Richard Durbin

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I support Senator Sherrod Brown's unanimous consent request that the Senate adopt the Veterans Education Relief and Restoration Act, S. 2253, to support veterans who were harmed by the closure of ITT Tech. ITT Tech's predatory practices led to its sudden closure early this month, leaving tens of thousands of students in the lurch. Many veterans using GI bill benefits at ITT Tech have been particularly affected by this company's practices and now its closure and bankruptcy. ITT Tech has for years been a major recipient of GI bill benefits. According to a 2014 report by Senator Tom Harkin's HELP Committee, ITT Tech was the third largest recipient in 2012-13, receiving $161 million in GI bill funds. When it closed earlier this month, an estimated 7,000 veterans were enrolled at ITT Tech. Not only have these veterans used up part or in some cases all of their limited GI bill education benefits, some of them relied on VA housing assistance to pay their rent and afford a place to live for themselves and their families. Veterans can only receive this housing stipend if they are enrolled in a school that qualifies for GI bill benefits, so the closure of ITT Tech has put them at risk of being unable to afford their current housing and further disrupting their lives. I support the bipartisan Veterans Education Relief and Restoration Act, or VERRA, introduced by Senators Blumenthal and Tillis, to reinstate GI bill education benefits in certain cases and to give the Secretary of Veterans Affairs the authority to temporarily extend housing benefits to veterans, including those who attended ITT Tech, who find their education interrupted by a sudden closure of a school. The closure of ITT Tech makes the need to pass VERRA an emergency for so many veterans across the country. This is a commonsense bill--it's bipartisan--and it's time sensitive. I urge Republicans not to block this effort to extend this modest and much-needed relief to our veterans who have been put in this terrible position by ITT Tech.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, today I wish to recognize the Creating Entrepreneurial Opportunities, CEO, program, a yearlong class that creates a real-world learning environment for high school students across Illinois. The CEO program was started by author Jack Schultz, Craig Lindvahl, and other community leaders to change the way America's youth approach problems and give them more control over their futures. The mission of the CEO program is ``to prepare youths to be responsible, enterprising individuals who become entrepreneurs and contribute to the economic development and sustainability of their community.'' Throughout this program, participants visit 30 to 50 community businesses during the school year. They learn how to start their own businesses from actual CEOs of local, national, and international companies. They also develop important life skills: critical thinking, problem solving, teamwork, and communication. Through this program, students gain a new sense of self-confidence to become future business leaders. The success of the CEO program would not be possible without Craig Lindvahl, the executive director of the Midland Institute for Entrepreneurship in Effingham, IL. Every day he works to empower students through the CEO program. Craig, who is a nationally recognized teacher and filmmaker, has spent the last 5 years teaching the CEO program and bringing together business people, community leaders, and students from high schools across Illinois. The program has also expanded into Minnesota and Indiana. Under Craig's leadership, the CEO program is helping build a strong foundation for our students, which will have a lasting effect on their futures. Our Nation's economy is evolving at a rapid rate, and in order to meet labor demands and foster innovation, we need mentors like Craig and programs like CEO to help prepare our students with the necessary skills to be competitive and successful. I had a chance to see this for myself when I visited the Williamson and Jackson Counties CEO classes in May and watched students present their final projects. It is with great pride that today I recognize the Creating Entrepreneurial Opportunities program for the transformative education they are providing the next generation of entrepreneurs and community leaders.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, this year marks the 75th anniversary of the establishment of the Illinois Association of Chiefs of Police, and I wish to commend the association for its seven-and-a-half decades of dedicated service to the people of Illinois. Since its creation in 1941, the association has worked to elevate the training and professional development of law enforcement leadership throughout the State, including working to establish the Police Training Institute at the University of Illinois. The association makes sure that police chiefs have the information and training they need to engage in effective community policing. From its headquarters on Fifth Street in Springfield, the association's influence has spread across the Nation and the world, with seven members of the association having served as the president of the International Association of Chiefs of Police. Throughout its history, the association has worked to earn and maintain the respect of the people the association's members serve. The association has been guided by its values of compassion, integrity, accountability, fairness, professionalism, innovation, continuous improvement, diversity and inclusion. Not only has the association represented the voices of Illinois' law enforcement leaders as they work to protect the community, but the association also has given back to the community through its longstanding support of the Special Olympics and other charitable causes. As the association comes together on October 1, 2016, to celebrate its 75th anniversary, I want to recognize and honor the Illinois Association of Chiefs Of Police, its more than 1,200 members from nearly 500 agencies across Illinois, its staff, and its board of officers: President Chief Steven Casstevens of the Buffalo Grove Police Department, First Vice President Chief James Kruger of the Oak Brook Police Department, Second Vice President Chief Brian Fengel of the Bartonville Police Department, Third Vice President Chief Steven Stelter of the Westchester Police Department, Fourth Vice President Chief James Black of the Crystal Lake Police Department, Immediate Past President Chief Frank Kaminski of the Park Ridge Police Department, and Parliamentarian Chief Russell Laine of the Fox Lake Police Department. Our men and women in law enforcement put their lives on the line every day to help protect and serve our communities. For the past 75 years, the Illinois Association of Chiefs of Police has been there to help support and guide Illinois' police chiefs and their departments every step of the way. I am grateful to the association for its steadfast service to our State, and I commend and honor the association on the occasion of its 75th anniversary.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I want to take a few moments to acknowledge David Yepsen, director of the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute at Southern Illinois University, SIU. Earlier this year, David announced that he would be retiring in late October. Prior to joining the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute at SIU, David was a political writer, editor, and columnist. He spent over three decades at the Des Moines Register. If you have a passion for covering politics, like David Yepsen does, there is no better place to be. Every 4 years, the political class descends on Iowa, and no one takes this more seriously than Iowans. Iowans and politicos fill churches, community centers, schools, libraries, and homes on cold winter nights to talk politics with friends and neighbors. At the center of this political three-ring circus is the Des Moines Register, and for nine Presidential campaign cycles, that meant David Yepsen. It should come as no surprise that David has had a lifelong interest in politics. In high school, he was elected student body president, governor of the Iowa American Legion's Boys' State program, and U.S. senator in the group's Boys Nation program. David Yepsen is ``Mr. Iowa.'' Born in Jefferson, IA, David graduated from the University of Iowa, studied journalism and mass communications at Iowa State University, and earned a masters in public administration from Drake University in Des Moines. In 1977, David became a Statehouse reporter for the Des Moines Register. And in 1983, he got his big break becoming the Des Moines Register's chief political reporter. He was later named political editor and, in 2000, was promoted to full-time political columnist. In 1997, after retiring from the U.S. Senate, Paul Simon established a public policy institute at Southern Illinois University. When it first opened, the institute was considered a think tank by many, but not by Paul Simon. He called it a ``do tank.'' In 2009, David Yepsen became director of the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute, and under his leadership, it was exactly that. Throughout the years, he has organized countless events--including a ``pizza and politics'' program--encouraging students on campus to get involved in politics and government. David never lost sight of Paul Simon's vision and always searched for ways the institute could educate the public and even influence Washington, DC. He was always looking for opportunities to take the institute to the next level. Although Senator Paul Simon never saw David Yepsen lead his institute, it was clear what he thought of him and the job he would do. In 1988, when Senator Simon ran for the Democratic nomination to be President of the United States, he praised David's objectivity. He said: ``Every four years the chief political reporter for the Des Moines Register becomes the most important reporter in the nation. It is a position that could cause vanity and abuse. To his credit, David Yepsen handled this position with sensitivity and balance. And he worked hard.'' That is high praise, but well deserved. Some of the best advice I have received is from Senator Paul Simon. He used to say that ``when people disagree with my vote I want them to say that it's because I'm ignorant or stupid, not because I'm greedy or making money.'' With his credentials and years at the Des Moines Register, David had plenty of opportunities to cash in on his success and make money, but instead, he chose to take a job as director of the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute at SIU in Carbondale, IL. Paul Simon would have been proud. I want to congratulate David Yepsen on his distinguished career and thank him for continuing the outstanding work started by Senator Paul Simon at Southern Illinois University. I especially want to thank David's wife, Dr. Mary Stuart, and daughter Elizabeth for sharing so much of their husband and father with the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute at SIU. I wish him and his family all the best.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to introduce the Solitary Confinement Reform Act, a bill that would make significant reforms to the use of solitary confinement in federal prisons and encourage states to implement similar reforms. Before I discuss what this legislation would do, let me explain why I am introducing it. Several years ago, I read an article in the New Yorker magazine entitled ``Hellhole.'' This article was written by Dr. Atul Gawande, a medical doctor who examined the human impact of long-term solitary confinement in American prisons. In this article, Dr. Gawande asked: If prolonged isolation is--as research and experience have confirmed for decades--so objectively horrifying, so intrinsically cruel, how did we end up with a prison system that may subject more of our own citizens to it than any other country in history has? At the time, I was serving as Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Human Rights, and I decided to hold a hearing on solitary confinement--the first-ever congressional hearing on the topic. It turned out to be a hearing that I will never forget. One of our witnesses at the hearing was Anthony Graves. I will never forget Mr. Graves' testimony. He spent 18 years in prison, including 16 years in solitary confinement. In 2010, he became the 12th death row inmate to be exonerated in Texas. Think about that--Mr. Graves spent 16 years in solitary for a crime he didn't commit. At the hearing, Mr. Graves testified about his experience, and here is what he said: I lived under some of the worst conditions imaginable with the filth, the food, the total disrespect of human dignity. I lived under the rules of a system that is literally driving men out of their minds. He went on to say: Solitary confinement does one thing, it breaks a man's will to live and he ends up deteriorating. He's never the same person again. . . . I have been free for almost two years and I still cry at night, because no one out here can relate to what I have gone through. I battle with feelings of loneliness. I've tried therapy but it didn't work. The therapist was crying more than me. She couldn't believe that our system was putting men through this sort of inhumane treatment. I think that sentiment echoed through the minds of everyone in the hearing room as Mr. Graves gave his testimony. We couldn't believe that our system was putting inmates through this sort of inhumane treatment. Mr. Graves' story shed light on the damaging impact of holding tens of thousands of men, women, and children in small windowless cells 23 hours a day--for weeks, months, years--with very little, if any, contact with the outside world. Clearly, such extreme isolation can have serious psychological effects on inmates. At the hearing, we also examined the serious fiscal impact of solitary confinement. We learned that in a federal high security facility, the cost of housing an inmate in segregation is about 1.3 times the cost of housing an inmate in a general population unit. At the Federal supermax prison in Florence, CO, the cost of housing an inmate in segregation is more than 2.5 times the cost of housing an inmate in the general population. Is this a wise use of taxpayer dollars when the money we spend on our Federal prisons already consumes one quarter of the Department of Justice's budget every year? So every dollar that we spend holding a prisoner in solitary confinement is a dollar that we don't spend on community policing, crime prevention, and drug treatment. We also discussed the significant public safety consequences of widespread solitary confinement. Some people might ask, ``What happens in our prisons doesn't affect me, so why should I care?'' But consider this--the vast majority of inmates held in segregation will be released into our communities someday. So if solitary confinement destabilizes prisoners and makes them more likely to engage in violence or other criminal conduct, then that affects all of us. Two years after my first hearing, I held a follow-up hearing. At that hearing, we heard from Damon Thibodeaux, who spent 15 years in solitary confinement at the Louisiana State Penitentiary before he was exonerated in 2012. Mr. Thibodeaux testified: I do not condone what those who have killed and committed other serious offenses have done. But I also don't condone what we do to them, when we put them in solitary for years on end and treat them as sub-human. We are better than that. As a civilized society, we should be better than that. Mr. Thibodeaux was right. We should be better than that. Thankfully, our society is beginning to recognize that the widespread use of solitary confinement in our prison system must change. In 2014, Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy testified to Congress that, quote, ``solitary confinement literally drives men mad.'' Last year, Justice Kennedy again brought up the issue in a powerful concurring opinion. He wrote, quote, ``research still confirms what this Court suggested over a century ago: Years on end of near-total isolation exacts a terrible price.'' He went on to note that, quote, ``the judiciary may be required . . . to determine whether workable alternative systems for long-term confinement exist, and, if so, whether a correctional system should be required to adopt them.'' Pope Francis has also criticized solitary confinement. In a 2014 speech at the Vatican, he referred to the practice of extreme isolation as ``torture'' and ``a genuine surplus of pain added to the actual suffering of imprisonment.'' He went on to say: The lack of sensory stimuli, the total impossibility of communication and the lack of contact with other human beings induce mental and physical suffering such as paranoia, anxiety, depression, weight loss, and significantly increase the suicidal tendency. I still don't fully understand how our society reached a point at which the overuse of solitary confinement became acceptable, or normal. But I know that we need to do something about it. In light of the mounting evidence of the harmful, even dangerous, impacts of solitary confinement, states around the country have led the way in reassessing the practice. Take Colorado, for example, which has implemented a number of critical reforms. Colorado no longer releases offenders directly from solitary to the community and no longer places inmates with serious mental illness in solitary. Have these reforms made Colorado's prisons less safe? No, in fact since Colorado changed its solitary confinement practices, inmate-on-staff assaults are at their lowest levels since 2006, incidents of self-harm have decreased, and most inmates released from solitary are not returning. Progress has been made at the Federal level as well. After my 2014 hearing I called for an end to solitary confinement for juveniles, pregnant women, and inmates with serious mental illness in our federal prisons. I also asked the Federal Bureau of Prisons to submit for the first time to an outside independent assessment of its solitary confinement practices. The assessment, released last year, noted that some improvements have been made since the hearing, most importantly in the declining number of inmates in solitary confinement. The assessment also made a number of recommendations for additional reforms, such as improving mental health care for inmates in segregation and establishing alternatives to segregation for inmates in protective custody. BOP began taking steps to address these issues following the release of the assessment. Last year, building upon this independent assessment, the Department of Justice undertook a review of the Bureau of Prisons' use of solitary confinement. This January, President Obama announced that he had accepted a number of DOJ's recommendations to reform and reduce the practice of solitary confinement in the Federal prison system-- including implementing the ban on juvenile solitary confinement that I called for in 2014. I welcome the reforms that the President announced, and I am glad to see that the Bureau of Prisons is making some progress in implementing these reforms. However, our Federal prison system is still housing more than 10,000 inmates in segregation as I speak. The number of inmates in solitary confinement since my first hearing has decreased from about 13,600 to about 10,400. But the number of total Federal prisoners has also dropped significantly since 2012. So the percentage of Federal prisoners in solitary has only gone down from 7.8 percent to 6.7 percent. Clearly, there is much more work to be done. That is why Senator Coons and I are joining together to introduce the Solitary Confinement Reform Act. This legislation will build on the Justice Department's recommendations to further reform and reduce the use of solitary confinement in Federal prisons. Our bill ensures that inmates are only placed in solitary confinement when absolutely necessary--such as to control a substantial and immediate threat to the safety of other inmates or corrections staff, or to punish an inmate for a significant and serious disciplinary violation. Our bill also improves the conditions of confinement for prisoners in solitary and establishes firm time limits on segregation, in order to combat long-term isolation. However, we recognize that some extremely dangerous inmates require long-term separation from the general population. That's why our bill ensures that BOP can continue to separate those inmates who pose the greatest risk to other inmates, staff, and the general public. Among the most important provisions in our bill are the strict limits on the use of solitary confinement for inmates nearing their release date, inmates in protective custody, LGBT inmates, and inmates who are minors, have a serious mental illness, have an intellectual or physical disability, or are pregnant or in the first eight weeks of postpartum recovery after birth. For inmates who are placed in segregated housing, our bill improves access to mental health care and ensures that a robust review process is in place. Additionally, our bill increases transparency and accountability by requiring the Attorney General to establish a Civil Rights Ombudsman within the Bureau of Prisons to review inmate complaints, and directing BOP to submit an annual assessment to Congress detailing their solitary confinement policies, regulations, and data. Finally, our bill establishes a National Resource Center on Solitary Confinement Reform that would provide vital resources to state and local jurisdictions as corrections systems around the country pursue reductions in solitary confinement. I want to thank Senator Coons for working with me on this legislation, and Senators Booker, Leahy, and Franken for joining as original cosponsors of the bill. I also want to thank the ACLU, The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, Human Rights Watch, Just Detention International, Campaign for Youth Justice, Center for Children's Law and Policy, Human Rights Campaign, National Alliance on Mental Illness, National Religious Campaign Against Torture, Bend the Arc Jewish Action, Interfaith Action for Human Rights, T'ruah: The Rabbinic Call for Human Rights, and Washington Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs for endorsing the Solitary Confinement Reform Act. This legislation is one of many steps we should take to reform our criminal justice system and make our country safer, more just, and more fiscally responsible. I urge my colleagues to support the Solitary Confinement Reform Act. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, while the Republican whip is still on the floor, I believe there is an agreement, at 10:45, Republicans will have control of the floor. I have waited patiently while the Senator from Texas has given his speech. I ask unanimous consent to allow me 10 minutes to speak on the floor before the Republicans claim their time.

Mr. DURBIN. Thank you very much. Mr. President, why are we facing a continuing resolution to fund the government of the United States of America? Because our budget expires on October 1. It is a new budget. We are supposed to pass spending bills, appropriations bills, budget bills that will cover this next 12 months of the fiscal year, and we have failed. The Senate Appropriations Committee, which I am proud to serve on, has done its job on a bipartisan basis. In fact, we have reported out all 12 spending bills but had very little luck on the floor of the Senate moving those bills forward. The first one we took up was the military construction bill, which passed with good support, and was sent over to the House of Representatives. They loaded it up with every political issue they could think of for this campaign season, and that bill started floundering at that point. That is why, at this moment in time, we need to pass a continuing resolution. This is no way to run a government but, to be honest with you, both political parties have been guilty of finding themselves in this mess before, where we have had to buy a little extra time into the fiscal year in order to agree on the budget for the remainder of that year. What the President said to the Republican leaders of the House and Senate last week is, if you want to do this continuing resolution bill, just keep the government running until you can agree on all the appropriations bills, give me a continuing resolution bill until December 9, and--if you would--please acknowledge that we are facing a public health crisis with the Zika virus. The President raised that issue because in February of this year, 7 months ago, he notified Congress this was going to happen; that we were going to see these mosquitoes carrying the Zika virus infecting people in Puerto Rico and in the United States and endangering mothers who were carrying babies. In February, the President asked for Congress to give $1.9 billion to eradicate the mosquitoes, to lessen the danger, and, equally important, to develop a vaccine. This is a vaccine which frankly, when it is developed, all of us will want to take, one that protects all of us from Zika virus infection in the future. What did the Republican-controlled Congress do with the President's emergency public health crisis request for Zika? Nothing. They ignored it until May of this year, when the Senate finally passed, with 89 votes, Democrats and Republicans together--it was not $1.9 billion but $1.1 billion to deal with the Zika virus, this emergency public health crisis. It took 3 months. It should have taken 3 days. In May, with 89 votes, we sent a bill from the Senate over to the House of Representatives to deal with this crisis. What did they do with it? Instead of passing the bipartisan bill the President requested, they decided to load it up with politically controversial issues that they thought would help them in this election cycle. Listen to some of the things they added to this bill, this emergency public health crisis bill. First, they put in the provision that there was a prohibition of funding any efforts by Planned Parenthood on family planning under this bill. Why? Because mothers, facing the prospect of a pregnancy and the possibility of an infection, would seek family planning help at Planned Parenthood. Two million American mothers did last year. They put this provision in to defund Planned Parenthood. They knew that was going to be a fight. They put it in anyway. They eliminated $500 million from the Veterans' Administration funding to process veterans' claims--something we desperately need. They took the authority of the Environmental Protection Agency to monitor the chemicals that would be used to kill the mosquitoes. And then, to add insult to injury, they put in a provision that said you could display Confederate flags in U.S. military cemeteries. What does that have to do with the Zika virus? Nothing. It was political gamesmanship. It was going nowhere. The President would never sign it under those circumstances, and they knew it. Now the President says: Give me a clean Zika funding bill and we will move forward with this continuing resolution. Finally, last week the Senate Republican leader gave us that clean bill as part of the CR, and if that were all he did, we would be finished, we would be home, but he kept moving forward in other areas of controversy. You see, there was terrible flooding in Louisiana, and a lot of innocent people were hurt. They lost their homes and businesses. It has been a custom in the Congress to rally to the aid of victims of disasters. I have voted for that over and over again, for maybe every State across the United States, because I knew the day would come--and it has--when Illinois would need a helping hand, and I wanted to be there for my colleagues. So we said this to the leader on the Republican side: If you want to help Louisiana--and I do--also help the people living in Flint, MI. Remember when their water supply was contaminated? There were 100,000 people ingesting lead, when there is zero tolerance in our blood streams for that. The damage is obvious. Imagine 9,000 children in Flint poisoned with lead-contaminated water. That happened. In that poor city, they are still drinking water out of bottles every single day. So we said to the Republican leader: Yes, we care about Louisiana. You should care about Flint, MI. If you are going to help Louisiana, help those poor people in Flint who are facing this kind of contamination. He refused. He said: There will be money for Louisiana but no money for Michigan. Why? We think there are victims in both places, and in the past the Senate and Congress have risen to those tragedies and those demands. I have done it on a bipartisan basis. It makes no difference to me that we have two Republican Senators in Louisiana, and it should make no difference to Senator McConnell that we have two Democratic Senators in Michigan. Let's think about the Americans who are hurting in both places instead of playing political games. But no--Senator McConnell said: We will help Louisiana; we will provide no help to Flint, MI. That is unfair, and it complicates the situation. If that were all he did, it would be bad enough, but Senator McConnell has a pet project that he needs to put into this bill. Listen to what it is. It is a prohibition at the Securities and Exchange Commission that would promulgate a rule to require America's corporations to publicly disclose the campaign contributions they are making. Under Citizens United, in warped thinking at the Supreme Court, it was determined that corporations are persons when it comes to contributing money. Look what has happened--a flood of millions of dollars. Republicans were boasting that they raised $43 million in their super PAC in August, and they got $20 million last week from Sheldon Adelson, a rich man who lives out in Nevada. Oh, they are rolling in millions, but Senator McConnell is determined to keep secret the source of these funds, so he wants to prohibit the Securities and Exchange Commission from requiring corporations to simply state publicly that they are making these contributions. We do. If corporations are persons--individual persons, like myself have to make a disclosure of contributions that are made. Why should corporations have the benefit of being treated as a person to make contributions but not the responsibility facing persons to disclose this publicly? Senator McConnell wants to keep that secret, and that is why he included it in this legislation and made it as controversial as it is. A simple word to the leader on the Republican side and to the wise who want to leave and go home and campaign: There is a way out of here. Treat the people in Flint, MI, with the same respect we are treating the victims in Louisiana. Provide the resources for opioid funding, which we desperately need. Leave out this special interest provision protecting corporations that want to make political contributions but want to keep it secret so nobody knows what they are doing. Make sure that we finally--finally--7 months later, adequately fund the Zika crisis so we can deal with this and develop a vaccine to protect all of America. Mr. President, to reiterate, after weeks of bipartisan negotiations and significant progress made in settling our differences on a bill to keep the government open through December 9, Republican leadership has given up on negotiations and instead filed a bill that completely ignores the ongoing emergency in Flint, MI. For over a year, the good people of Flint have waited for Congress to do our job and address the public health emergency that has poisoned 9,000 children and left 100,000 residents without access to clean and safe water. But once again, they are being told to wait. They are being told that the emergency their community is facing is somehow less important than emergencies other communities around the country are facing. Republicans continue to argue that the ongoing crisis in Flint and other cities is better addressed through the Water Resources Development bill or WRDA. But while the Senate WRDA bill, which we passed earlier this month, includes vital funding for Flint, the House has made no commitment to help Flint in their bill. We cannot afford to wait any longer. The people of Flint have waited far too long already. We need to address the emergency in Flint now--in this bill--just as we are addressing the emergency in Louisiana. It is unbelievable that Congress continues to hold up federal funds to help aid these Americans in their time of need. Almost 100,000 people are currently living without reliable access to clean water in their homes and 9,000 children are suffering from lead poisoning. Just like those suffering from flooding and tornados, these families did nothing to deserve this. And just as the federal government always helps when Americans are hit by disasters, it should do so now. There were no complaints last May when the Federal government declared an emergency and reached out to residents of Texas to help them rebuild their lives after a tornado hit. So I see no reason why Senators should hesitate to provide funding to Flint, Michigan, to help deal with this public health emergency. The crisis in Flint is a tragedy that demands Senate action. Instead of turning on the tap to make breakfast or take a shower, like all of us did this morning, these residents start their day by waiting in long lines for bottled water to feed and bathe their children, take showers, and stay healthy. And for those elderly or disabled residents that cannot make it to the pick-up location, they are left with the option of continuing to use water that they know is poisoning their bodies with lead and causing numerous health issues. The lead contamination levels in the City mean that an entire generation of children are in danger of suffering from irreversible brain damage, lower IQ scores, developmental delays, and behavior issues for the rest of their lives. This truly is a tragedy that requires federal support. And what is frightening, is that Flint is not the only city battling with lead issues, nor is it an isolated incident. Elevated lead contamination levels have been reported in cities nationwide--including in Ohio, South Carolina, New Jersey, Mississippi, and Washington, DC. In my own home state of Illinois, Chicagoans have been battling with lead contamination in their homes for years. Recent articles in the Chicago Tribune have highlighted this struggle. In 2012, an EPA study found high levels of lead in the drinking water of several Chicago homes--despite the City's use of anticorrosive chemicals to treat the water. And since then, at least 179 young children in federally-subsidized homes in Chicago have suffered lead poisoning stemming from exposure to lead-based paint. These issues have led to Illinois having some of the country's highest rates of children with elevated blood lead blood levels, which, unfortunately, have hit low-income and minority communities the hardest. Thankfully, however, lead levels in Illinois and across the nation have not risen to the severity of those in Flint. But the widespread nature of these issues does show that we need to get serious about investing in infrastructure programs that address the housing, environmental, and public health aspects of preventing lead contamination in American homes. That is why I was proud to join Senators from both sides of the aisle in supporting a bipartisan deal to address the ongoing lead crisis in Flint and other communities across the country and ensure all Americans have access to safe drinking water. The Senate's bipartisan WRDA bill provides $220 million in direct emergency assistance to Flint and other communities facing similar drinking water emergencies. It provides $1.4 billion over five years to help small and disadvantaged communities comply with the Safe Drinking Water Act. The bill modernizes our State Revolving Loan Fund program and provides $300 million in grants for communities to replace lead service lines. And because we are also seeing high levels of lead in our schools' water, the bill authorizes $100 million for additional lead testing in schools. This bill also addresses many of the issues that I raised in the Lead-Safe Housing for Kids Act that I introduced with Senator Menendez and the CLEAR Act that I introduced with Senator Cardin, two bills that would ensure our children are protected from the dangerous effects of lead in our water and our housing. While we still haven't figured out our differences over aid for communities affected by lead contamination, Democrats and Republicans have finally agreed to address the Zika public health emergency in this bill. In February, the President requested $1.9 billion to fight the Zika virus. In May, the Senate overwhelmingly passed a bipartisan bill to provide $1.1 billion in emergency funding to combat this virus, but then partisan politics took over. Republicans insisted on attaching a variety of controversial policy riders to the Zika bill, from attempting to overturn provisions of the Clean Water Act to trying to block money from going to Planned Parenthood health centers. Thankfully, 7 months after the President first made his request, common-sense is prevailing and Republicans have finally dropped their outrageous demands to load this bill up with contentious and extraneous items. I wish it had happened sooner. The bill before us today includes $1.1 billion in funding to help States and our Federal health agencies properly respond to the ongoing Zika epidemic. This money will be used for vaccine development, mosquito control, and the delivery of needed health care. What the bill before us today does NOT include are ill-conceived partisan poison pills. As of last week, there were more than 23,000 reported cases of Zika in the United States and its territories, including more than 2,000 pregnant women. We are 7 months overdue in passing this emergency funding. It is my hope that pregnant women and children won't have to wait much longer. While this bill is missing vital funding for Flint, Leader McConnell had no problem including controversial language that limits the Security and Exchange Commission's ability to require disclosure of corporate political spending. In 2010, the Supreme Court issued a far-reaching decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. On a divided 5-4 vote, the Court struck down years of precedent and held that the First Amendment permitted corporations to spend freely from their treasuries to influence elections. As a result of Citizens United and the series of decisions that followed in its wake, special interests and wealthy, well-connected campaign donors have so far poured more than $2 billion dollars of outside spending into recent Federal elections, including 2016 races. In the years since Citizens United, several of my colleagues and I have called for the SEC to initiate a rulemaking requiring public companies to disclose their political spending to shareholders. More than 1.2 million securities experts, institutional and individual investors, and members of the public have asked the SEC for a disclosure rule. Such a rulemaking would bring much needed transparency to the U.S. political process. Shareholders deserve to know when outside spending in political campaigns comes from the coffers of a company they have invested in. Unfortunately, last year, this provision limiting the SEC's rulemaking authority was slipped into the omnibus appropriations bill, which we had to pass in order to fund the government for the 2016 fiscal year. We should not allow this rider to continue to strangle the SEC's authority. Despite weeks of bipartisan progress on a deal to fund the government, the Republicans have decided to move forward on a bill that continues to ignore the ongoing crisis in Flint and other cities like Chicago. Congress and the Federal government's primary responsibility is to protect the American people. And just as the Federal government always helps when Americans are hit by disasters, it should do so now. Like the communities in Louisiana suffering from devastating flooding, the people of Flint deserve our help in responding to this public health emergency. A deal to provide funding for Flint has already passed the Senate with overwhelming bipartisan support. We need to address the emergency in Flint NOW, in this bill. The people of Flint have waited long enough. I yield the floor.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I thank my colleagues for coming to the floor this afternoon for a historic presentation. I just spent this last weekend--an enjoyable weekend--being a babysitter. My wife and I were able to babysit our 5-year-old grand- twins. It is always a kick to hear what is on their minds and have conversations. We spend a lot of time discussing the concept of fiction and nonfiction. They were trying to figure out which things were fiction and which were nonfiction. We went back and forth through superheroes and all the rest of it, and it was a lot of fun. I thought about that as I came to the floor today because when it comes to looking for fiction and nonfiction, the Executive Calendar of the U.S. Senate on our desk would have to fall in the category of fiction. It is not true because in this calendar, you will find the nominations sent from the committee to the floor of the Senate to be considered. At least that is what you think you are going to find, but instead what we find are the names of 30 nominees to become Federal judges and have cleared the committees, such as the Judiciary Committee, and languish on this calendar never to be called by the Republican majority. Some have been here for a year. They cleared the committee with bipartisan votes. Many of them were nominated and approved by Republican Senators, but when they come to the floor, it comes to a full stop. Senator McConnell, the Republican leader, is not scheduling votes for Federal judges under President Obama. He argues that whether it is the Supreme Court or other Federal district courts, this is a lameduck President, and he has no obligation, being of the opposite political faith, to give this President anything when it comes to judges. That is the Republican Senate position, that is Senator McConnell's position, but it is totally inconsistent with two things. The tradition of the Senate is the first issue. When George W. Bush was in his last term in office and the Democrats were in control, we approved 68 judges in that last Congress--in his ``lameduck'' Congress. So far this Congress Senator McConnell has allowed only 22 judges to come through the Senate, and 30 of them are sitting on the calendar. By the tradition of the Senate, where the Senate fills the vacancies when they need to be filled, regardless of the President's party or the year of his term--Senator McConnell ignores that. We have 91 Federal judicial vacancies across the United States that need to be filled. Nearly half of them are emergencies. The caseload is overwhelming and justice is not being served in those districts, but Senator McConnell says no. The most egregious example is the vacancy on the U.S. Supreme Court. You can almost look through the windows and outside of the doors of the Chamber here and see that beautiful building, the Supreme Court, and realize that in a matter of days they will reconvene to consider the most important cases pending before the United States of America. What is different about this Supreme Court is that there are only eight Justices seated on the Court. The untimely passing of Antonin Scalia in February led to a vacancy on the Supreme Court. President Obama met his obligation under the Constitution. Article II, section 2 says the President shall nominate someone to fill the vacancy on the Supreme Court. President Obama did it. As the Constitution directs him, he sent that name to the U.S. Senate for advice and consent 195 days ago. Senator McConnell announced he would not fill that vacancy and would not even give that nominee, Merrick Garland of the D.C. Circuit, a hearing so he could be asked the basic questions about his service on the Court. In fact, Senator McConnell took another step and said: I will not even meet with him. How many times has that happened in the history of the U.S. Senate? Never. Politicians are careful when they use that word--``never.'' We have never had a President submit the nominee to fill a pending vacancy on the Supreme Court who has been denied a hearing in the Senate--never. Why? Senator McConnell says: Well, President Obama is leaving soon, as if he were elected only for a 7-year tenure and isn't entitled to be President in his eighth year, but the real reason is pretty obvious. Senator McConnell and the Republicans are praying that Donald Trump will be able to fill this vacancy on the Supreme Court. After watching the performance last night, can you imagine that man choosing a Justice for life on the Supreme Court? That is what they are counting on. That is why they are leaving these vacancies open, too, so that Donald Trump can fill those vacancies. It is a sad moment in the history of this country. It is the most accurate reflection of the dysfunction of the U.S. Senate I can think of--that the Senate Republican leadership would ignore the Constitution and the traditions of the Senate, leave these poor judicial nominees languishing for up to a year on the calendar, and refuse to meet their constitutional obligation to give Merrick Garland--even though the American Bar Association deemed him as being unanimously ``well qualified''--his time to come before the Senate for an open hearing, answer questions under oath, and receive a vote on the floor of the Senate. The Republicans in the Senate want to brag about their great record of performance this year as the party in control of the U.S. Senate, but what they cannot explain or live down is the embarrassment they brought to this institution by refusing to meet their constitutional responsibility. I yield the floor.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, it has been said that nations that forget its defenders will be itself forgotten. Well, I would like to take a moment to recognize one of those defenders who fought for and secured our freedom during World War II. First, I want to commend Richard Paul for his brave actions and quiet courage--and thank him for a debt that we can never fully repay. I also want to wish him an early happy birthday. On October 23, Richard Paul, first lieutenant of the 13th Army Air Force--from Quincy, IL--will turn 100 years old. What an achievement. Today, I am honored to share his story. Let me take you back to November 29, 1942. On that November day, in the midst of World War II, rather than waiting to have his draft number called, Richard drove down to the nearest Army Air Force Cadet Training Program in Peoria, IL, and volunteered to serve. The next day, he was sworn into the program and told to await further orders. In January 1943, Richard received his orders and reported to Decatur, IL. After stints in Jefferson Barracks, MO, and Galesburg, IL, Richard found himself in Texas for pilot training. On March 12, 1944, Richard graduated from flight school and spent the next 7 weeks in Liberal, KS, learning to fly the B-24 Liberator, an American bomber with the greatest bomb load carrying capacity and longest range of its time. By the spring of 1944, First Lieutenant Richard Paul and his crew flew B- 24 Liberators on 36 combat missions, including two recon missions in the South Pacific theater. Richard also received the Distinguished Flying Cross for his heroism and extraordinary achievement while participating and supporting military operations in an aerial flight. Although he didn't know it at the time, on March 20, 1945, Richard flew his final mission. The following day, he was told he was going back to the States. For all his wartime accomplishments, I think Richard would agree that his greatest achievement happened in flight school, marrying Esther Viola Jewell, who he simply called Vi. After getting permission from his base commander, the chaplain picked Richard and his bride up from the hotel she was staying at in Independence, KS. There was one problem: Richard and Vi didn't have witnesses. So Richard rushed back to the barracks and found two cadets to fill in. Disaster averted. And on Christmas Eve 1943, Richard and Vi were married. They would spend the next 64 Christmases together before Vi passed on December 14, 2008. We owe a great debt to veterans like Richard, who came home after the war and built this Nation. When the war ended, Richard first looked for work as a pilot at a Minneapolis airline. But despite his incredible experience, he was told they received nearly 100 applications from former Army pilots every day and did not have enough jobs. Well, it was the airline's loss and a blessing for the people of Quincy. The following year, Richard became a pharmacist and spent the next 44 years working in Quincy at the Brown Drug Company--the same Brown Drug Company Vi worked at in 1940. There are many advantages of having 100 years on Earth, but on top of the list may be the ability to spread love in so many ways. Whether it was through love of country--while serving as first lieutenant in the 13th Air Force during World War II; love of community--spending 44 years as a pharmacist at the Brown Drug Company; or love of family, raising 4 daughters with his wife, Vi, 8 grandchildren, and 18 great- grandchildren--what an extraordinary legacy. I will close with this: I have heard the first 100 years are the hardest. But I am reminded of what an old ball player once said: ``Age is a case of mind over matter. If you don't mind, it don't matter.'' So when the big day arrives, I hope Richard celebrates with friends and family--and enjoys it. He has earned it. Thank you, Richard, for your service and sacrifice, and congratulations on an outstanding milestone.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, this weekend the doors will open on a new American treasure. The National Museum of African American History and Culture tells the story of a people whose toil and genius helped create America and whose contributions in every walk of life have enriched our Nation beyond measure. The museum stands majestically on the National Mall, at the foot of the Washington Monument. If you stand at the museum's entrance and look in one direction you see the Lincoln Memorial, where Marian Anderson sang and Dr. King spoke of his dream for America. Look in the other direction and you can see a plot of land where, just several generations ago, men, women and children were sold like chattel--close enough to this Capitol that members of Congress could hear their anguished cries. Those stories and many, many more, are chronicled within the walls of this ambitious and long overdue museum. The National Museum of African American History and Culture represents America's first official attempt to tell the story of African Americans--a story that spans 600 years and stretches from the indignity and inhumanity of slavery to the long and still ongoing march for freedom that changed our Nation and our world. As one writer described it, the museum is ``a shifting mix of sadness and celebration.'' It is a record of brutal subjugation, racial violence, and discrimination--and it is the story of a resilient people who survived those horrors and created a rich and vibrant culture. The new museum is the 19th in the priceless portfolio of the Smithsonian Institution. If you ask African Americans about the significance of the new museum, you are likely to hear many answers. One answer you will hear over and over is: ``Now our ancestors can rest.'' At long last, the stories of struggle, perseverance, and achievement that have been passed down, generation after generation, in African- American families finally have an official and honored repository in America. Speakers at the museum's opening on Saturday will include President Barack Obama and former President George W. Bush--two Presidents, one Republican and one Democrat, a White man and our Nation's first African-American President. Imagine the ancestors' delight at that line-up. As many as 100,000 people from all over America are expected to visit the museum on this opening weekend--like one giant, proud family reunion. The National Museum of African American History and Culture tells the harrowing story of slavery, Jim Crow, and segregation. It also documents the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s--the template for the women's movement, the disability rights movement, and other modern human rights struggles in America and around the world. But the Museum of African American History and Culture is more than a story of suffering and struggle. It is a celebration of resilience and triumph--of faith in America and in a better future. It showcases the countless ways in which African Americans have enriched and enlivened American culture and society--in sports, music, literature, and art--in commerce and business, and in scientific discovery. While it focuses on African Americans, it is a museum for all Americans--because you cannot truly understand American history without understanding African-American history and the difficult, often inspirational, and always central role that African Americans have played in our history. Lonnie Bunch III is a brilliant historian and educator. He is also the founding director of the Smithsonian's National Museum of African American History and Culture. As he says, the history of African Americans is ``the quintessential American story,'' a story of measured progress and remarkable achievement after an ugly period of painful oppression. From 2001 to 2005, Lonnie Bunch served as president of the Chicago Historical Society, now called the Chicago History Museum. That is where I came to know and respect him. During his short tenure, Lonnie Bunch oversaw a hugely successful expansion of the Chicago History Museum, and he helped broaden community support for the museum dramatically. He became almost as much of a cultural treasure as the museum itself, and we hated to see him leave Chicago. But the chance to help create the National Museum of African American History and Culture--literally, from the ground up--was the challenge of a lifetime. It was also, as Lonnie Bunch will tell you, something he felt he needed to do for his ancestors, to honor their struggle and perseverance. When he signed on to head it in 2005, the National Museum of African American History and Culture had no staff, no collection, and no building--not even a blueprint. No Smithsonian museum had ever started life without a collection. What is more, the museum's initial, very modest acquisitions budget meant that many of the most valuable artifacts of African-American history sell at traditional auctions were beyond the financial reach of the new museum. So Lonnie Bunch conceived of a brilliant strategy to build the museum's collection. He and his staff conducted ``Antiques Roadshow' ''-style programs in 15 cities called ``Save Our African American Treasures.'' Their hunt for African-American treasures kicked off in January 2008 at the Harold Washington Public Library in Chicago. Hundreds of people brought family heirlooms to be inspected and appraised. Many of the nearly 40,000 artifacts in the new museum's collection came from these shows. In city after city, people brought treasured objects that had been in their families for years and generations and said: ``We've cared for this until now. We trust the Smithsonian to keep it safe from now on.'' Among the treasures is Harriet Tubman's prayer shawl, given to her by Queen Victoria, and the great abolitionist's personal hymnal. As the endpoint in the great migration of African Americans from the Deep South to the North, Chicago holds a special place in African- American history and that is reflected in the new museum. One of the most powerful exhibits is the original glass casket that held the battered body of Emmett Till, the 14-year-old boy from Chicago who was viciously murdered by two White men in Mississippi in 1955. Emmett Till was kidnapped, beaten to a bloody pulp, and shot in the head. His broken body was then weighted down and thrown into a river. His grieving mother, Mamie Till Moseley, insisted that the casket remain open during her son's funeral so the world could see what racial hatred and violence had done to her only child. The images of Emmett's mangled body shocked the Nation's conscience and fueled the modern civil rights Nmovement. Rosa Parks said she was thinking of those images 3 months later when she refused to give up her seat and move to the back of the bus. Other treasures from Chicago and Illinois include objects from the Pullman Car Company and from famed African-American publications including Ebony and Jet magazines and the Chicago Defender newspaper. There are photographs from fair housing marches led by Dr. Martin Luther King in Marquette Park, a neighborhood in southwest Chicago in 1966. Dr. King was struck in the head by a brick thrown from an angry mob. Those marches showed America that racial animus and violence was not simply a Southern problem, it was an American problem. Only nine African Americans have ever served in this Senate. Illinois is proud to be home to three of those Senators, including the man who went on to become our first African-American President. Among the museum's artifacts from Barack Obama's historic public life is the entire contents of a 2008 Obama for President headquarters in Falls Church, VA--packed up--lock, stock and barrel--and preserved by the Smithsonian for future generations. Among the museum's other treasures are a fighter jet flown by Tuskegee Airman and shards of glass from the horrific Klan bombing in 1963 of the 16th Street Baptist Church in Birmingham, an act of terrorism that claimed the lives of four little girls attending Sunday school. Other artifacts remind us that the long march to freedom is not entirely over yet. Poll tax receipts from a century ago remind us of the need to be vigilant in protecting every Americans' constitutional right to vote. A guard tower from the infamous Angola State Penitentiary reminds us that racial inequities persist in America's criminal justice and we have more work to do to root it out. To borrow a phrase from the immortal Sam Cooke, the National Museum of African American History and Culture ``has been a long, long time coming.'' It was first proposed more than a century ago by African-American veterans of the Civil War. Congress approved it once, in 1927, but never funded it because of the Depression. The idea was resurrected in the late 1980s, led by Congressman John Lewis of Georgia, an icon of the civil rights movement. For 15 years, though, a bill to create the museum was defeated The logjam was finally broken in 2003, when President George W. Bush took up the cause. More than any previous Smithsonian museum, this one has relied on private donations, rather than just public dollars. A number of celebrities have made very large gifts, including $5 million from Michael Jordan and $21 million from Oprah Winfrey, the largest single benefactor. But many of the donations have come from churches, sororities and fraternities, and other African-American groups. A large amount--$4 million--came from average people in gifts of less than $1,000. The new museum looks like nothing else on the National Mall. It is clad in burnished bronze grillwork and built to resemble a three-tiered crown from an old African kingdom. Looking at it, one is reminded of the words of the writer James Baldwin. In exhorting African Americans to take pride in their history, Baldwin wrote: ``Your crown has been bought and paid for. All you must do is put it on.'' The National Museum of African American History and Culture is one of the great jewels in that crown. It will help the ancestors to rest and allow this and future generations to learn and be inspired, and that is cause to celebrate.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, throughout his life, the late Senator Paul Simon believed that for the United States to be a true world leader, our country and its citizens needed to strengthen our international understanding. In a 1995 floor speech, he posed the question ``Can someone really be considered educated if, upon graduation as an engineer or physician or teacher or journalist or accountant or architect, he or she does not have the most minimal understanding of the rest of the world?'' At the heart of this question was his aspiration for our country to become more internationally aware. Following the horrific attacks of September 11, 2001--an event that is now 15 years in our past, Senator Simon shared his vision of a world in which peace and security is fostered through mutual understanding and global awareness. He believed the best way to develop this understanding and awareness was through fulling submerse oneself in another culture. Senator Simon saw that the opportunity for this already existed on college campuses through study abroad programs. Study abroad helps students make a connection with another part of the world and begin to develop insight into the perspectives of other nations. By exposing young adults to study abroad, today's students will become more globally aware future leaders. Unfortunately, as a country, we are falling short of achieving the great vision set forth by Senator Simon. Currently, less than 2 percent of enrolled post-secondary students in the United States study abroad. Furthermore, the students who do study abroad are not reflective of post-secondary enrollment in the United States. Minority students, first generation college students, and community college students are significantly underrepresented among those who do study abroad. These groups of students disproportionately lose out on the remarkable educational opportunities that come along with studying abroad-- engaging with other cultures, enhancing foreign language skills, and expanding international knowledge through firsthand experience. Further, the students who study abroad do so overwhelmingly in just one part of the world. Of all students who study abroad, 40 percent study in just four countries: the United Kingdom, Italy, Spain, and France. An additional 13 percent study in other European countries, meaning that over half of all U.S. students who study abroad do so in Europe. Europe has many valuable and important educational experiences to offer American students. But, increasing the diversity of study abroad destinations allows students to expand their horizons and make connections that will help them develop a global perspective and deeper understanding of the challenges we face in the 21st Century. In 2004, Congress took the first step towards expanding study abroad when it authorized the Commission on Abraham Lincoln Study Abroad Fellowship Program to provide recommendations to Congress and the President on expanding study abroad programs. Today, I am honored to carry on the vision laid out by Senator Simon as Senator Wicker and I introduce the Senator Paul Simon Study Abroad Program Act. This legislation takes an important step towards making the vision of Senator Simon a reality based on the recommendations made by the Abraham Lincoln Study Abroad Commission. It establishes a competitive grant program for institutions of higher education to encourage the sustainable expansion of study abroad opportunities for students in the United States. Over the next 10 years, this grant program aims to increase the overall number of undergraduate students studying abroad each year to one million students. It will place a special emphasis on increasing opportunities for nontraditional and minority students, so that the demographics of students who study abroad more closely reflect the population of current undergraduate students. This bill will also emphasize getting students to study abroad in nontraditional destinations particularly in developing countries. We need to send more students to developing nations because these are the places that America needs to better understand--countries in Africa, Asia, Latin America, South America, and the Middle East. This legislation takes important steps toward expanding and diversifying participation in study abroad. I am pleased that several organizations have endorsed this bill including the American Public and Land-grant Universities, Association of International Educators, Partners of the Americas, American Council on Education, the American Association of Community Colleges, the Forum on Education Abroad, the Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities, and the Association of American Universities. In today's global society, an undergraduate education that includes a meaningful study abroad experience is more important than ever. Expanded participation in study abroad is necessary to prepare the next generation of Americans with the global knowledge and skills needed for success in an increasingly interconnected world. I thank Senator Wicker for standing with me in this effort and I hope my colleagues will join us. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, throughout his life, the late Senator Paul Simon believed that for the United States to be a true world leader, our country and its citizens needed to strengthen our international understanding. In a 1995 floor speech, he posed the question ``Can someone really be considered educated if, upon graduation as an engineer or physician or teacher or journalist or accountant or architect, he or she does not have the most minimal understanding of the rest of the world?'' At the heart of this question was his aspiration for our country to become more internationally aware. Following the horrific attacks of September 11, 2001--an event that is now 15 years in our past, Senator Simon shared his vision of a world in which peace and security is fostered through mutual understanding and global awareness. He believed the best way to develop this understanding and awareness was through fulling submerse oneself in another culture. Senator Simon saw that the opportunity for this already existed on college campuses through study abroad programs. Study abroad helps students make a connection with another part of the world and begin to develop insight into the perspectives of other nations. By exposing young adults to study abroad, today's students will become more globally aware future leaders. Unfortunately, as a country, we are falling short of achieving the great vision set forth by Senator Simon. Currently, less than 2 percent of enrolled post-secondary students in the United States study abroad. Furthermore, the students who do study abroad are not reflective of post-secondary enrollment in the United States. Minority students, first generation college students, and community college students are significantly underrepresented among those who do study abroad. These groups of students disproportionately lose out on the remarkable educational opportunities that come along with studying abroad-- engaging with other cultures, enhancing foreign language skills, and expanding international knowledge through firsthand experience. Further, the students who study abroad do so overwhelmingly in just one part of the world. Of all students who study abroad, 40 percent study in just four countries: the United Kingdom, Italy, Spain, and France. An additional 13 percent study in other European countries, meaning that over half of all U.S. students who study abroad do so in Europe. Europe has many valuable and important educational experiences to offer American students. But, increasing the diversity of study abroad destinations allows students to expand their horizons and make connections that will help them develop a global perspective and deeper understanding of the challenges we face in the 21st Century. In 2004, Congress took the first step towards expanding study abroad when it authorized the Commission on Abraham Lincoln Study Abroad Fellowship Program to provide recommendations to Congress and the President on expanding study abroad programs. Today, I am honored to carry on the vision laid out by Senator Simon as Senator Wicker and I introduce the Senator Paul Simon Study Abroad Program Act. This legislation takes an important step towards making the vision of Senator Simon a reality based on the recommendations made by the Abraham Lincoln Study Abroad Commission. It establishes a competitive grant program for institutions of higher education to encourage the sustainable expansion of study abroad opportunities for students in the United States. Over the next 10 years, this grant program aims to increase the overall number of undergraduate students studying abroad each year to one million students. It will place a special emphasis on increasing opportunities for nontraditional and minority students, so that the demographics of students who study abroad more closely reflect the population of current undergraduate students. This bill will also emphasize getting students to study abroad in nontraditional destinations particularly in developing countries. We need to send more students to developing nations because these are the places that America needs to better understand--countries in Africa, Asia, Latin America, South America, and the Middle East. This legislation takes important steps toward expanding and diversifying participation in study abroad. I am pleased that several organizations have endorsed this bill including the American Public and Land-grant Universities, Association of International Educators, Partners of the Americas, American Council on Education, the American Association of Community Colleges, the Forum on Education Abroad, the Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities, and the Association of American Universities. In today's global society, an undergraduate education that includes a meaningful study abroad experience is more important than ever. Expanded participation in study abroad is necessary to prepare the next generation of Americans with the global knowledge and skills needed for success in an increasingly interconnected world. I thank Senator Wicker for standing with me in this effort and I hope my colleagues will join us. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. In the last 2 years, I have spoken with so many Illinoisans about the heroin and prescription opioid epidemic. I have heard many different perspectives, including those from law enforcement, health care providers, criminal justice systems, the pharmaceutical industry, Federal oversight agencies, parents, loved ones, and recovering addicts. I have learned that there is no town too small and no suburb too wealthy to avoid this crisis of addiction and overdose. Opioids and heroin are affecting communities all across the country. Last November, I travelled to Dixon, IL, to learn about their work to combat the scourge of prescription opioid misuse. That is where I met chief of police Danny Langloss of the Dixon Police Department, who is leading an innovative effort with the Lee County Sherriff's Department to address this problem. Chief Langloss told me that the town had experienced a spike in opioid overdose deaths, which was quite uncommon for the area. As a result, the Dixon Police Department launched a new plan, one that was unconventional for law enforcement, but had proven to be effective in other parts of the country. They started the Safe Passage Initiative, a program that promotes treatment alternatives to arrest and incarceration. The police department put the word out that, if residents suffering from addiction came forward for help and turned in their drug paraphernalia, they would be assisted in finding addiction treatment rather than being arrested, so long as they did not have outstanding warrants. This program is a model for other communities. It embodies the public health approach to this epidemic that views substance abuse as a disease and not purely a criminal matter. Well, what has happened? Immediately after the announcement, the police department had dozens of residents come forward, asking for help. They were provided with social services and rehabilitation options. Since the program's initiation, the Dixon Police Department has helped to place more than 100 individuals into treatment. This is quite the cause for celebration, especially in a small, rural community where it can be incredibly difficult to find open treatment slots. Months later, many of these local residents are now clean and on the path toward recovery. What else has happened? Crime is down, and the jail cells are not nearly as full as they once were. Rather than arresting addicts for petty crimes that feed their addictions, they are being steered towards long-term help. Today I would like to celebrate the 1-year anniversary of this program and commend the Dixon Police Department, Chief Danny Langloss, and their partners in the treatment and advocacy community who have helped to make this program a success. The program has now expanded to multiple neighboring counties, including Whiteside County and Livingston County. When we talk about this opioid epidemic and the need for all stakeholders to step up and do their part, the Safe Passage Initiative is a worthy effort that is helping to turn the tide. Today there is a network of more than 145 police departments and 300 treatment centers that are taking this commonsense approach to addressing the opioid crisis. It is true that real barriers remain. I know that the Dixon Police Department struggles at times to find available beds for individuals that come forward to their program. And that is why I am working to expand access to addiction treatment by removing an old Medicaid rule, known as the IMD exclusion, which will help more people get the care they need. I am also working to increase funding for treatment centers and have succeeded in changing Federal regulations so that more individuals can receive effective treatment services. Across our Nation, there are an average of 77 drug overdose deaths each day. In Illinois, we experienced approximately 1,700 heroin and prescription opioid overdose deaths in 2014, a 29 percent increase from 2010. With the leadership of the Dixon Police Department and the dedication of its partners, we will help make a difference for those suffering from addiction. I congratulate them on the 1-year anniversary of the Safe Passage Initiative and look forward to greater success and expansion across the State in the future.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, every morning paper and most of the newscasts this morning focused in on a hearing of the Senate Banking Committee yesterday. It was a hearing where the President of the Wells Fargo bank was called on to testify. At issue was a recent disclosure that over a period of many years, Wells Fargo bank was enrolling its customers, without their knowledge, in the ownership of bank accounts and credit cards. Many times they faced penalties and charges which they did not understand because they had not asked to be enrolled in these programs. The employees at Wells Fargo bank did it in an effort to win favor within their corporate ranks and even to receive bonuses. This defrauding of thousands of Wells Fargo customers was finally unearthed by the media and by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. As a result, a substantial fine of millions of dollars was paid by Wells Fargo bank, and the President, Mr. Stumpf, was called before the committee yesterday to explain the situation. He faulted the over 5,000 employees of Wells Fargo bank, who he said were not honest in their dealings with their customers, and they were dismissed. There were questions asked of Mr. Stumpf about the responsibility of the management of Wells Fargo bank for this terrible miscarriage of justice and apparently very few, if any, managers were held accountable. One particular woman who was in a management capacity had been allowed to leave the bank under extremely positive circumstances. She was given a golden parachute of over $100 million when leaving the bank. So while 5,300 people, making around $12 an hour, were being dismissed because of their lack of ethics, this managing woman was, in fact, rewarded with a golden parachute of over $100 million as she left. Questions were raised by many of my colleagues, including Senator Brown, and even Republican colleagues were skeptical of this Wells Fargo presentation. Senator Elizabeth Warren was particularly poignant in her remarks that so many of the lower echelon employees were found morally culpable and paid a heavy price, while those at the highest ranks, including Mr. Stumpf himself, were compensated grandly for their leadership during this terrible time. It is an indication of what it takes to bring real justice to a free market system. I am a person who believes America is lucky to have the economy it has, but I also know that throughout history, there have been excesses where people have had to step in--sometimes the media with disclosure and many times the government with oversight and regulation--to right the wrongs which occur in runaway, rampant capitalism. We saw it, of course, in the recession that hit our country in 2008. Many of the largest banks in this country took advantage of individuals and families and businesses. At the end of it, many people lost their savings, their homes, and their jobs because of the greed of Wall Street, but what we are talking about in the area of justice doesn't just apply to financial institutions, it applies to health insurance as well. Affordable Care Act Mr. President, on a regular basis now, the leadership on the Republican side of the aisle has come forward to condemn the Affordable Care Act. It apparently is a big issue which they want to take into the election in November. I hope the American people listen carefully to what we have just heard from Senator McConnell, the Republican leader in the Senate. Day after day, week after week, month after month, and year after year, for the last 5 years, Republicans have come to the floor and said: Let's abolish ObamaCare. Let's end the Affordable Care Act. I am still waiting for the first Republican to come to the floor and say: And here is what we will replace it with. There is a saying in downstate Illinois--I will clean it up a little bit--that any mule can kick down a barn door, but it takes a carpenter to build one. In this situation, the Republicans can't wait to kick down the Affordable Care Act, but they don't have any plans to build a replacement. So here is what they want to do. They want to go back to what they consider the good old days of health insurance in America. Six years ago, let me tell me colleagues, health insurance in America was no picnic for most American families. Not only was there a steady increase in premiums year after year, but health insurance companies were very picky about the people they would insure. If you happened to be the parents of a child who had weathered the storm and survived cancer treatment, your child had a preexisting condition. If you could get health insurance, you paid a lot for it. The same thing was true if your wife had survived a heart attack, for example, and was now on the mend and doing well. She had a preexisting condition. So preexisting conditions became the basis for discriminating against American consumers. Who among us comes from such a perfect family without any health record that we can say there are no preexisting conditions in my family. If you don't have one today, you might have one tomorrow. One of the things about the Affordable Care Act is, we said health insurance companies cannot discriminate against people because of preexisting conditions. In the bad old days, which the Republicans would return to, they could. Under the Affordable Care Act, they cannot. We also said that lifetime limits on health insurance policies were unacceptable. So $100,000 may sound like a lot of money until you are diagnosed with cancer, and then you realize the course of treatment is going to blow through that $100,000 before you are ultimately going to get what the doctor has ordered. So we eliminated the lifetime caps on these policies that were, in fact, creating poverty among many Americans families because of medical diagnoses. We also eliminated discrimination based on gender. Why was it that a man applying for a health insurance policy was paying less than a woman applying for a health insurance policy? That discrimination was allowed under the bad old days of health insurance that the Republicans want to return to. We went further and said: If you are parents and have a young son or daughter, they can stay under your family health insurance plan until they reach the age of 26. Why is this important? Because kids out of college are still looking for work. They may not get a full-time job, they may not get health care benefits, but families want the peace of mind to know they are covered until age 26, until they can have a chance to develop their own health insurance coverage. Under the bad old days, that coverage was not there. The Republicans would like to go back to that. That is a mistake as far as I am concerned. We also basically said as well that if you are a senior citizen in America, you are not going to be burdened by what was known as the doughnut hole. People in Medicare are given a benefit for prescription drugs, but as the law was originally written, there was a gap in coverage in that benefit called the doughnut hole. You would be covered for the first few months of the year on expensive drugs; then you would be on your own to either pay out of your savings or not take the drugs for several months before coverage started again. We are closing the doughnut hole as part of the Affordable Care Act. The Republicans would take us back to the days of the doughnut hole, where individual retired Americans would face expenses of $2,000 or more for drugs each year. We are in the process of closing that doughnut hole. The Republicans would take us back to the bad old days when we didn't have that closure. They would eliminate the coverage of health insurance brought on by the Affordable Care Act for over 20 million Americans--20 million Americans. Senator McConnell would say: Sorry, we are going back to the bad old days. You and your family don't get health care coverage. There is something we discovered. Even families without health insurance get sick, and when they do get sick and, in the worst of circumstances, turn up at the doctor or the hospital, they are treated, and many times can't pay for it. Who pays for that care? Everyone else. Everyone else who is paying health insurance will pay for it. We think it is better under the Affordable Care Act. We achieved this: More and more Americans have their own health insurance, both for care when they are sick as well as for preventive care. We provide preventive care under the Affordable Care Act, particularly for senior citizens so they will avoid serious illnesses that get very expensive down the line. So what has been the net result of this? Not only are there 20 million more people who have health insurance in America because of the Affordable Care Act, but also the fact is, the rate of increase in costs in health care has slowed down--slower than at any time in recent records or modern memory. It has extended the life of Medicare for another 12 or 13 years because the cost of health care is not rising as quickly as we thought it might. The Republicans would take us back to the bad old days when the cost of health care was going up even more rapidly. I don't think most Americans would sign up for that. We also understand that when it comes to the Affordable Care Act, there are ways to improve it. I signed on to one of the provisions that Senator McConnell took exception to this morning. It is a provision for us to consider a public option when it comes to health insurance. I am all for private health insurance companies competing, doing their best, trying to win the support and the enrollment of American families, but what is wrong with creating a Medicare-like proposal that is a not-for- profit entity providing health insurance along the style of Medicare? Senator McConnell was pretty critical of that this morning. He hadn't asked most Americans what they think about Medicare. He should. Many of them thank God we have it. For many of them, it meant health insurance when they had no place to turn. The creation of Medicare over 50 years ago was liberating to many seniors. Now they finally have affordable, quality health care after they retire. So putting that on as a public option to be considered by those who are signing up for health insurance would let them shop and let them compete. That to me is consistent with what we want to achieve when it comes to health care in this country. So we listen time and again to these attacks and critiques of the Affordable Care Act. We have yet to see the Republican alternative. The only alternative they suggest is going back to the bad old days when health insurance cost too much, when health insurance discriminated against people with preexisting conditions, and when health insurance was a gamble as to whether you would have it from this year to the next. There are ways to improve the Affordable Care Act. I won't come to argue and will be the last to say that it is perfect as written, but in order to improve it, we need bipartisan cooperation, which we don't have. On the Republican side of the aisle, there have been 60 or 70 votes to abolish it, but not 1 vote to step up and try to improve it, which I would be happy to join in on a bipartisan basis. That is what the American people expect of us. The last point I would like to make on the issue of health care is to state for the Record of the U.S. Senate that we had a meeting yesterday on medical research. This is a good news story, and there aren't a lot of them on Capitol Hill. But we moved forward on a bipartisan basis to make substantial increases in the medical research budgets of the National Institutes of Health. This is the premier medical research facility for the world, and we are lucky to have it right here in the Washington area. Dr. Francis Collins heads it up. He told me years ago that if he could get 5-percent real growth in medical research for a number of years, we could make dramatic advances when it comes to medical research and cures for diseases. I took him up on that, and I enlisted a joint effort--first with Patty Murray, my colleague from the State of Washington, who is in a key position on the Appropriations Committee and the authorizing committee in the area of medical research and is totally committed to the effort, and on the Republican side Senator Blunt of Missouri and Senator Alexander of Tennessee. Then Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina joined me to cochair the NIH Caucus. Here are some things you may not know about medical research and how important it is. There was a briefing yesterday on diabetes. I didn't realize until I walked into that briefing that one-third of the annual expenditure for Medicare is for the treatment of diabetes. In addition to that, 20 percent of the annual expenditure for Medicare is for Alzheimer's. So for two diseases, diabetes and Alzheimer's, more than 50 percent of our Medicare budget is being spent each year. If we could develop new drugs, new treatments, new approaches that deal with diabetes and Alzheimer's, it would not only spare the people from the suffering they are going through and from the need for medical care, but it would greatly help our Medicare Program to be more solvent for years to come. Is medical research a good investment? I think it is the best investment. We have seen it pay off over and over and over again. Do you remember not too long ago when we were talking about people who were making their last trek down to Plains, GA, in the hopes that they would see former President Jimmy Carter for the last time because of his cancer diagnosis? Then, do you remember when President Jimmy Carter held a press conference and said: I am cancer-free. It was because of the development of drugs and medical treatments through medical research. That has given him back his life. For many Americans, it is the same story every day. We may do a lot of things wrong in Washington, but let's not get medical research wrong. Let's get it right. Let's make it bipartisan, and let's invest in it. I can't think of a better investment for future generations in this country. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Kaine) is necessarily absent. I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Kaine) would vote ``yea.''

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, Sunday, September 25 marks the end of an era. After 43 years of covering the news in Chicago, Robert Jordan will officially anchor his last newscast on ``Chicago's Very Own'' WGN 9. Mr. Jordan, an Atlanta native, is unique in journalism. Instead of moving from market to market, he landed with WGN in 1973 just 3 years into his career and never left the city. Outside of a 2-year stint as a Midwest correspondent for CBS, Mr. Jordan was a WGN fixture. Mr. Jordan has enjoyed a reputation of being a serious anchor and reporter while maintaining a sense of humor for the lighter moments. Since 1995, Mr. Jordan has been coanchoring the weekend newscasts with Jackie Bange. Video of their secret handshakes during commercial breaks has gone viral, with one such clip earning more than 7 million views on YouTube. In 2014, Mr. Jordan was named as the first journalist-in-residence for the University of Chicago's Careers in Journalism, Arts, and Media program. At the time of announcement, Mr. Jordan told an industry reporter that he was ``eager to work with young journalists and help guide them at this challenging time in our profession.'' There is no doubt those students had a tremendous opportunity to learn from one of the best, but those students weren't the first to learn from Mr. Jordan. His daughter Karen followed in his footsteps and now is a news anchor at WLS 7 in Chicago. Mr. Jordan's son-in-law Christian Farr is a reporter at WMAQ 5, so delivering the news to millions of viewers in Chicago truly has become the family business. Mr. Jordan's work in education was a natural fit for a man who earned a Ph.D. in philosophy of education with a minor in ethics from Loyola University Chicago in 1999 after receiving degrees from Northeastern Illinois University and Roosevelt University. Before he picked up a microphone, Mr. Jordan served our Nation as a surgical assistant in the U.S. Army. He continues to serve through his role on the boards of several community organizations. With retirement providing some free time on the weekends, Mr. Jordan said he plans to go to fun events with his wife, Sharon, that he missed out on while working. He is also going to continue his work with the Greater Illinois Chapter of the Alzheimer's Association on a unique program called the Memory Preservation Project. Mr. Jordan interviews people who are newly diagnosed with Alzheimer's for the project and creates a video of cherished family memories before the wretched disease robs victims of their ability to recall events in detail. With a new person being diagnosed with Alzheimer's every 67 seconds, there are many families affected by this terrible disease. Mr. Jordan has promised to turn up from time to time when WGN needs him to fill in for a colleague, but Sunday is truly the end of an era in Chicago journalism. I wish a happy retirement to one of ``Chicago's Very Own,'' Robert Jordan.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I can still recall the first briefing I had as a Member of Congress on something called HIV/AIDS. I didn't know much about it. I heard the words, but I didn't understand them until this briefing brought to mind and brought to light the serious threat this was to the health of thousands of people in the United States and around the world. It was a frightening moment. The information we received led us to believe quite honestly that this was the public health crisis of our time. There was a response that I was surprised by. Despite all the controversy around all the values and issues, President Ronald Reagan and his Surgeon General Koop stepped forward and showed real leadership. Some argued that President Reagan waited too long. I am going to put that argument aside. The day came when the Surgeon General sent a letter to every American family telling them the threat of this public health crisis. It was the right thing to do. We dealt with it in an honest, forthright way. We appropriated massive amounts of money for treatment research, and we have come a long way in saving the lives of many who were threatened by this deadly disease. It is rare when a President of the United States steps up and says to the American people: We have a public health crisis. Because it is so rare, we should take it very seriously. In February of this year, President Obama made that plea to Congress about a new public health crisis involving the Zika infection. Zika, of course, is borne by mosquitoes. There is evidence in countries around the world that when these mosquitoes bite someone and infect them, it has a negative health consequence, particularly on pregnant women and the babies they carry. President Obama came to Congress in February of this year and in a rare moment announced that we had an emergency, a public health crisis that needed to be addressed. He asked for $1.9 billion to eradicate the mosquitoes and also to develop a vaccine to protect innocent Americans. I took that seriously. Unfortunately, the Republican leadership in Congress did not. It wasn't until May, some 3 months later, that the Senate passed a response to the President's request for this public health emergency called Zika. We passed a bill that had about $1.1 billion in it--not what the President asked for but a substantial investment toward his goal of protecting America and developing a vaccine, and we passed it with an overwhelming bipartisan vote. Some 89 Senators from both parties voted for it in May of this year. That, of course, was 4 months ago. What happened after the Senate with a strong bipartisan vote responded to the President's request for emergency funding for a public health crisis involving Zika? What happened to this bill after it passed the Senate? It went to the House of Representatives. Unfortunately, that is where it took a bad turn. Instead of passing the obvious bipartisan bill in response to the President, the House Republicans insisted on delaying it further and adding provisions that were politically controversial and really were unnecessary to our goal of protecting America from this crisis. They added a provision that said that if you were a woman seeking family planning so that your pregnancy was not compromised by the Zika virus, you could not use the Planned Parenthood agencies for those family planning consultations. Why would they pick Planned Parenthood? Because the Republican Party is at war with Planned Parenthood. They are willing to stop even their family planning functions. Two million American women went to Planned Parenthood last year. They count on them for professional services they can trust and afford. The Republicans want to close it down. They have voted repeatedly to do that. So they chose this Zika emergency public health crisis bill to do that again. They took $500 million slated for the Veterans' Administration to expedite the consideration of claims by our veterans and eliminated that money in the VA--put it toward the Zika virus. Third, they decided to suspend the authority of the Environmental Protection Agency when it came to monitoring and overseeing the chemicals that would be sprayed to kill these mosquitoes. Finally, in the ultimate political act, they put in a provision that eliminated the prohibition against displaying a Confederate flag at a U.S. military cemetery. That is what happens when legislation that starts off as very simple, pointed, and direct runs amok and becomes a political freighter, carrying all of these issues. That is what happened and, of course, the Republicans in the House knew what would follow. The bill would run into resistance, and the Senate would be bogged down. Instead of taking the simple funding bill the Senate passed overwhelmingly with a bipartisan vote, the Republicans complicated the situation dramatically and brought the whole conversation to a stop. So here we are today. The President's request was in February; we are now in September. Congress has yet to send the President the resources he asked for. At what cost? Well, we know the cost. At this point we estimate that by the end of the year in Puerto Rico, 25 percent of the people on that island will be infected with the Zika virus, including presently about 1,000 women in Puerto Rico. We know that they are in danger and that the babies they give birth to will have serious life- threatening birth defects because of that infection--an infection that might have been slowed down or even avoided had this Congress under Republican control responded to President Obama's request for emergency public health funding for this Zika epidemic. As of last week there were 20,870 reported cases of Zika in the United States and its territories. That included 1,897 pregnant women, and in Illinois there are 70 of these women. We estimate about 700 or 800 women in America in the continental United States have been infected by this virus, with another 1,000, as I mentioned, in Puerto Rico. If we had responded quickly in a responsible bipartisan way when the President made his request, I don't know whether some of these families and women and their babies could have been spared. We will never know, but we do know this for sure: The Republican-led Congress ignored the President's request, refused to send the money he asked for, and we are paying a heavy price as a nation--not as heavy a price as these women who sadly have a tragedy on their hands that maybe could have been avoided if Congress had responded in a timely fashion. Seven months without congressional action for an emergency public health crisis called Zika is shameful. Let's not wait another day before we leave here to go back and campaign, before each party returns home to brag about what they have achieved or can achieve. Let's do our job when it comes to this Zika crisis. Let's make sure the continuing resolution that keeps the government's lights on also turns on the lights at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and at the National Institutes of Health so that we start reducing the number of people infected and also developing a vaccine to protect innocent families across the United States and perhaps around the world. That is something we desperately need to do. For-Profit Colleges and Universities Mr. President, the for-profit college and university industry is the most heavily federally subsidized profitmaking private business in America, bar none. Most of these for-profit colleges and universities, like the University of Phoenix, Kaplan, and others, have decided they want to tap into our Federal Treasury for anywhere up to 90 or 95 percent of all the revenue that comes through their universities and schools. There is no other business in America so dependent on Federal subsidies as for-profit colleges and universities. What happens? The Federal Treasury sends money to the students who apply to these schools in the form of grants and loans. The money is then transferred to the school, and the student has a debt they have to cope with when it comes to the money that is borrowed from the Federal Government. What happens in those circumstances where the school goes out of business? We saw it with Corinthian last year, one of the largest for- profit colleges and universities, and we just saw it 2 weeks ago with a group called ITT Tech. Here is what happens. Students have debt incurred at these for-profit schools like ITT Tech. They are approached by the Department of Education which offers them two options. The first option is, if you were a student at the school when it closed or you withdrew 120 days before it went out of business, you have a choice. You can keep your credit hours that you earned at ITT Tech and the debt incurred in earning them or walk away from both. Also, if you happen to have been defrauded by these schools, you have something called defense to repayment. If they misled you about the courses you were going to take, how much they would cost, what kind of loans were available to you, what kind of job you may have after graduation, then you, too, can raise that as a defense and potentially have your federal student loan debt forgiven. That is an option that many ITT Tech students now have. There is another aspect of this that we should not overlook. These schools do not just exploit students who are fresh out of high school or coming from some other place, unfortunately, they defraud veterans. Veterans using GI bill benefits at ITT Tech have been unfairly affected by this company's practices and now its closure and bankruptcy. For years, ITT Tech has been a major recipient of GI bill benefits. According to the 2014 report by Senator Tom Harkin's HELP Committee, ITT Tech was the third largest recipient in 2012 and 2013, receiving $161 million in GI bill funds. When it closed earlier this month, an estimated 7,000 veterans were enrolled at the school that has now gone out of business. Not only have these veterans used up part or, in some cases, all of their limited GI bill education benefits, some of them relied on VA housing assistance to pay their rent and afford a place to live for themselves and their families. Veterans can only receive this housing stipend if they are enrolled in a school that qualifies for GI bill benefits. So the closure of ITT Tech has put these veterans and their families at risk of being unable to afford their current housing, disrupting their lives. I support a bipartisan bill introduced by my colleagues Senators Blumenthal and Tillis, a bipartisan bill to reinstate GI bill education benefits in certain cases and give the Secretary of the VA the authority to temporarily extend housing benefits to vets, including those who attended ITT Tech. This bill, called the Department of Veterans Affairs Veterans Education Relief and Restoration Act or VERRA, was included in a larger bipartisan VA reform package that I hope the Senate will still take up this year. But the closure of ITT Tech makes the need to pass VERRA urgent. I urge my colleagues to join me in passing this common-sense, bipartisan legislation before we adjourn. I urge them to stop and reflect on the fact that these for-profit schools are exploiting students and families, members of the military and their families, and veterans across the United States. Why, in good conscience, are we allowing this to continue? It is time for us to put some standards of conduct on this for-profit university industry that has taken so much money from our Federal Treasury, from $25 to $30 billion a year. These heavily subsidized, crony capitalist operations are a disgrace. Ten percent of all students enrolled in postsecondary education attend for-profit colleges and universities. Forty percent of all the student loan defaults are from the students at these for-profit colleges and universities. Their tuitions are outrageously high, their diplomas are outrageously worthless, and many students and innocent people pay a heavy price. I will close with a story about one of them I represent. Laura Cotton is one of those students who was misled by ITT Tech. She is a single mom in Oak Lawn, IL, working part time. She saw the come-on advertising of ITT Tech, had a lot of conversations with their recruiters about their great programs and the job she would get with an ITT Tech degree. She said they never bothered to talk to her about what it was going to cost and how she was going to pay for it. She ended up enrolling in an online criminal justice program. According to Laura, most of the courses had nothing to do with her program of study. ITT Tech would just send her paperwork to sign, more loans, Federal and private. She ended up dropping out of ITT Tech when she finally added up all of the money they had enticed her to borrow. Laura has a debt of $98,000 from ITT Tech and nothing--no degree, nothing to show for it. In a letter she sent me, Laura wrote: ``My American dream of home ownership, purchasing a new car, giving my kids an education has suffered because my credit is now shot.'' I wish Laura's story was unique. I wish more Members of the Senate and Congress would sit down and talk to people just like her who have been victims of these for-profit colleges and universities. When are we going to accept our responsibility to clean up this shameful industry? I yield the floor.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Delaware (Mr. Coons) and the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Kaine) are necessarily absent. I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Kaine) would vote ``yea.''

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Delaware (Mr. Coons), the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Kaine), the Senator from Maryland (Ms. Mikulski), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), and the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Warner) are necessarily absent. I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Kaine) would vote yea.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Kaine) is necessarily absent. I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Kaine) would vote yea.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask through the Chair if the Senator from Nevada will yield for a question.

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I say through the Chair that I wish to join in. I started my career as a staffer and then as a Parliamentarian so I know what happens behind the scenes is sometimes even more important than what you see on the floor of the Senate. For 25 years, Tim Mitchell has been behind the scenes and at the heart of the activity in the U.S. Senate. I have been here for 20 years and have relied on Tim and our great staff team that has really stepped up time and time again. Like most people, it took just a minute or two in the Senate cloakroom to realize that Tim Mitchell is the biggest baseball fan I have ever run into. I didn't know he had 100 baseball neckties, but he does, and as Senator Reid said, some are very challenging from a style viewpoint, but he is loyal to his sport and particularly to his team, the Boston Red Sox. I watched him as he came into his glory moment when the Boston Red Sox won the World Series after a long wait. I know he is now looking for the Boston Red Sox to return to the World Series, and I have a pairing in my mind that would be perfect. It involves a former Red Sox President who came over to help the Chicago Cubs. His name is Theo Epstein, and he made history in Boston by taking the Red Sox to the World Series. We think he is going to make history in Chicago. This would be the perfect World Series for Tim, me, and for baseball. Let me close by saying that would be a perfect World Series, you have been a perfect addition to the Senate for 25 years, and we look forward to a lot more ahead. Thanks, Tim.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs. Boxer), the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Kaine), and the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) are necessarily absent. I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Kaine) would each vote yea.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from Pennsylvania. Several of us came to the floor earlier today to pay tribute to Tim Mitchell in his service to the Senate, which is certainly deserved on this occasion of his 25th anniversary of beginning work here. (The remarks of Mr. Durbin pertaining to the introduction of S. 3347 are printed in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions.'')

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.