[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 163 (2017), Part 9]
[Senate]
[Pages 12100-12105]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. REED (for himself, Mr. Casey, Mrs. Gillibrand, Ms. Hassan, 
        and Mr. Whitehouse):
  S. 1651. A bill to provide for temporary financing of short-time 
compensation programs; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. REED. Mr. President, today I am joined by Senators Casey, 
Gillibrand, Hassan, and Whitehouse to introduce the Layoff Prevention 
Act of 2017. This bill renews and extends Federal support for State 
short-time compensation--or work sharing--programs, which help avert 
layoffs and the economic effects of long-term unemployment.
  Work sharing is a proven concept that is endorsed by economists 
across the political spectrum. When business slows down, employers feel 
pressure to lay off employees. Under work sharing, employers may 
instead opt to reduce hours across-the-board, and employees may then 
collect a pro-rata unemployment compensation check for the hours they 
lost. This prevents layoffs, lowers employers' rehiring and training 
expenses, and costs States only a fraction of what they would pay if 
workers went on full unemployment.
  The Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 included my 
Layoff Prevention Act, which modernized Federal work sharing laws. 
Partly as a result of this increased Federal support for work sharing, 
State work sharing programs helped to save over 130,000 jobs between 
2012 and the expiration of Federal incentives in 2015.
  The legislation I am introducing today would renew incentives so that 
States with existing work sharing programs, and those considering 
enacting a program, can qualify for Federal support. Our economy has 
come a long way in recent years, and we should invest in proven 
programs like work sharing to ensure we do not experience again the 
same scale of job loss that we endured during the Great Recession.
  I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting passage of this bill to 
keep American workers on the job, save taxpayers money, and provide 
employers with a practical, positive, and cost-effective alternative to 
layoffs.
                                 ______
                                 
  By Mr. LEE (for himself, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Heller, Mrs. Shaheen, Mr. 
Daines, Mr. Blumenthal, Mr. Gardner, and Mr. Franken):
  S. 1654. A bill to amend title 18, United States Code, to update the 
privacy protections for electronic communications information that is 
stored by third-party service providers in order to protect consumer 
privacy interests while meeting law enforcement needs, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. Leahy. Six years ago, Senator Lee and I first joined together to 
reform our outdated digital privacy laws. We recognized that our 
Nation's privacy rules failed to account for how we live our lives 
today and provided little protection for Americans' electronic 
information.
  Most Americans are shocked to learn that a law dating back to the 
Reagan administration governs when the government can read their emails 
and texts, view their photos, obtain their location information, and 
even inspect their Internet browsing history. Thirty-one years ago, I 
led efforts to write the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA). 
At the time, computers were an emerging technology and there was little 
understanding of the Internet, let alone cloud computing. ECPA was 
significant and forward-looking legislation in 1986, but it was not 
intended to get us through 30 years of technological innovations. 
Modern technology and digital communications have transformed our 
society. It is past time for Congress to catch up.
  ECPA no longer makes any sense in our digital world. When Senator Lee 
and I first set out to modernize the statute, we focused on one 
critical reform: enacting a clear, uniform rule that the government 
must obtain a warrant supported by probable cause whenever it seeks the 
content of our emails, texts, photos, and other electronic documents 
stored in the cloud. This is what the Constitution requires; and this 
is what Vermonters, Utahns, and Americans across the Country expect.
  But even in the six years since we first introduced legislation to 
reform ECPA, it has become increasingly clear that broader reforms are 
necessary to ensure that the statute adequately addresses the privacy 
and technological challenges of the modern world. When the U.S. Court 
of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit held in 2010 that email was fully 
protected by the Fourth Amendment, the court cautioned that ``the 
Fourth Amendment must keep pace with the inexorable march of 
technological progress, or its guarantees will wither and perish.'' The 
bill we introduce today would ensure our laws keep pace.
  The ECPA Modernization Act of 2017 introduces a broad set of reforms 
to our digital privacy statutes. Like legislation we introduced in 
previous Congresses, this bill would create a foundational requirement 
that the government obtain a warrant when it seeks the content of our 
electronic communications from third-party service providers. The bill 
also goes further

[[Page 12101]]

by addressing the unique privacy concerns associated with Americans' 
location information. Following the example set by States like Vermont, 
Utah, and California, our bill would require that the government obtain 
a warrant when it seeks stored or real-time location information from 
third-party service providers, or uses IMSI-catchers or stingrays to 
get location data from individuals' own cell phones.
  The ECPA Modernization Act additionally would require law enforcement 
to notify individuals when their communications or location information 
is obtained from third-party service providers. The bill would also add 
new privacy protections related to government requests for customer 
records and metadata; a suppression remedy for illegally obtained 
electronic data; and reform the pen register and trap and trace device 
statutes to bring them in line with other laws.
  Senator Lee and I are proud to introduce this bill with the support 
of a broad range of stakeholders, including the Center for Democracy & 
Technology, the ACLU, the Constitution Project, New America's Open 
Technology Institute, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the American 
Library Association, the R Street Institute, TechFreedom, FreedomWorks, 
Google, Engine, BSA/The Software Alliance, and many others.
  Today Senator Lee and I are also introducing the Email Privacy Act, 
companion legislation to the bill introduced in the House of 
Representatives by Congressmen Yoder and Polis. The Email Privacy Act 
passed the House by voice vote earlier this year, and received an 
overwhelming 419 to 0 vote last congress. I commend Representatives 
Yoder and Polis for their efforts, and also commend House Judiciary 
Committee Chairman Goodlatte and Ranking Member Conyers for reaching a 
historic compromise that led to unanimous support for this bill in the 
House.
  When the House passed the Email Privacy Act last year, I was hopeful 
that the Senate would follow suit to protect Americans' digital privacy 
and swiftly pass the bill so that it would be enacted into law. I was 
disappointed when instead of working in a bipartisan fashion, certain 
Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee threatened to use it as a 
vehicle to push poison pill amendments on controversial National 
security matters, effectively killing the bill for their own political 
purposes.
  The Email Privacy Act is a good bill that is unanimously supported by 
the House of Representatives. That legislation does not include all the 
reforms that I believe are necessary to bring our digital privacy laws 
into the modern age, but it takes a significant step toward ensuring 
that ECPA complies with the Fourth Amendment by requiring a warrant 
whenever the government seeks the contents of Americans' emails and 
electronic communication. I have worked for years to see this critical 
reform implemented into law, and I will take every opportunity to see 
that it reaches the President's desk.
  But make no mistake: I believe our work must not stop there. 
Americans deserve Fourth Amendment protections for their location 
information, notice when law enforcement obtains their content or 
location data, and strong protections governing the acquisition of 
metadata and records. I will keep fighting for the protections we have 
now set forth in the ECPA Modernization Act. I will keep pushing the 
Senate to advance legislation that keeps pace with Americans' 
expectations of privacy. The American people expect these protections, 
and they deserve them.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DURBIN (for himself and Ms. Duckworth):
  S. 1658. A bill to amend the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical 
Education Act of 2006 to give the Department of Education the authority 
to award competitive grants to eligible entities to establish, expand, 
or support school-based mentoring programs to assist at-risk students 
in middle school and high school in developing cognitive and social-
emotional skills to prepare them for success in high school, 
postsecondary education, and the workforce; to the Committee on Health, 
Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. DURBIN, Mr. President, today I introduce the Mentoring to Succeed 
Act, a bill that would break down the walls of access and meet at-risk 
youth where they are, in school, to give them the support and guidance 
they need to be successful.
  Barriers such as childhood poverty, inadequate schools, chronic 
absenteeism, adverse childhood experiences, community violence, 
exclusionary discipline policies, and juvenile justice involvement can 
lead to poor academic achievement and life outcomes. Students who grow 
up facing these challenges without a strong support system often 
struggle to transition to high school, college, and the workforce. 
School-based mentoring programs are an effective strategy to help at-
risk students thrive in school, careers, and life.
  According to a 2014 study, there are an estimated 16 million young 
people, including 9 million at-risk youth, who will reach the age of 19 
without ever having a mentor. As a result, these youth will miss out on 
the powerful effects of mentoring that are linked to significant 
outcomes. Youth who have mentors are 52 percent less likely to skip a 
day of school; 55 percent more likely to be enrolled in college; 81 
percent more likely to participate regularly in sports or 
extracurricular activities; 78 percent more likely to volunteer 
regularly in their communities; and 130 percent more likely to hold 
leadership positions.
  Researchers at the University of Chicago found that Youth Guidance's 
school-based mentoring program, Becoming a Man, reduced arrests for 
violent crime, improved school engagement, and increased high school 
graduation rates.
  Mentoring programs can help youth develop the skills employers are 
seeking. A 2016 study found that 8 in 10 employers say social and 
emotional skills are the most important to success, and are the most 
difficult skills to find in job applicants.
  In Illinois, an estimated 55,000 youth are formally matched with a 
mentor, with 68 percent residing in Metro Chicago. Last year, it cost 
the State of Illinois an average of $172,000 to incarcerate one youth, 
compared to an average of $6,000 for one youth in an intensive youth 
development program, and only $2,300 per youth in a formal mentoring 
program. In 2012, the University of Chicago Crime Lab found that 
benefits to society compared to mentoring program costs in Illinois 
measured as high as $31 for every $1 dollar invested.
  Lakeisha Steele, a member of my staff that has been working on this 
issue, is a testament to the powerful effect mentorship can have. She 
lost her oldest brother, Lewis Williams III, to gun violence on July 
10, 1996. He was 24 years old and studying to become a welder while 
preparing for the birth of his only son, his namesake, who would be 
born a month after his death. The loss of her brother's life rocked 
Lakeisha's family to its core. There were limited resources in her 
community (she is from Kankakee, Illinois) and her family could not 
afford to see a grief counselor. She went through her freshman year 
grieving the loss of her brother and it impacted her school work. A 
once A-student brought home Cs and Ds. She credits her high school 
guidance counselor, Paul Meyer of Kankakee High School, for helping her 
cope with the trauma of losing her brother and keeping her focused on 
her education and future. She says she wouldn't be here today without 
his mentorship.
  The Mentoring to Succeed Act would help break down the barriers that 
make it difficult for far too many of our children and youth to 
succeed, especially our students of color. This bill would provide 
high-need school districts, schools, and local governments with the 
funding they need to create, expand, and support school-based mentoring 
programs to improve the academic, social, and workforce skills of at-
risk students. It would support partnerships with non-profit, 
community-based, and faith-based organizations to

[[Page 12102]]

serve more at-risk students. In addition, it would support youth job 
training by partnering with local businesses and private companies to 
provide at-risk students with internships and career exploration 
activities. Further, this bill would provide funding to train mentors 
on trauma and toxic stress to increase student resilience and promote 
social and emotional development.
  Last year, the City of Chicago announced a bold and innovative 
mentoring initiative to help Chicago's most at-risk youth. By the year 
2018, the City's goal is to reach 7,200 8th, 9th, and 10th grade boys 
in 22 of Chicago's highest poverty and highest violence neighborhoods.
  This bill would support the City of Chicago and other local 
governments, schools, and school districts who have undertaken efforts 
to help at-risk youth by creating or expanding school-based mentoring 
programs. I would like to thank my colleague, Senator Tammy Duckworth 
from Illinois for joining me in this effort. I hope my other colleagues 
will join me to strengthen investments in school-based mentoring 
programs to help at-risk youth develop the academic, social, and 
workforce skills that lead to success.
  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. 1658

       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 ``Mentoring to Succeed Act of 
     2017''.

     SEC. 2. PURPOSE.

       The purpose of this Act is to make assistance available for 
     school-based mentoring programs for at-risk students in order 
     to--
       (1) establish, expand, or support school-based mentoring 
     programs;
       (2) assist at-risk students in middle school and high 
     school in developing cognitive and social-emotional skills; 
     and
       (3) prepare such at-risk students for success in high 
     school, postsecondary education, and the workforce.

     SEC. 3. SCHOOL-BASED MENTORING PROGRAM.

       Part C of title I of the Carl D. Perkins Career and 
     Technical Education Act of 2006 (20 U.S.C. 2351 et seq.) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:

     ``SEC. 136. DISTRIBUTION OF FUNDS FOR SCHOOL-BASED MENTORING 
                   PROGRAMS.

       ``(a) Definitions.--In this Act:
       ``(1) At-risk student.--The term `at-risk student' means a 
     student who--
       ``(A) is failing academically or at risk of dropping out of 
     school;
       ``(B) is pregnant or a parent;
       ``(C) is a gang member;
       ``(D) is a child or youth in foster care or a youth who has 
     been emancipated from foster care but is still enrolled in 
     high school;
       ``(E) is or has recently been a homeless child or youth;
       ``(F) is chronically absent;
       ``(G) has changed schools 3 or more times in the past 6 
     months;
       ``(H) has come in contact with the juvenile justice system 
     in the past;
       ``(I) has a history of multiple suspensions or disciplinary 
     actions;
       ``(J) is an English learner;
       ``(K) has 1 or both parents incarcerated;
       ``(L) has experienced 1 or more adverse childhood 
     experiences, traumatic events, or toxic stressors, as 
     assessed through an evidence-based screening; or
       ``(M) lives in a high-poverty area with a high rate of 
     community violence.
       ``(2) Eligible entity.--The term `eligible entity'--
       ``(A) means a high-need local educational agency, high-need 
     school, or local government entity; and
       ``(B) may include a partnership between an entity described 
     in subparagraph (A) and a nonprofit, community-based, or 
     faith-based organization, or institution of higher education 
     (as defined in section 101 of the Higher Education Act of 
     1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001)).
       ``(3) English learner.--The term `English learner' has the 
     meaning given the term in section 8101 of the Elementary and 
     Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801).
       ``(4) Foster care.--The term `foster care' has the meaning 
     given the term in section 1355.20 of title 45, Code of 
     Federal Regulations.
       ``(5) High-need local educational agency.--The term `high-
     need local educational agency' means a local educational 
     agency that serves at least 1 high-need school.
       ``(6) High-need school.--The term `high-need school' has 
     the meaning given the term in section 2211 of the Elementary 
     and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6631).
       ``(7) Homeless children and youths.--The term `homeless 
     children and youths' has the meaning given the term in 
     section 725 of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42 
     U.S.C. 11434a).
       ``(8) School-based mentoring.--The term `school-based 
     mentoring' means a structured, managed, evidenced-based 
     program conducted in partnership with teachers, 
     administrators, school psychologists, school social workers 
     or counselors, and other school staff, in which at-risk 
     students are appropriately matched with screened and trained 
     professional or volunteer mentors who provide guidance, 
     support, and encouragement, involving meetings, group-based 
     sessions, and educational and workforce-related activities on 
     a regular basis to prepare at-risk students for success in 
     high school, postsecondary education, and the workforce.
       ``(b) School-Based Mentoring Competitive Grant Program.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall award grants on a 
     competitive basis to eligible entities to establish, expand, 
     or support school-based mentoring programs that--
       ``(A) are designed to assist at-risk students in high-need 
     schools in developing cognitive skills and promoting social-
     emotional learning to prepare them for success in high 
     school, postsecondary education, and the workforce by linking 
     them with mentors who--
       ``(i) have received mentor training, including on trauma-
     informed practices and youth engagement; and
       ``(ii) have been screened using appropriate reference 
     checks and criminal background checks;
       ``(B) provide coaching and technical assistance to mentors 
     in such mentoring program;
       ``(C) provide at-risk students with a positive relationship 
     with a skilled adult offering support and guidance;
       ``(D) improve the academic achievement of at-risk students;
       ``(E) foster positive relationships between at-risk 
     students and their peers, teachers, other adults, and family 
     members;
       ``(F) reduce dropout rates and absenteeism and improve 
     school engagement of at-risk students and their families;
       ``(G) reduce juvenile justice involvement of at-risk 
     students;
       ``(H) develop the cognitive and social-emotional skills of 
     at-risk students;
       ``(I) develop the workforce readiness skills of at-risk 
     students;
       ``(J) encourage at-risk students to participate in 
     community service activities; and
       ``(K) encourage at-risk students to set goals and plan for 
     their futures, including encouraging such students to make 
     plans for postsecondary education and the workforce.
       ``(2) Duration.--The Secretary shall award grants under 
     this section for a period not to exceed 5 years.
       ``(3) Application.--To receive a grant under this section, 
     an eligible entity shall submit to the Secretary an 
     application that includes--
       ``(A) a needs assessment that includes baseline data on the 
     measures described in paragraph (6)(A)(ii); and
       ``(B) a plan to meet the requirements of paragraph (1).
       ``(4) Priority.--In selecting grant recipients, the 
     Secretary shall give priority to applicants that--
       ``(A) serve children and youth with the greatest need 
     living in high-poverty, high-crime areas, rural areas, or who 
     attend schools with high rates of community violence;
       ``(B) provide at-risk students with opportunities for job 
     training, professional development, work shadowing, 
     internships, networking, resume writing and review, interview 
     preparation, college application assistance, college visits, 
     and leadership development through community service, 
     including through partnerships with the private sector and 
     local businesses to provide internship and career exploration 
     activities and resources; and
       ``(C) seek to provide match lengths between at-risk 
     students and mentors of not less than 8 months.
       ``(5) Use of funds.--An eligible entity that receives a 
     grant under this section may use such funds to--
       ``(A) develop and carry out regular training for mentors, 
     including on--
       ``(i) the impact of adverse childhood experiences;
       ``(ii) trauma-informed practices and interventions;
       ``(iii) supporting homeless children and youths;
       ``(iv) supporting children and youth in foster care or 
     youth who have been emancipated from foster care but are 
     still enrolled in high school;
       ``(v) cultural competency;
       ``(vi) confidentiality requirements for working with 
     children and youth in foster care; and
       ``(vii) working in coordination with a public school 
     system;
       ``(B) recruit, screen, match, and train mentors;
       ``(C) hire staff to perform or support the objectives of 
     the school-based mentoring program;
       ``(D) provide youth engagement activities, such as--

[[Page 12103]]

       ``(i) enrichment field trips to cultural destinations; and
       ``(ii) career or academic exploration activities; and
       ``(E) conduct program evaluation, including by acquiring 
     and analyzing the data described under paragraph (6).
       ``(6) Reporting requirements.--
       ``(A) In general.--Not later than 6 months after the end of 
     each academic year during the grant period, an eligible 
     entity receiving a grant under this section shall submit to 
     the Secretary a report that includes--
       ``(i) the number of students who participated in the 
     school-based mentoring program that was funded in whole or in 
     part with the grant funds;
       ``(ii) data on the academic achievement, dropout rates, 
     truancy, absenteeism, outcomes of arrests for violent crime, 
     summer employment, and college enrollment of students in the 
     program;
       ``(iii) the number of group sessions and number of one-to-
     one contacts between students in the program and their 
     mentors;
       ``(iv) the average attendance of students enrolled in the 
     program;
       ``(v) data on social emotional development of students as 
     assessed with a validated social emotional assessment tool; 
     and
       ``(vi) any other information that the Secretary may require 
     to evaluate the success of the school-based mentoring 
     program.
       ``(B) Student privacy.--An eligible entity shall ensure 
     that the report submitted under subparagraph (A) is prepared 
     in a manner that protects the privacy rights of each student 
     in accordance with section 444 of the General Education 
     Provisions Act (commonly referred to as the `Family 
     Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974') (20 U.S.C. 
     1232g).
       ``(7) Mentoring resources and community service 
     coordination.--
       ``(A) Best practices.--The Secretary shall work with the 
     Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention to--
       ``(i) refer grantees under this section to the National 
     Mentoring Resource Center to obtain resources on best 
     practices and research related to mentoring and to request 
     no-cost training and technical assistance; and
       ``(ii) provide grantees under this section with information 
     to promote positive youth development, including transitional 
     services for at-risk students returning from correctional 
     facilities.
       ``(B) Technical assistance.--The Secretary shall coordinate 
     with the Corporation for National and Community Service, 
     including through entering into an interagency agreement or a 
     memorandum of understanding, to provide technical assistance 
     and other resources to support grantees under this section as 
     they provide mentoring and community service-related 
     activities for at-risk students.
       ``(c) Authorization of Funds.--There are authorized to be 
     appropriated to carry out this section such sums as may be 
     necessary for each of fiscal years 2018 through 2023.''.

     SEC. 4. INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCES STUDY ON SCHOOL-BASED 
                   MENTORING PROGRAMS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Education, acting through 
     the Director of the Institute of Education Sciences, shall 
     conduct a study to--
       (1) identify successful school-based mentoring programs and 
     effective strategies for administering and monitoring such 
     programs;
       (2) evaluate the role of mentors in promoting cognitive 
     development and social-emotional learning to enhance academic 
     achievement and to improve workforce readiness; and
       (3) evaluate the effectiveness of the grant program under 
     section 136 of the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical 
     Education Act of 2006, as added by section 3, on student 
     academic outcomes and youth career development.
       (b) Timing.--Not later than 3 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Education, acting 
     through the Director of the Institute of Education Sciences, 
     shall submit the results of the study to the appropriate 
     Congressional committees.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DURBIN (for himself, Mr. Merkley, Mr. Whitehouse, Mr. 
        Blumenthal, Mrs. Gillibrand, and Mr. Franken):
  S. 1659. A bill to amend the Truth in Lending Act to establish a 
national usury rate for consumer credit transactions; to the Committee 
on Banking, Housing, and Urban 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. 1659

       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 ``Protecting Consumers from 
     Unreasonable Credit Rates Act of 2017''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds that--
       (1) attempts have been made to prohibit usurious interest 
     rates in America since colonial times;
       (2) at the Federal level, in 2006, Congress enacted a 
     Federal 36 percent annualized usury cap for servicemembers 
     and their families for covered credit products, as defined by 
     the Department of Defense, which curbed payday, car title, 
     and tax refund lending around military bases;
       (3) notwithstanding such attempts to curb predatory 
     lending, high-cost lending persists in all 50 States due to 
     loopholes in State laws, safe harbor laws for specific forms 
     of credit, and the exportation of unregulated interest rates 
     permitted by preemption;
       (4) due to the lack of a comprehensive Federal usury cap, 
     consumers annually pay approximately $14,000,000,000 on high-
     cost overdraft loans, as much as approximately $7,000,000,000 
     on storefront and online payday loans, $3,800,000,000 on car 
     title loans, and additional amounts in unreported revenues on 
     high-cost online installment loans;
       (5) cash-strapped consumers pay on average approximately 
     400 percent annual interest for payday loans, 300 percent 
     annual interest for car title loans, up to 17,000 percent or 
     higher for bank overdraft loans, and triple-digit rates for 
     online installment loans;
       (6) a national maximum interest rate that includes all 
     forms of fees and closes all loopholes is necessary to 
     eliminate such predatory lending; and
       (7) alternatives to predatory lending that encourage small 
     dollar loans with minimal or no fees, installment payment 
     schedules, and affordable repayment periods should be 
     encouraged.

     SEC. 3. NATIONAL MAXIMUM INTEREST RATE.

       Chapter 2 of the Truth in Lending Act (15 U.S.C. 1631 et 
     seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:

     ``SEC. 140B. MAXIMUM RATES OF INTEREST.

       ``(a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, no creditor may make an extension of credit to a 
     consumer with respect to which the fee and interest rate, as 
     defined in subsection (b), exceeds 36 percent.
       ``(b) Fee and Interest Rate Defined.--
       ``(1) In general.--For purposes of this section, the fee 
     and interest rate includes all charges payable, directly or 
     indirectly, incident to, ancillary to, or as a condition of 
     the extension of credit, including--
       ``(A) any payment compensating a creditor or prospective 
     creditor for--
       ``(i) an extension of credit or making available a line of 
     credit, such as fees connected with credit extension or 
     availability such as numerical periodic rates, annual fees, 
     cash advance fees, and membership fees; or
       ``(ii) any fees for default or breach by a borrower of a 
     condition upon which credit was extended, such as late fees, 
     creditor-imposed not sufficient funds fees charged when a 
     borrower tenders payment on a debt with a check drawn on 
     insufficient funds, overdraft fees, and over limit fees;
       ``(B) all fees which constitute a finance charge, as 
     defined by rules of the Bureau in accordance with this title;
       ``(C) credit insurance premiums, whether optional or 
     required; and
       ``(D) all charges and costs for ancillary products sold in 
     connection with or incidental to the credit transaction.
       ``(2) Tolerances.--
       ``(A) In general.--With respect to a credit obligation that 
     is payable in at least 3 fully amortizing installments over 
     at least 90 days, the term `fee and interest rate' does not 
     include--
       ``(i) application or participation fees that in total do 
     not exceed the greater of $30 or, if there is a limit to the 
     credit line, 5 percent of the credit limit, up to $120, if--

       ``(I) such fees are excludable from the finance charge 
     pursuant to section 106 and regulations issued thereunder;
       ``(II) such fees cover all credit extended or renewed by 
     the creditor for 12 months; and
       ``(III) the minimum amount of credit extended or available 
     on a credit line is equal to $300 or more;

       ``(ii) a late fee charged as authorized by State law and by 
     the agreement that does not exceed either $20 per late 
     payment or $20 per month; or
       ``(iii) a creditor-imposed not sufficient funds fee charged 
     when a borrower tenders payment on a debt with a check drawn 
     on insufficient funds that does not exceed $15.
       ``(B) Adjustments for inflation.--The Bureau may adjust the 
     amounts of the tolerances established under this paragraph 
     for inflation over time, consistent with the primary goals of 
     protecting consumers and ensuring that the 36 percent fee and 
     interest rate limitation is not circumvented.
       ``(c) Calculations.--
       ``(1) Open end credit plans.--For an open end credit plan--
       ``(A) the fee and interest rate shall be calculated each 
     month, based upon the sum of all fees and finance charges 
     described in subsection (b) charged by the creditor during 
     the preceding 1-year period, divided by the average daily 
     balance; and
       ``(B) if the credit account has been open less than 1 year, 
     the fee and interest rate shall be calculated based upon the 
     total of all fees and finance charges described in subsection 
     (b)(1) charged by the creditor since

[[Page 12104]]

     the plan was opened, divided by the average daily balance, 
     and multiplied by the quotient of 12 divided by the number of 
     full months that the credit plan has been in existence.
       ``(2) Other credit plans.--For purposes of this section, in 
     calculating the fee and interest rate, the Bureau shall 
     require the method of calculation of annual percentage rate 
     specified in section 107(a)(1), except that the amount 
     referred to in that section 107(a)(1) as the `finance charge' 
     shall include all fees, charges, and payments described in 
     subsection (b)(1) of this section.
       ``(3) Adjustments authorized.--The Bureau may make 
     adjustments to the calculations in paragraphs (1) and (2), 
     but the primary goals of such adjustment shall be to protect 
     consumers and to ensure that the 36 percent fee and interest 
     rate limitation is not circumvented.
       ``(d) Definition of Creditor.--As used in this section, the 
     term `creditor' has the same meaning as in section 702(e) of 
     the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (15 U.S.C. 1691a(e)).
       ``(e) No Exemptions Permitted.--The exemption authority of 
     the Bureau under section 105 shall not apply to the rates 
     established under this section or the disclosure requirements 
     under section 127(b)(6).
       ``(f) Disclosure of Fee and Interest Rate for Credit Other 
     Than Open End Credit Plans.--In addition to the disclosure 
     requirements under section 127(b)(6), the Bureau may 
     prescribe regulations requiring disclosure of the fee and 
     interest rate established under this section.
       ``(g) Relation to State Law.--Nothing in this section may 
     be construed to preempt any provision of State law that 
     provides greater protection to consumers than is provided in 
     this section.
       ``(h) Civil Liability and Enforcement.--In addition to 
     remedies available to the consumer under section 130(a), any 
     payment compensating a creditor or prospective creditor, to 
     the extent that such payment is a transaction made in 
     violation of this section, shall be null and void, and not 
     enforceable by any party in any court or alternative dispute 
     resolution forum, and the creditor or any subsequent holder 
     of the obligation shall promptly return to the consumer any 
     principal, interest, charges, and fees, and any security 
     interest associated with such transaction. Notwithstanding 
     any statute of limitations or repose, a violation of this 
     section may be raised as a matter of defense by recoupment or 
     setoff to an action to collect such debt or repossess related 
     security at any time.
       ``(i) Violations.--Any person that violates this section, 
     or seeks to enforce an agreement made in violation of this 
     section, shall be subject to, for each such violation, 1 year 
     in prison and a fine in an amount equal to the greater of--
       ``(1) 3 times the amount of the total accrued debt 
     associated with the subject transaction; or
       ``(2) $50,000.
       ``(j) State Attorneys General.--An action to enforce this 
     section may be brought by the appropriate State attorney 
     general in any United States district court or any other 
     court of competent jurisdiction within 3 years from the date 
     of the violation, and such attorney general may obtain 
     injunctive relief.''.

     SEC. 4. DISCLOSURE OF FEE AND INTEREST RATE FOR OPEN END 
                   CREDIT PLANS.

       Section 127(b)(6) of the Truth in Lending Act (15 U.S.C. 
     1637(b)(6)) is amended by striking ``the total finance charge 
     expressed'' and all that follows through the end of the 
     paragraph and inserting ``the fee and interest rate, 
     displayed as `FAIR', established under section 141.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. CORNYN (for himself and Mr. Kaine):
  S. 1664. A bill to amend section 5307 of title 49, United States 
Code, with respect to the treatment of communities as urbanized areas 
following a major disaster; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and 
Urban Affairs.
  Mr. CORNYN. 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. 1664

       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 ``Relief for Recovering 
     Communities Act''.

     SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF URBANIZED AREAS FOLLOWING A MAJOR 
                   DISASTER.

       Section 5307 of title 49, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``(i) Urbanized Areas Following a Major Disaster.--
       ``(1) Defined term.--In this section, the term `major 
     disaster' has the meaning given such term in section 102(2) 
     of the Disaster Relief Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5122(2)).
       ``(2) Urbanized area major disaster population criteria.--
     Notwithstanding section 5302, the Secretary shall treat an 
     area as an `urbanized area' for purposes of this section 
     until the second decennial census conducted after a major 
     disaster in such area if--
       ``(A) the area was defined and designated as an `urbanized 
     area' by the Secretary of Commerce in the decennial census 
     immediately preceding such major disaster, effective with the 
     2000 decennial census; and
       ``(B) the population of the area fell below 50,000 as a 
     result of such major disaster.
       ``(3) Population calculation.--An area treated as an 
     `urbanized area' under this subsection shall be assigned the 
     population and square miles of the urban cluster designated 
     by the Secretary of Commerce in the most recent decennial 
     census.
       ``(4) Savings provision.--Nothing in this subsection may be 
     construed to affect apportionments made under this chapter 
     before the date of the enactment of this subsection.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself and Ms. Duckworth):
  S. 1667. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to provide 
protections for consumers against excessive, unjustified, or unfairly 
discriminatory increases in premium rates; to the Committee on Health, 
Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the 
Protecting Consumers from Unreasonable Rates Act. This critical health 
care reform bill would address the soaring cost of insurance premiums.
  Many factors contribute to increasing premiums, from the increased 
prevalence of chronic disease to the consolidation of the insurance 
market. But no matter the root cause of premium hikes, it is important 
that rate increases are reviewed to ensure they are fair. When 
consumers see insurance premiums increase by double digits, it can add 
an additional burden on top of mortgage payments, childcare, and 
student loans. If rates are unreasonable, they should be blocked or 
modified.
  The Protecting Consumers from Unreasonable Rates Act would allow the 
Secretary of Health and Human Services to act on behalf of consumers to 
protect them against egregious increases in health insurance rates in 
States that do not take this action.
  In California and several other States across the Nation, State 
regulators lack the authority to block or modify extreme health 
insurance rate increases. This legislation does not change any State's 
ability to take this action. Rather, it simply allows the Secretary of 
Health and Human Services to help fill in the gaps in the health care 
regulatory space so consumers in all States would have adequate 
protections against this type of price gouging.
  The Affordable Care Act slowed the growth of premium increases and 
improved the value of health insurance--including how much of premiums 
insurers must spend on actual medical care and ensuring rate increases 
are at least reviewed. These were good first steps, but more needs to 
be done. Far too many Americans are facing rate increases and full 
consumer protections must be in place to ensure that prices reflect 
true cost and not simply profits. Providing all Americans with 
affordable, quality healthcare is of the utmost importance and Congress 
ought to be building on the successes of the Affordable Care Act while 
making improvements where necessary.
  This bill provides a straightforward, direct enforcement mechanism to 
ensure that insurers may not impose unreasonably high costs on 
consumers, by empowering the Secretary of Health and Human Services to 
step in when State regulators do not, or are unable to.
  I urge my colleagues to support this legislation to protect Americans 
from unreasonable rate hikes and move toward real, commonsense health 
care solutions.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. SCHUMER:
  S. 1668. A bill to rename a waterway in the State of New York as the 
``Joseph Sanford Jr. Channel''; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, 
and Transportation.
  Mr. SCHUMER. 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:

[[Page 12105]]



                                S. 1668

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. JOSEPH SANFORD JR. CHANNEL.

       (a) In General.--The waterway in the State of New York 
     designated as the ``Negro Bar Channel'' shall be known and 
     redesignated as the ``Joseph Sanford Jr. Channel''.
       (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 
     document, paper, or other record of the United States to the 
     waterway referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be 
     a reference to the ``Joseph Sanford Jr. Channel''.

                          ____________________