
     section is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``the interest rate 
     limitation in subsection (a)'' and inserting ``an interest 
     rate limitation in paragraph (1) or (2) of subsection (a)''; 
     and
       (2) in paragraph (2)--
       (A) in the paragraph heading, by striking ``as of date of 
     order to active duty''; and
       (B) by inserting before the period at the end the 
     following: ``in the case of an obligation or liability 
     covered by subsection (a)(1), or as of the date the 
     servicemember (or servicemember and spouse jointly) incurs 
     the obligation or liability concerned under subsection 
     (a)(2)''.
       (c) Student Loan Defined.--Subsection (d) of such section 
     is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(3) Student loan.--The term `student loan' means the 
     following:
       ``(A) A Federal student loan made, insured, or guaranteed 
     under title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
     1070 et seq.).
       ``(B) A private student loan as that term is defined in 
     section 140(a) of the Truth in Lending Act (15 U.S.C. 
     1650(a)).''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. SANDERS:
  S. 1564. A bill to require that employers provide not less than 10 
days of paid vacation time to eligible employees, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. SANDERS. Mr. President, I want to say a few words about family 
values. ``Family values'' is an expression that has been used for many 
years by my Republican colleagues. Generally speaking, what they mean 
by ``family values'' is opposition to a woman's right to choose, 
opposition to contraception, opposition to gay rights. I happen to 
strongly disagree with many of my Republican colleagues on those 
issues. Let me take the opportunity to briefly give a somewhat 
different perspective on family values--on real family values, on the 
values that really matter to millions of families in this country.
  When a mother gives birth to a baby and is unable to spend time with 
that newborn child during the first weeks and months of that baby's 
life because she does not have the money to stay home and is forced to 
go back to work, which is the case for millions of mothers in this 
country, that is not a family value. Separating a mother from a newborn 
baby for economic reasons is not a family value. In fact, that is an 
attack on everything that a family is supposed to stand for.
  When a wife is diagnosed with cancer and her husband cannot get time 
off of work to take care of her because he

[[Page 9346]]

does not have any family or medical leave time or sick leave time, that 
is not a family value. That is an attack on everything that a family is 
supposed to stand for.
  When a husband, wife, and kids, during the course of an entire year, 
are unable to spend any time on a vacation, when they cannot get 
together in leisure activity, when they cannot relax and spend quality 
time with each other, that is not a family value.
  Let us be very clear in understanding that, in fact, in terms of 
protecting the needs of our families, in terms of real family values, 
in many, many respects the United States of America lags behind 
virtually every other major country on earth.
  When you look at other major countries, what you find is that the 
United States is the only advanced economy that does not guarantee its 
workers some form of paid family leave, some form of paid sick time, 
some form of paid vacation time. In other words, when it comes to basic 
workplace protections and family benefits, workers in every other major 
industrialized country in the world get a better deal than our workers 
here in the United States. That is wrong. That is a travesty, and that 
has got to change.
  Last place is no place for America. It is time for us to join the 
rest of the industrialized world by showing the people of this country 
that we are not just a nation that talks about family values but that 
we are a nation that is prepared to live up to these ideals by making 
sure that workers in this country have access to paid family leave, 
paid sick time, and paid vacations, just like workers in virtually 
every other major country on earth.
  Simply stated, it is unacceptable that millions of women in this 
country give birth and are forced back to work because they do not have 
the income to stay home with their newborn babies.
  When we talk about family values, what is more important than for 
mothers and fathers to bond with their babies at a time when almost 
every psychologist will tell you those are the most important weeks and 
months of a human being's life? What kind of family value is it when 
you tell a woman who has just had a baby that she cannot spend time 
with her child because she has to go back to work? This is not a family 
value. That is an insult to every mother, every father, and every 
newborn child in this country, and we have to change that.
  The reality is that the Family and Medical Leave Act that was signed 
into law in 1993 is totally inadequate. Today, nearly 8 out of 10 
workers in this country who are eligible to take time off under this 
law cannot do so because they cannot afford to do so, according to the 
Department of Labor. Even worse, 40 percent of American workers are not 
even eligible to receive this unpaid leave because they work for a 
company with fewer than 50 employees.
  In my view, every worker in this country should be guaranteed at 
least 12 weeks of paid family and medical leave, and that is why I am a 
proud cosponsor of the FAMILY Act, introduced by Kirsten Gillibrand. 
The FAMILY Act would guarantee employees 12 weeks of paid family and 
medical leave to take care of a baby, to help a family member who is 
diagnosed with cancer or has some other serious medical condition or to 
take care of themselves if they become seriously ill. Just like Social 
Security retirement and disability, it is an insurance program that 
workers would pay into at a price of about one cup of coffee a week.
  That is not all. We have to make certain that in this country workers 
have paid sick time. It is absurd that low-wage workers in McDonald's 
and Burger King and low-wage employees all over this country who get 
sick are forced to work because they cannot afford to take time off. 
Not only is this unfair to the workers, it is also a public health 
issue. I do not know about you, but I am not crazy about the idea of 
somebody who is sick coming to work and preparing the food that I eat 
in a restaurant.
  That is why I am supporting the Healthy Families Act, introduced by 
Senator Patty Murray, which guarantees 7 days of paid sick leave to 
American workers. This bill would benefit 43 million Americans who 
today do not have access to paid sick leave, and it would create a 
permanent floor in workplaces where employers already provide some paid 
sick leave.
  Last but not least, when we talk about the disappearing American 
middle class, we are talking about millions of American workers working 
longer hours for lower wages. We are talking about Americans who are 
overworked, underpaid and, in many cases, living under enormous stress. 
In my State of Vermont, I see it every week I am home. You talk to 
people who work not one job but who are working two jobs or sometimes 
three jobs in order to cobble together some income and some health 
care.
  Here is an amazing irony. Many of us can remember in school reading 
about workers protesting, taking to the streets 100 years ago, and they 
held up large banners. Do you know what those banners said 100 years 
ago? They said: We want a 40-hour workweek. A 40-hour workweek was the 
demand 100 years ago. Today, we still have not achieved that goal.
  In fact, today 85 percent of men who are working and 66 percent of 
working women are working more than 40 hours a week. In fact, in 
America today--not widely known but true--our people are working the 
longest hours of any major country on Earth, because as real wages go 
down, people have to work 50 hours or they have to work 60 hours. 
Husbands are working here, and wives are working there--all to cobble 
together some income in order to provide for the family.
  Today Americans are working 137 hours a year more than workers in 
Japan--and the Japanese are very hard workers. We are working 260 hours 
more than the British and almost 500 hours a year more than French 
workers.
  That is why I am introducing legislation today to require employers 
to provide at least 10 days of paid vacation to workers in this 
country. This is already done in almost every other major country on 
Earth. It is one more way to demonstrate our commitment to real family 
values. What we are saying is that if families are overworked and if 
husbands and wives do not even have the time to spend together with 
their kids, what family values are about is that at least for 2 weeks a 
year, people can come together under a relaxed environment and enjoy 
the family. That is a family value that I want to see happen in this 
country.
  The time is long overdue for us to start talking about real family 
values, not about abortion, not about gay rights but the values the 
American people want to see inscribed in law to protect their families. 
Let us make sure every American worker is entitled to paid family and 
medical leave, paid sick time, and guaranteed at least some vacation 
time. Those are real family values. Let's go forward and make that 
happen.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. REED (for himself, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Menendez, Mr. Warner, 
        Mr. Merkley, Ms. Warren, Mr. Blumenthal, Mr. Franken, Mr. 
        Durbin, Mr. Kaine, and Ms. Hirono):
  S. 1565. A bill to allow the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection 
to provide greater protection to servicemembers; to the Committee on 
Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
  Mr. REED. Mr. President, today, along with Senators Schumer, 
Menendez, Warner, Merkley, Warren, Blumenthal, Franken, Durbin, Kaine, 
and Hirono, I am introducing the Military Consumer Protection Act, 
which reinforces our commitment to consumer protections for 
servicemembers.
  Our country has a strong tradition of ensuring that our 
servicemembers are protected while they sacrifice to keep our Nation 
safe. Building on such efforts, Congress passed the Soldiers' and 
Sailor's Civil Relief Act as World War II escalated to provide crucial 
financial protections for servicemembers to ``enable such persons to 
devote their entire energy to the defense needs of the Nation.'' Now 
called the Servicemember Civil Relief Act, SCRA, this law includes such 
protections as prohibiting

[[Page 9347]]

the eviction of servicemembers and their dependents from rental or 
mortgaged properties and capping the interest at 6 percent on debts 
incurred prior to an individual entering active duty military service.
  Despite the SCRA's importance, enforcement of this critical law has 
been found to be inconsistent and subject to the discretion of our 
financial regulators. Indeed, misinformation, lapses, and mistakes that 
the SCRA was intended to fix continue to persist. Moreover, according 
to a July 2012 report from the Government Accountability Office, ``in 
2010, examinations for SCRA compliance occurred in an estimated 26 
percent of all [financial] institutions, compared with 2007 when about 
4 percent of all institutions were reviewed for SCRA.''
  Without a change in the law, SCRA enforcement will continue to be 
subject to the changing priorities of the
financial regulators. Simply put, prioritizing the consumer protection 
of our servicemembers should not be discretionary. It should be 
mandatory, and my legislation ensures that SCRA enforcement will be a 
permanent priority for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, CFPB, 
which Congress created to enforce Federal consumer financial protection 
laws.
  In 2010, as we were debating the creation of the CFPB, I led the 
bipartisan effort to ensure it would contain a key role in protecting 
servicemembers through the establishment of an Office of Servicemember 
Affairs. Since that time, the CFPB has coordinated with other 
enforcement agencies and regulators to help servicemembers recover 
millions in relief from unscrupulous actors in the financial 
marketplace. With this demonstrated record of success in protecting our 
servicemembers, the CFPB is an ideal focal point for enforcement of 
certain key SCRA provisions, such as the protections against default 
judgments and the maximum rate of interest on debts incurred before 
military service.
  As we take steps to protect our servicemembers, we should do all we 
can to make sure there is a strong watchdog on the beat that can 
enforce the protections we have put in place. Our legislation is 
supported by the National Guard Association of the United States, the 
National Military Family Association, the Military Officers Association 
of America, Americans for Financial Reform, the Consumer Federation of 
America, Consumer Action, the National Consumer Law Center, and the 
U.S. Public Interest Research Group. I urge our colleagues to help 
honor our commitment to our Nation's servicemembers by joining us in 
this effort to improve the supervision and enforcement of the SCRA.

                          ____________________