Richard Durbin

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Booker) and the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Booker), the Senator from California (Mrs. Feinstein) and the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Booker) and the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I came to the floor yesterday to speak on the devastating impact the Republican tax plan would have on working families in my home State of Illinois and other States across the Nation. It is no secret that the Republican plan would finance massive tax cuts for the wealthiest people in America. They just can't help themselves. Every time they look at the Tax Code, they think there has to be a way to help the wealthiest people in our country. They usually look at the estate tax, which is paid for by 1 out of every 1,000 Americans, and say: We have just got to spare these poor people who have a net worth of over $11 million from paying any taxes to the government. We have to spare them from paying this government for the benefit that this great Nation has brought to them and their families and businesses. That is where they start. Then they do the alternative minimum tax, which is a tax that was created so that if your accountants and bookkeepers and lawyers are the sharpest on Earth and ended up finding that you had no tax liability, you still paid a fair share for sustaining this great Nation that you call home. They want to get rid of that, too, or at least dramatically modify it. They start off with the premise of making these tax cuts for the wealthiest people in America the beginning point of tax reform, these giveaways to people who are not even asking for them. They can't help themselves. They always start there, and the American people know it. When you ask the American people, what is this tax reform all about, they say it is tax cuts for wealthy people. That is where it always starts, and it does when the Republicans are the authors. That is what we face again. They try to argue that it is going to help working families. It will help some--let me be honest about that--and yet you are going to find many working families who are going to pay more instead of less because of this so-called tax reform. Why would we ever do that? Why would we give tax breaks to the wealthiest people in America-- permanent tax breaks--and then turn around and say to working families: Sorry. Some of you will get help, but many of you will not. In my home State of Illinois, the elimination of the State and local tax exemption is going to be devastating to our State. We are in the top five of States where the people in my State who pay income tax, sales tax, and property tax can deduct those taxes from their Federal income that is subject to taxation. That is not a new idea. It has been around for decades. It really is premised on the following: Americans should not have to pay tax on a tax. If I pay $100 a month, and I pay my local property taxes, I shouldn't be taxed on that $100. It is a double hit. It is not fair, but the Republican plan believes that is what we should do. I will tell the seven Republican Congressmen in my State, they ought to go home and ask the people whom they represent what they think about this one, the idea of double taxation that they would vote for and go home and try to defend. I think it is going to be tough, very tough. It is no secret that these tax cuts for the wealthy and large corporations will end up raising taxes on a lot of Americans and blowing a massive hole in the deficit. I am going to quote a fellow who has been retired a few years from Congress. His name is Dave Obey. He was a Congressman from Wisconsin. Dave Obey used to say over and over again--and I am going to repeat it, and I have credited him with it: Too many times politicians are posing for holy pictures, but when it comes to the deficit and the debt, many of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle pose for holy pictures about the national debt whenever there is a Democratic President and then get a swift case of amnesia whenever there is a Republican President. Here we go again. They are ignoring the reality that the tax cuts they are promoting for the wealthiest and biggest corporations are going to end up blowing a hole in the deficit--a hole in the deficit, which is going to have to be paid for by future generations. I used to watch as my Republican colleagues would get red in the face talking about our national debt, but that, of course, was under a Democratic President. Under a Republican President, it doesn't seem to be a major issue. Incidentally, there is a way to plug that hole, and somewhere along the way someone slipped and told us what it was. If you want to plug the hole of $1.5 trillion in tax cuts to the wealthy and big corporations, they propose cutting Medicare benefits and Medicaid benefits, cutting the basic health insurance plans that seniors and people in low-income categories use. Is that a sound policy, to try to patch a hole in the deficit by taking healthcare protection away from senior citizens in America--the 40-plus million who count on it--or those who are under Medicaid? I think it is not. It turns out that Chairman Hatch had a new surprise for us this week. At 10:30 p.m. last night, Chairman Orrin Hatch released additional changes to this bill, which is evolving before our eyes. It is a bill which was not publicly announced until last Friday and is currently being debated in the hopes that when we return a week after our Thanksgiving recess, we will take it up and vote on it. Does it seem like it is a hurried operation? Of course, it is. They know that if these bills sit out long enough and people read them and consider them, there will be a lot of questions asked that they can't answer. Chairman Hatch released additional changes to the bill, and they decided to fund permanent tax cuts for some corporations. That is a high priority for the Republicans--wealthy people, big corporations. So how do they pay for permanent tax cuts for the biggest corporations? It turns out that in addition to raising taxes on working families, the Senate Republican tax bill would also raise health insurance premiums on middle-income families. That is right. The Republicans propose that their tax bill would also repeal parts of the Affordable Care Act. As a result, the Congressional Budget Office tells us that an estimated 13 to 14 million Americans will lose their health insurance protection because of the Republican tax giveaway plan. I thought that plan was supposed to help working families. It ends up taking away their health insurance. For those who can still remain in the market buying health insurance, they can anticipate their premiums for health insurance going up 10 percent. What kind of tax cut is this that ends up raising the cost of health insurance for working families and ends up eliminating health insurance for many middle-income families? I find it hard to believe the satisfaction so many Republicans take to be able to boast and brag that they passed a bill that took away health insurance for Americans. You are proud of that? I wouldn't be. We should be doing the opposite--expanding the reach of health insurance, making sure every American has the peace of mind and health insurance they need for them and their families. Remember when Republicans campaigned on the promise of increasing the number of people with insurance and decreasing premiums? This tax bill does just the opposite. Haven't my Republican colleagues learned the lessons of the ACA-- Affordable Care Act--repeal by now? We spent the whole year in a vain effort by the Republicans to repeal and barely replace. The American people don't want it. Overwhelmingly, they are against it. My hospitals in Illinois and across this Nation don't want what the Republicans are proposing in their bill. Patients don't want it. Nurses don't want it. Clinics don't want it. The disabled community doesn't want it. The Republicans are determined to do it anyway. Senior leaders are against it, faith leaders are against it, the American people are against it, but this is going to be the feather in the cap for the Republican majority; that by the end of this year, they hope to pass a tax reform bill that is going to give tax breaks to the wealthiest, give a permanent tax break to the biggest corporations, make the middle-income families pay for it, eliminate 13 to 14 million Americans' health insurance, and raise their premiums. What a package. You have to work overtime to put together a package that damaging to working families in America, but that is what they are pushing. That is what they are determined to do.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, last week my home State of Illinois took a major step forward in protecting student loan borrowers. On November 7, the Illinois House of Representatives voted 98 to 16 to override Governor Rauner's veto of the Illinois Student Loan Bill of Rights, which was designed to protect student loan borrowers from the well documented abuses of Federal student loan servicers. The Illinois Senate previously voted 37 to 19 to override. With the house's action, the bill became law. I would like to thank all of those in the general assembly who voted for this bill, including Senator Daniel Biss and Representative Will Guzzardi, who sponsored the legislation. I would also like to thank the legislation's author, Attorney General Lisa Madigan, for her leadership and tireless efforts to investigate and hold Federal student loan servicers accountable. Federal student loan servicers are contracted by the U.S. Department of Education to handle the billing and other services related to the repayment of a Federal student loan. Too often, these contractors make it more difficult for students to repay their loans by giving them incorrect or incomplete information and guidance, refusing to provide benefits to which students are entitled under Federal law, or incorrectly processing payments. I have heard complaints about servicers from countless of the 1.5 million Illinoisans holding a cumulative total of $51 billion in Federal student loan debt. Attorney General Madigan has heard those complaints too. In response, she initiated an investigation which resulted in an ongoing lawsuit against the Nation's largest student loan servicer, Navient. Navient has become the poster child for poor customer service and abusive practices that make it more difficult for struggling borrowers to repay their Federal student loans. The Illinois Student Loan Bill of Rights will help to protect Illinois borrowers from these practices. Among other things, the law requires servicers to inform borrowers about their eligibility for income-driven repayment plans and other affordable repayment options. It also prohibits servicers from misleading borrowers, requires them to correctly process payments, and requires servicers to inform borrowers about their eligibility for loan forgiveness due to a disability or harmful actions by the school. I have worked at the Federal level to provide similar protections for all student loan borrowers. I authored the Federal Student Loan Borrower Bill of Rights, which I will reintroduce in the coming months. This bill was the basis for reforms to student loan servicing contracts initiated by President Obama. Unfortunately, much of that work has been rolled back by Secretary Betsy DeVos. Thanks to Attorney General Madigan and the bipartisan actions of the Illinois General Assembly, borrowers in our State will now have new rights and protections that neither Governor Rauner nor Secretary DeVos can take away.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Booker), the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez), and the Senator from Maryland (Mr. Van Hollen) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, it was 16 years ago that I introduced a bill known as the DREAM Act. The purpose of the DREAM Act was to give undocumented young people brought to the United States under the age of 18 an opportunity to go through a background check and to earn their way to legal status--16 years ago. The bill passed the Senate at various times and it passed the House, though never quite in the same year at the same time. Now we face a crisis, literally. It is a crisis involving hundreds of thousands of these young people across America. It was just September 5 when the President of the United States announced that he was going to eliminate DACA. DACA was the Executive order of President Obama that allowed these Dreamers to come forward, pay a filing fee of about $500 or $600, submit themselves to a criminal background check, and, after that background check, if they cleared it, to be given a 2-year allowance to live in the United States without fear of deportation--2 years at a time--and the legal capacity to work. That was what DACA was about. So 780,000 young people did it. They came forward. They surrendered the information about themselves and their families. They submitted themselves to criminal background checks, and they ended up getting the protection of DACA. They went on to go to school, to go to work, to become teachers or engineers, to go to medical school, and to do things that really mean that they will have a future in this country that will be a benefit to them and to all of us. So President Trump said that program will end on March 5, 2018, and he established a deadline, for those who were going to see their DACA eligibility end during that period of time, for them to renew. The deadline was October 5. It meant that they had to come forward with the filing fee and at least apply to go through the process again. It was quite a hardship on many of these young people to come up with the money for the filing fee and to realize that the clock was ticking in a very meaningful way about their ability to protect themselves. Many of them stepped forward and asked for help from families, from churches, and from friends to come up with the filing fee to make sure that they renewed their DACA eligibility in time. Let me tell you what happened to some of them who went through this process. Here is one case. On September 14, Allison Baker, a lawyer for the Legal Aid Society in New York, sent one of these young individuals' application to renew this permit that would let him stay and work in the United States legally as part of DACA. The date of September 14 should be remembered because the deadline for filing was October 5. To be sure, this lawyer sent this renewal application for this young man by certified mail. Back in the day when I practiced law, that was one way to make sure you had written proof of when you actually mailed something far in advance of a deadline. Tracking data from the U.S. Postal Service showed that the envelope arrived in Chicago on September 16. It was mailed from New York on September 14 and arrived in Chicago September 16, on its way to a regional processing warehouse of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, the agency that administers the program known as DACA. Then the packet started circling the Chicago postal system in a mysterious holding pattern. From September 17 to September 19, it was in transit to destination, according to the Postal Service. Then its tracking whereabouts disappeared until October 4, where, once again, the Postal Service assured the sender that it was ``on its way.'' On October 6, the day after the deadline, this certified application, which was sent on September 14, arrived, and the application for this 24-year-old man was rejected by our government. He wasn't alone. We know of at least 33 other cases just like this. Congressman Luis Gutierrez, of my State of Illinois, told the story of another application renewal sent on September 13 for an October 5 deadline. It arrived on October 6, as well. Another sent their paperwork on September 21. It wasn't received until October 9. What Congressman Gutierrez said is very obvious: Because somebody else did not do their job correctly, we are taking innocent young immigrants and making them deportable. That is unacceptable, Congressman Gutierrez said. What does the U.S. Postal Service have to say about what I just read to you, those two or three cases? On Thursday, in a rare admission from a Federal agency, the U.S. Postal Service took the blame. David Partenheimer, a spokesman for the Postal Service, said that there had been ``an unintentional temporary mail processing delay in the Chicago area.'' Remember what I am saying here. Young people, undocumented had applied successfully and had been accepted into the DACA Program. The President announced he was going to end the program, and those--many of them--had to re-sign up, renew, by October 5. They did it. They mailed it. Their application didn't arrive in time. It doesn't take a big leap of faith or intelligence to realize what should be done. Clearly, this agency should be giving these young people a chance. Once again, they have done everything they can think of to comply with the law and trust our government. They trusted our government to give them DACA status to allow them to stay in the United States, and they trusted the Postal Service, in a matter of 2 weeks, to be able to deliver a letter. Yesterday I spoke to the USCIS Director, Francis Cissna, and I asked him about this. I said to him: There must be a way for us to acknowledge the obvious. These young people, in good faith, did everything we could ask of them to comply with the law, and now they have been rejected. Now they are subject to deportation because the Postal Service didn't do its job. I asked him: Are you prepared to at least reconsider this decision and give them a chance to renew their DACA status? He said he was aware of the situation and that it was being considered at the highest levels of the Department of Homeland Security. I raise this issue because real lives are at stake. These are real people. These are young men and women who are doing everything they can think of to become part of America's future. They are hiring lawyers, they are raising money, and they are filing the documents that are asked of them in the hopes they can stay in the United States of America, and the system is fighting them every step of the way. In this situation, this is totally unfair. Our government is better than this. Our people are better than this. Our values are better than this. I am pleading with the Department of Homeland Security and those who are seeking positions in that Department to show some common sense and a little bit of heart when it comes to these young people who are simply trying to make a future for themselves and a better United States of America.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Booker), the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez), and the Senator from Maryland (Mr. Van Hollen) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, today I want to take a few moments to acknowledge former mayor of Evanston, IL--and my friend--Liz Tisdahl. Liz began her service to Evanston in 1989 on the Evanston Township School Board. After 2 years as president of the board, Liz was appointed to the Evanston City Council in 2003 by Mayor Lorraine Morton. Mayor Morton had met Liz years earlier when she was picking up her youngest granddaughter from softball practice. She didn't recognize the new coach and asked about her. It was Liz Tisdahl. Liz didn't have a child on the team, but she wanted to lend a helping hand in the community. When Lorraine Morton became mayor, she always remembered how Liz stepped up just to help other people, so when it came time for Mayor Morton to decide whom she wanted to replace her, the first and only name that came to mind was Liz Tisdahl. When Liz was first approached to run, her answer was ``absolutely not,'' but after giving it more thought, Liz answered the call to run to help out Evanston's residents who were leaving the community due to the increasingly high cost of living. Liz Tisdahl wasn't running for mayor to help herself, but like her time coaching that softball team years earlier, she was doing it for other people. Early in Liz's tenure as mayor, she quickly learned what it meant to be the ``face of Evanston'' and the good she could accomplish. At the time, too many Evanston residents struggled to afford housing, so Liz wrote a Federal grant application and flew to Washington, DC, to lobby for money to expand affordable housing in her community--and it worked. Evanston received an $18 million grant. I remember calling her with the good news. Liz later said that was ``the day that I realized that there really was something to this `being a mayor' thing.'' Liz Tisdahl also has successfully lobbied to secure a designation for a Federal qualified health center in Evanston, resulting in the establishment of the Erie Evanston/Skokie Health Center. Since 2012, the Erie Evanston/Skokie Health Center has treated nearly 12,000 patients and provided immediate care for the residents of Evanston. In 2009, when Liz Tisdahl first ran for mayor of Evanston, she campaigned under a simple platform: ``Diversity, Sustainability, and Economic Development.'' First, Liz set out to increase employment. She expanded the Mayor's Summer Youth Employment Program, which had 167 jobs in 2009. Since 2012, the program has grown by 100 jobs each year, employing 750 young people in 2016. Liz also created partnerships with Northwestern University, NorthShore University HealthSystem, and other businesses to establish job training and apprenticeship programs for the community's most vulnerable people. In 2009, the unemployment rate of Evanston was 8 percent. When Mayor Tisdahl left office earlier this year, unemployment was down to 4.1 percent. Liz Tisdahl also worked to make Evanston greener and--as promised-- brought changes to the city's sustainability efforts. According to a 2015 emissions report, Evanston reduced its greenhouse gas emissions by more than 18 percent between 2005 and 2015. In 2014, Evanston became one of America's first two cities to receive a four-star rating from the Sustainability Tools for Assessing and Rating Communities Initiative. For her environmental work and focus on sustainability issues, Liz received the Climate Protection Award from the U.S. Conference of Mayors. Earlier this year, after two terms in office, Liz Tisdahl decided not to run for a third. When asked why, her answer was simple. Although she loved being mayor, she had accomplished her goals. Liz Tisdahl went out on top. Despite her many achievements, Liz's proudest accomplishment is her family. Now that she is retired, I know she is enjoying more time with her children and grandchildren, but this isn't the last we have heard from Liz Tisdahl. She will continue to be a fearless advocate for the people of Evanston. Since retiring, Liz has joined the board at Curt's Cafe, an Evanston coffee shop that trains at-risk youth, prepares them to become job-ready, and helps them to transition into full-time employment. One thing is clear, Liz Tisdahl is not done helping the community she loves. I want to congratulate Liz Tisdahl on her distinguished career and thank her for her outstanding service to the people of Evanston. Now as she enters the next chapter in her life, I wish her and her family all the best. (At the request of Mr. Schumer, the following statement was ordered to be printed in the Record.)

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Booker) and the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Booker) and the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business until 11:15 a.m.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I would like to speak for a moment about Veterans Day, which is just 2 days away. On Saturday, November 11, Americans will pause to honor the courage and sacrifice of America's veterans. More than 40 million Americans have served our Nation in uniform, in battles from Bunker Hill to Baghdad, and beyond. Mr. President, as this Veterans Day approaches, I have been thinking about the words of one of those brave patriots. He is the son and grandson of military leaders. When his time came, he too went to war and suffered horrific deprivation and excruciating injuries. Years later, he said: ``Few veterans cherish a romantic remembrance of war.'' When wars are fought, he said, ``a million tragedies ensue.'' ``War is wretched beyond description,'' he added, ``and only a fool or a fraud could sentimentalize its cruel reality.'' Those are the words of a man whom I am privileged to call a colleague and a friend, the senior Senator from Arizona, John McCain. We owe him and all of our Nation's veterans and their families our profound gratitude and respect for their courage, sacrifices, and the hardships they endured for all of us. Senator McCain endured more than 5\1/2\ years of torture as a prisoner of war during the Vietnam conflict. When he finally came home, John McCain found another way to serve our Nation with honor. We thank him for that. Mr. President, this week, the Congress dedicated a commemorative chair to honor all Americans ever held as prisoners of war and to honor the more than 83,000 servicemembers who remain missing in action. The antique, empty chair will stand in Emancipation Hall in the Capitol as a solemn reminder of the servicemembers who were missing for years in captivity and those who remain missing today. Mr. President, as we prepare to celebrate this Veterans Day, I want to tell you about another veteran, another patriot, who was also a prisoner of war. His war was World War II. Like Senator McCain, he survived, came home, married, raised a family, and spent decades in public service. His name is Richard Lockhart. Everybody calls him Dick Lockhart. He is 93 years old, almost 94. He is a lobbyist in Springfield, IL, the capital of my State and my hometown. Dick Lockhart does not represent the big, monied interests. He represents the little guys--the nonprofit groups, the public workers, the mental health providers and the families who need them, among others. He is the senior practicing lobbyist in Illinois, maybe in all of America. He will be giving up that title soon because, on December 31, Dick Lockhart is retiring at the age of 93 from the firm he founded 60 years ago. He is not stepping down because he is tired. He still works 7 days a week, most weeks. He is still physically strong and is as sharp as a tack mentally. No, Dick Lockhart is retiring because there are other things to do, he says. He wants to travel more and write the book that he has always wanted to write and explain to ordinary citizens how to make their government work better. Dick's life would make a fascinating book, itself. Born in Ohio in 1924 as an only child, his family moved to Indiana when he was young. The Great Depression hit the Lockhart family hard. Dick's dad lost his job. Sometimes the electricity was shut off at home for nonpayment. The family never owned a car, never took a vacation, and never ate a meal in a restaurant. Dick delivered newspapers and worked as a soda jerk during high school to help pay for expenses. He was a student at Purdue University when Japan bombed Pearl Harbor. Exactly 1 year later, on December 7, 1942, he enlisted in the U.S. Army infantry. He was assigned to the Army's 106th Division, the Golden Lions. In October of 1944, the 106th shipped out to England. In early December they arrived in a quiet area of southeastern Belgium, near the German border. Military higher-ups assured the men of the 106th to expect an uneventful few weeks and that Germany would probably surrender before Christmas. History had another plan. In the predawn hours of December 16, German forces launched their last major offensive of the war, the Battle of the Bulge. The U.S. forces were outnumbered. Lockhart's regiment, the 423rd, fought for days. Finally--out of food, out of water, and out of ammunition--they surrendered. In all, some 8,000 U.S. soldiers were captured at the Battle of the Bulge. They were packed into railroad boxcars, crammed in so tightly that soldiers had to take turns sitting and standing. After 2 days of being in those boxcars, they arrived at a prisoner-of-war camp in Germany, known as Stalag IX-B. Camp life was brutal. Medical care was nonexistent. Men died every day. Meals consisted of only thin ``grass soup.'' On one bitterly cold day, Dick Lockhart was beaten savagely by a German prison guard. Decades later, he still experiences back pain from that beating. One memory still haunts him. One day, the prison guards demanded that any Jewish prisoners of war identify themselves. For several hours, no one stepped forward. After more threats, Jewish American soldiers began to step forward, apparently thinking that their U.S. citizenship would protect them. They were wrong. They were shipped off to a notorious hard-labor camp in another part of Germany. On January 20, 1945, Dick Lockhart turned 21 while a prisoner of war in Stalag IX-B. On April 2, 1945, American soldiers liberated the camp, Dick Lockhart, and the other prisoners. The Army sent Dick Lockhart home on a 60-day furlough with instructions to get some rest and to gain back some of the weight that he had lost in the prisoner-of-war camp. He arrived home in Fort Wayne. He knocked at the door and was stunned to see a stranger open it. Months before, his parents had received a cable that read that their only child was missing in the war and was presumed dead. His mother, overcome with grief, went to Ohio to stay with her family. His father moved away to look for another factory job. Fortunately, they left forwarding addresses, and Dick found them soon and was reunited with his parents. A month later, while Dick was still on leave, Germany surrendered. The war in Europe was finally over. Dick had always loved Chicago. So he decided to use his GI bill to go to Northwestern University. He became involved in reform politics in Chicago--a battle of a different sort. He married and had two children, a son and a daughter. In 1958 he founded his own lobbying firm to try to advance democracy through good policies and laws rather than through tanks and bombs. He is honest, hard-working, modest, empathetic, and always an optimist. He has earned the respect of both sides of the aisle for decades of ethical and professional service in the Illinois General Assembly. Laws he has helped to pass have made life better for countless people in my home State. In recognition of that fact, the Illinois General Assembly recently voted to celebrate December 31, which will be Dick's last day on the job, as Richard ``Dick'' Lockhart Day in the State of Illinois--a well-deserved honor. Five weeks after Dick Lockhart and others were captured, American forces won the Battle of the Bulge, liberated Belgium, and sent the German occupying troops back to Germany. Two years ago, as part of the 70th anniversary of that event, Dick Lockhart returned to Belgium. The children and grandchildren of the Belgians who had been liberated from Nazi occupation greeted him like a hero. He was honored by the nation's King and Queen in a castle--royal treatment that he and all of the American soldiers richly deserved. When Dick speaks about his experience as a soldier, he is never the hero of any story. He reserves that role for the young men who didn't come home. He says: ``There is an inscription in a World War II cemetery that reads, `When you go home, tell them of us and say that for your tomorrow, we gave our today.' '' At the risk of contradicting my old friend, I have to say that Dick Lockhart is, indeed, an American hero. This Veterans Day, we say to him and to all of the American veterans: Thank you for your service. Thank you for our freedom. Thank you for all of the tomorrows you purchased for us with your courage and sacrifice. healthcare Mr. President, in 2010, Congress passed the Affordable Care Act with one main goal in mind--to help more Americans get quality, affordable health insurance. And it worked. Since the law took effect, more than 20 million previously uninsured Americans have gained health coverage, including 1 million in Illinois. For the first time ever, our Nation's uninsured rate is below 10 percent. Insurers can no longer deny coverage due to a preexisting condition, charge sky-high premiums for being a woman or having a health history, or impose annual or lifetime caps on your benefits. Young people can stay on their parents' plans until age 26, and we extended the life of Medicare by a decade. These are real improvements that are saving lives. Was the law perfect? No. But did it accomplish its primary goal of ensuring that more Americans could obtain healthcare--regardless of their income, gender, or medical history? Yes, it did. None of that has mattered to President Trump, who has spent the past 10 months orchestrating a deliberate campaign to sabotage healthcare for tens of millions of American families. From his first day in office, President Trump directed Federal agencies not to enforce the law. He cut the open enrollment sign-up period in half. He yanked advertisements and slashed outreach and enrollment assistance funding. And he terminated the cost-sharing reduction subsidies that keep costs down for 7 million Americans. As a result, individual market premiums will increase 20 percent next year alone. President Trump has done everything within his power to sabotage and undermine this law. Despite President Trump's repeated attempts at repeal and sabotage, the Affordable Care Act is still the law of the land, and that means that quality, affordable healthcare options are available. And we are right in the midst of Open Enrollment. Starting last week--on November 1--Americans who purchased their health plans in the individual marketplace began signing up for health insurance that covers them next year, in 2018. But you only have 6 weeks to sign up. Open enrollment began November 1, and ends on December 15. This is your opportunity to buy insurance that covers important health benefits--hospitalizations, prescription drugs, doctor visits, maternity/newborn care, mental health and substance abuse treatment. And there is financial assistance to help you buy these plans. In fact, 8 out of 10 people who purchase health insurance in the individual market are eligible to receive tax credits that help make that insurance more affordable. In Illinois, about 350,000 people purchase their health insurance in the individual market, and nearly 300,000 of them are eligible for tax credits that will ensure their health plan premiums are below $100 per month. So, despite the frenzy in Washington over healthcare: health insurance under the ACA is open for business, and the time to sign up is now. Visit www.healthcare.gov or call 1-800-318-2596. I would encourage everyone to sign up early. Don't wait unitl the last minute. Speaking of waiting until the last minute, I remain dismayed that this Republican-controlled Congress has failed to reauthorize two incredibly important Federal healthcare programs--the Children's Health Insurance Program and the community health centers program. Nationwide, 27 million people receive care from community health centers. And 9 million children and pregnant women get their healthcare through the CHIP program, including more than 330,000 kids in Illinois. Because of congressional inaction, funding for these two programs expired over a month ago, on October 1. And what have Republican leaders in the Senate done over the past month, while funding has lapsed for children, pregnant women, and our Nation's health clinics? Well, they passed a budget resolution making it easier to give huge tax cuts to wealthy individuals and big businesses. That is right. While States and health centers are struggling to figure out how to keep their programs operating, while families are worrying about when their health coverage may run out, congressional Republicans are focused on tax breaks for the rich. Facing this funding uncertainty, States and community health centers are trying to figure out how to keep their programs and clinics operating. Ten States--plus the District of Columbia--will run out of CHIP funding in the next month or so. For example, later this month, the State of Colorado is planning to send health coverage termination letters to lower income families. The letter reads, in part: ``You are receiving this letter because members of your household are enrolled in the [Children's Health Insurance Program] . . . If Congress does not renew federal funding, CHIP in Colorado will end on January 31, 2018 . . . there is no guarantee that they will.'' Imagine how terrifying it would be to receive this letter, to learn that your child is about to lose their health insurance coverage because Congress is preoccupied with tax breaks for the rich. It is beyond unacceptable that congressional Republicans abdicated their responsibility to reauthorize these critical health programs. If we truly want to help the communities and people we serve, let's quickly reauthorize funding for children's health care and for community health centers. And remember, if you need health insurance next year, you have until December 15 to sign up. Don't miss your chance.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) and the Senator from Montana (Mr. Tester) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) and the Senator from Montana (Mr. Tester) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I want to take a few minutes to thank Judge Ann Claire Williams for her extraordinary service to our country. After serving nearly two decades on the Seventh U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago, Judge Williams announced she would be retiring from the judiciary later this year. Ann Claire Williams is a trailblazer. She is the first African American to serve on the Seventh U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals--an accomplishment that one judge called: ``the desegregation of the 7th Circuit.'' This was just another in a series of firsts for Judge Williams. She was one of the first two African-American women to clerk for judges on the Seventh Circuit. In 1985, Judge Williams became the first African American woman to become a U.S. District Court judge for the Northern District of Illinois. She served as chair of the Court Administration and Case Management Committee of the United States Judicial Conference--making her the first African American chair of a Judicial Conference committee. Judge Williams also became the first African American president of the Federal Judges Association. Simply put, almost every step of her career has broken new ground. Born in Detroit, MI, Ann Claire Williams began her career as a third grade music teacher after graduating from Wayne State University with a bachelor's degree in elementary education and master's degree from the University of Michigan in guidance and counseling. Inspired by the television show ``Perry Mason'' the only lawyer she knew growing up-- and a competitive spirit, Ann decided to attend law school. She chose the University of Notre Dame and the rest is history--or more appropriately, the rest of her career made history. Judge Williams has been the recipient of numerous honors and awards. Here are just a few: Chicago Lawyer 2000 Person of the Year; the Arabella Babb Mansfield Award from the National Association of Women Lawyers; the National Bar Association's Gertrude E. Rush Award; the American Bar Association's Margaret Brent Women Lawyers of Achievement Award; Chicago Inn of Court's Joel M. Flaum Award; American Judicature Society's Edward J. Devitt Distinguished Service to Justice Award; the Black Women Lawyers' Association of Greater Chicago's Pioneer Award; the Leadership Institute for Women of Color Attorneys, Inc.'s Breaking the Glass Ceiling Award; and was recognized by Newsweek Daily Beast as one of 2012's 150 Fearless Women in the World. Judge Williams has always been proud of breaking barriers and her history of firsts, but she doesn't want to be the last. Throughout her career, she has been committed to training young lawyers. As a founding member of the Black Women Lawyers in Chicago, Judge Williams uses her story to inspire the next generation--and makes clear through her experiences that young women today can follow the path she paved to reach the top of their fields. She also serves as chairwoman of the Just The Beginning Foundation to help guide more minority law students into the legal profession. Under Judge Williams' leadership, the organization has grown to include programs for students in high school and middle school across the country. For all her achievements, it is her commitment to the future that is truly inspiring. Recently, Judge Williams said. You want to be nourished by people that understand your story and your experience. But once you're nourished that means you have to go out and deal with the broader world. Well, Judge Williams has done just that. She serves on the board of Equal Justice Works, a nonprofit dedicated to creating a just society by training lawyers committed to working in the public interest, and despite her busy schedule, she has made time to travel to Ghana, Rwanda, Liberia, and Uganda to train judges and attorneys. Judge Williams' career is groundbreaking, and she is a role model for countless young women of color--and an inspiration to the rest of us. I am proud to call her a friend. I want to congratulate Judge Williams on an outstanding career and thank her for all she has done--and all she will continue to do. The country is grateful for her service. I wish her and her family all the best in her next chapter.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, on Monday, I was in Crystal Lake, IL, in the 6th Congressional District. I was joined by realtors and local elected officials to talk about how the GOP tax plan would hurt families in my home State of Illinois. The families in the 6th Congressional District would be hit especially hard since they are in the 12th highest district in terms of the benefit received from the State and local tax deduction--a deduction that is gutted in the Republican House tax plan. Republicans released this plan last Thursday, have been marking it up in committee this week, with the plan to have it on the House floor next week. It is already clear that this partisan plan does nothing more than double-down on some of the most damaging ideas from the framework congressional Republicans and the White House released in September-- and the bill gets worse the closer you look. The House Republican bill would bankroll massive tax cuts for the wealthy few and the largest corporations on the backs of hard-working families in Illinois and across the country. The bill eliminates some of the most vital tax breaks for people in Illinois--making it so that struggling seniors no longer will be able to deduct costly out-of-pocket medical expenses and that the 1.5 million Illinoisans with Federal student loan debt will no longer be able to deduct the interest paid on those loans. Congressional Republicans didn't stop at eliminating deductions for medical expenses and student loan interest. Republicans want to take away one of the most valuable deductions for working families in this State--the State and local tax deduction. Eliminating this deduction to fund a massive tax cuts for corporations and the ultrawealthy was a centerpiece of the Framework Republicans released earlier this year--a move that would raise taxes on one-third of all taxpayers. After strong opposition within their ranks for eliminating the State and local tax deduction, the House Republican plan released last week proposes a ``compromise'' to obtain the support of congressional Republicans that represent States like Illinois. This so-called compromise eliminates the tax deduction for State and local income taxes, and caps the deduction for property taxes, so instead of eliminating the deduction altogether, they just gut it. If you ask me, that is no compromise at all. The result is still the same: middle-income families would still be double taxed when it comes to income, sales, and some property taxes-- once by the Federal Government and again by the State. This would make it more expensive for families to fund services at the local level like the local schools, police and fire departments, and local roads and bridges. Make no mistake, in Illinois--the State with the fifth highest number of taxpayers claiming the State and local tax deduction--would be hit especially hard. Nearly 2 million Illinoisans--roughly one-third of taxpayers in the State--claimed more than $24 billion in State and local tax deductions in 2015 alone. If Republicans are successful in eliminating or gutting this deduction, it will mean a tax hike for working families across Illinois. If completely eliminated, a family of four living in a place like Crystal Lake making around $76,000 per year would pay more than $1,400 more in taxes each year. And what do Republicans do with the money from raising taxes on one- third of middle-income families in Illinois? They give the ultrawealthy and the largest corporations a tax cut. That is just plain wrong. I urge House Republicans to oppose any tax plan that would raise taxes on middle-income families by gutting the State and local tax deduction in order to give cuts to the largest corporations and richest 1 percent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) and the Senator from Montana (Mr. Tester) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) and the Senator from Montana (Mr. Tester) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) is necessarily absent.