Kirsten Gillibrand

Mrs. GILLIBRAND

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, I want to express my strong disappointment that we are unable to do this legislation now. There is a grave sense of urgency for the people living in Puerto Rico, so I share the goals of my colleagues to get this done sooner than later. This has to be moved forward. No American parent or child should have to face economic stress simply because of where they live. Congress has the responsibility to actually help these families. The economic situation in Puerto Rico is a serious problem that we can only begin to solve with meaningful legislation. This bill is the fiscally responsible way to help the people of Puerto Rico. It is the fiscally responsible way to alleviate the dire economic situation in Puerto Rico. Let's be very clear. This is not a bailout. It is a means for our fellow Americans in Puerto Rico to get themselves out of serious economic distress. Congress must come together to pass this bill. The situation in Puerto Rico is desperate and these families need our help. There is no other way to see it. We have to help them. I urge my colleagues to reconsider this objection. Congress must help the people of Puerto Rico. I yield the floor.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, I rise to urge my colleagues to vote to confirm this qualified judge, LaShann DeArcy Hall, to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York. Ms. Hall is an outstanding choice to fill this position. After decades of service in both the public sector and the private sector, Ms. Hall's breadth of knowledge and depth of experience will guide her for any case that happens to come before her. In her current role at a major international law firm, Ms. Hall specializes in high-stakes, complex commercial litigation. During her years of public service, including her time serving as a commissioner with the New York State Joint Commission on Public Ethics, Ms. Hall has worked tirelessly to help make her community a more fair and just place. Ms. Hall's credentials are absolutely worthy of this position on the Federal bench, and we will be a stronger nation with more women like Ms. Hall serving as judges in our Federal court system. Ms. Hall is a graduate of Howard University School of Law and she served in the U.S. Air Force. She is a highly accomplished lawyer, and she has devoted her entire career to various forms of public service. She is dedicated to her community, and she cares deeply about this country. LaShann DeArcy Hall would make an excellent Federal judge and would add much needed diversity to the Federal bench. Mr. President, I urge all my colleagues to vote to confirm her. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, two days ago another victim of the September 11 attacks died in New York. He is the eleventh first responder to die since this year's anniversary of the attacks. His name was Sergeant Gerard Beyrodt. He served for decades in the New York Police Department. His entire career was devoted to serving his community and keeping the people around him safe, and when we were attacked on September 11, 2011, Sergeant Beyrodt didn't waver. He banded together with thousands of first responders from around the country--from every single State--and he rushed to Ground Zero to help. These heroic men and women ran into the burning towers to try to save anyone they could. When the Twin Towers collapsed, our first responders worked day and night to clear the pile, breathing in toxic, poisonous fumes the entire time. These men and women were heroes. They refused to abandon their community in a time of terrifying confusion and intense grief. But now, because of the poisonous fumes they were exposed to at Ground Zero, the burning metal and the toxic smoke, these men and women are sick. Many of them have cancer, and many are dying, and far too many have already died. More than 14 years later, the terror attacks on September 11, 2001, are still claiming American lives. In the 6 weeks since the most recent anniversary of the attacks, we have lost 11 more responders to diseases that can be traced directly back to the work at Ground Zero. I wish to take a moment to actually speak their names now: John P. McKee, Reginald Umpthery, Kevin Kelly, Thomas Zayas, Paul McCabe, Ed Goller, Joseph Fugel, Ronald Richards, John Cedo, Dennis Needles, and Gerard Beyrodt. The death toll is not going to stop rising. So what is Congress waiting for? The bill authorizing funding for the 9/11 health program has already expired. It has expired. But these 9/ 11-related illnesses never expire. Neither should their health care. More than 33,000 first responders and survivors have an illness or injury caused by the 9/11 attacks or their aftermath. More than 1,700 have passed away from 9/11-related illnesses. More police officers have died from 9/11-related diseases than those who died on 9/11 itself. The participants in the 9/11 health program live in every single State. Every Senator in this Chamber has constituents who are sick and are registered in the 9/11 health program. The first responders we have lost leave behind families, spouses, and children. They leave behind bills, mortgages, car payments, and college tuition payments. These 9/11 illnesses not only rob families of their loved ones but leave them to face expenses without, in many cases, their family's primary bread winner. If Congress doesn't act now, how many more first responders and their families are going to suffer because we didn't do our job and reauthorize the program? On the most recent anniversary of the attacks, many of my colleagues here released statements and made posts online to commemorate the anniversary and remember the victims of 9/11. Well, if you are a Senator and that is all you are doing--if all you are doing is just talking about the heroism, the courage, and what happened on 9/11--then we are not actually doing our jobs. If we are Senators and all we are doing is tweeting about 9/11 and the responders, then we are not fully fulfilling our duty as Senators. There is a bill right here, right now, waiting for a vote. The majority of this Chamber already supports the bill as cosponsors. It is widely bipartisan, and not one person is opposed to it. So what are we waiting for? We must reauthorize and make permanent the World Trade Center Health Program and the Victim Compensation Fund. We must finish our job. Let's truly never forget. Our 9/11 heroes deserve and desperately need this health care. So let's do our job. Let's vote on this bill. Let's pass it. The clock is ticking. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Madam President, I rise to talk about the topic of gun violence. Time and again we have heard calls in this Chamber for tougher gun safety laws. We have debated ideas that have ultimately fallen short of passage. These were basic reforms that would better protect all Americans, and every time these proposals have failed, more of our communities have fallen victim to gun violence. There are more and more vigils, more funerals, and more questions about how these tragedies keep happening. Today lawmakers in Washington put forward a set of general principles to guide us as we work to stop the enormous amount of gun violence and gun deaths in our country. These principles include more thorough background checks, which the vast majority of Americans support. They include closing the various loopholes that make it so easy for criminals--not law-abiding citizens--to buy guns, and they include cracking down on gun trafficking and making it a Federal crime. I have introduced a bipartisan bill with Senator Kirk. The bill called the Hadiya Pendleton and Nyasia Pryear-Yard Gun Trafficking and Crime Prevention Act of 2015. It was named after two young girls who lost their lives when stray bullets from gang violence killed them. This bill is bipartisan. My main cosponsor is a Republican. Gun trafficking is recognized all around this country as a major source of fuel for American gun violence. Our bill would finally make gun trafficking a Federal crime. It would give law enforcement the tools they need to get illegal guns--we are not talking about legal guns--off the streets and prosecute those who make money dealing in trafficked weapons. Right now there is no Federal law that prevents someone from loading their truck in Georgia, driving up I-95, and reselling those guns to gang members in New York. These guns go to dangerous criminals. They are not going to our law-abiding citizens. They are not going to hunters in upstate New York. They are going to gang members in New York City, Chicago, and big cities across this country. We need to make it possible for our law enforcement to do their jobs. I have said it over and over again, nothing ever happens in Washington until regular people stand up and demand action. They want this nonsense to stop. They want innocent lives not to be lost because of criminals and the mentally ill who can so easily get access to weapons. It is insane that we cannot do commonsense gun reform that the vast majority of Americans and gun owners actually support. If you, God forbid, are a parent who has lost a child, we need to hear your voice. If you are a member of law enforcement, we need to hear from you about what has worked and what has not worked. What resources do you need for us to help you do your job? If you are a law- abiding gun owner, we need to hear your ideas about how to prevent criminals from getting their hands on guns. If your life has been affected by gun violence, we need to hear your ideas about how to prevent other people from having to live through the horror you have lived through. The only way we are going to make our country safer from gun violence is through Federal action. Right now, we are stuck with a patch of State and local laws which make it very hard for law enforcement to do their jobs to keep us safe. We urgently need Federal gun safety reform. Month after month, year after year illegal guns tear apart communities in New York and across our country. According to the last Federal data, there were 8,539 firearms recovered and traced in my home State in 2013 alone, and of those more than 8,500 guns, nearly 70 percent of them came from out of State. I cannot say this more strongly: We have to make gun trafficking a Federal crime. Give law enforcement the tools they need to keep our communities safe. Stop handing guns over to criminals. We can do this. I yield the floor.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, with great pleasure and pride, I wish to recognize the 125th anniversary of Carnegie Hall in New York City. At the ceremonial laying of the cornerstone of Carnegie Hall in 1890, Andrew Carnegie declared: ``It is built to stand for ages, and during these ages it is probable that this Hall will intertwine itself with the history of our country.'' The Hall has intertwined itself with the history of the United States but also with the history of the world. Today Carnegie Hall is the world's most recognized performing arts center and is a global symbol of artistic excellence. For 125 years the Hall has defined and shaped the future of music, and it continues in that leadership role today. The Hall has hosted world leaders, American presidents, authors, activists and intellectuals. The Hall's greatest influence, however, is through sound. Carnegie Hall's three performance centers project all forms of music to listeners around the world. Musicians from all corners of the globe strive to perform at Carnegie Hall. The Hall is a beacon inspiring and attracting the world's finest musicians in all genres. Less known but equally important, Carnegie Hall's Weill Music Institute produces an extraordinary range of music education and community programs that extend far outside the physical walls of its concert halls. Its music education in New York City schools serves as a laboratory of best practices for performing arts centers in major urban areas. Carnegie Hall provides and supports a partnership curriculum for 81 orchestras throughout the United States and abroad to work with local school students in urban, suburban, and rural settings. Its highly acclaimed National Youth Orchestra of the United States-- recently returned from a tour of China--helps build the next generation of musicians into lifelong community leaders and contributors. In the 2015-2016 season these programs will reach millions people in New York City, across the United States, and around the globe. In the spirit of Andrew Carnegie and of bold endeavors to tackle contemporary challenges, Carnegie Hall has recently initiated work to eliminate the music education ``access gap'' in schools throughout our nation. Carnegie Hall's leadership, from volunteers, trustees, to staff at all levels, are committed to quality and to equity of opportunity regardless of circumstance. Carnegie Hall's 125th opening night will occur on October 7th. I rise to commend the Hall's leadership, volunteers, contributors, performing artists, and staff. Carnegie Hall is a global icon symbolizing artistic excellence, achievement, and the power of music to feed our souls and bring people together. Congratulations, Carnegie Hall.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND

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

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

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, we just passed the 14th anniversary of the September 11 attacks. Americans all across the country honored the memory of 2,977 lives lost. There were moments of silence. There were testimonials from friends and family of the victims. There were statements, speeches, and posts online by my colleagues in Congress vowing to ``never forget.'' But the victims of September 11 are not just the men and women who were killed on that horrible day; the terror attacks on that day in 2001 are still claiming American lives. This includes the heroes who ran into the towers to save whom they could, who worked on the piles so that Americans might rebuild, and who would not abandon their community in a time of terrifying confusion and intense grief. Many of them are now sick because of their work at Ground Zero, and many are dying. In 2010, after years of delay, we finally established the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation programs to provide our first responders, the survivors, and their families with the health care and benefits they very desperately needed. Tomorrow, at midnight, the bill authorizing this funding will expire. More than 33,000 first responders and survivors have an illness or injury caused by the attacks or their aftermath. More than 1,700 have passed away from 9/11-related illnesses. More police officers have died since 9/11 from 9/11-related diseases than died on 9/11 itself. Since the 14th anniversary of the attacks earlier this month, another six 9/ 11 first responders have died. Think about that. In just a few short weeks, 6 more of our 9/11 heroes have died: John P. McKee, Roy McLaughlin, Reginald Umpthery, Kevin Kelly, Thomas Zayas, and Paul McCabe. They were married, and they had kids. Their average age was just a few years older than mine--53. They will all miss birthday parties and graduations. They will miss evening dinners and holidays. They leave behind mortgages, car payments, and college-tuition payments. These 9/11 illnesses not only rob families of their loved ones, but they leave them to face expenses without, in many cases, the family's primary breadwinner. Two weeks ago, hundreds of first responders from all over the country traveled to Washington to lobby Congress not to let their health care program expire. If Congress doesn't act now, how many more first responders and their families are going to suffer medically and financially because we didn't do our job and reauthorize this program? Let me tell you about just one responder, Ken George from Long Island. Ken was 37 on September 11, 2001. He was working for the New York City Highway Department, and after the attacks he went to do search and rescue work. He was there for a couple of weeks. Almost right away, Ken developed a cough, then asthma, and then the asthma led to restricted airway disease. Doctors found crushed glass from Ground Zero in his lungs. He was forced to retire in 2006 because his medical ailments became too burdensome, and now, as he put it, he is ``financially hurting like you wouldn't believe.'' We are not talking about statistics. We are not talking about data points on a chart. We are talking about a 51-year-old man with a wife and three kids, with crushed glass in his lungs because he chose to do the right thing. He chose to answer the call of duty, and he chose to search for survivors after 9/11. On top of everything else he is dealing with, Ken now has to worry if he will get the health treatments he needs and if his family will have the basic financial support they need. The health program officially expires tomorrow at midnight, but these illnesses--Ken's and thousands of others'--never expire, and neither should their health care. We must reauthorize and make permanent the World Trade Center Health Program and Victim Compensation Fund. The participants in the health program live in every single State. They live in 429 of the 435 congressional districts. Every Senator in this Chamber has constituents who are sick and dying and are in this program. A majority of this body has already signed on as cosponsors of this legislation, including many after our day of action a couple weeks ago. So let's finish this job. Let's give our 9/11 heroes the care and compensation they deserve and so desperately need. Let's truly never forget. The clock is ticking. Let's do our job. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, I rise today to speak in recognition of the 95th anniversary of the passage of the 19th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, granting voting rights for women. I ask my colleagues to join me in marking August 26, known as Women's Equality Day, a significant landmark in American history as we acknowledge, honor, and celebrate the vast and vital contributions that women have made to our country. Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Lucretia Mott, and other dedicated supporters for women's equality convened the First Women's Rights Convention on July 1848 in Seneca Falls, NY. They advocated for the right to own property, protection from domestic violence, and other social reforms that promoted equality, including voting, and never wavered in that pursuit. Stanton wrote a Declaration of Sentiments that called for ``all men and women'' to be recognized as created equal under the law, thus beginning the 72-year struggle for suffrage that ended in 1920. Mr. President, 2015 is the bicentennial year for Elizabeth Cady Stanton, who was born November 12, 1815, in Johnstown, NY. Celebrations of her extraordinary life are taking place throughout the year. Stanton met Susan B. Anthony in 1851, and they began a 50-year partnership advocating for suffrage and women's equality; however, both women did not live to see the passage of the 19th Amendment. As the mother of seven children, Mrs. Stanton can be proud of the legacy she left to her descendants, one of whom is today spearheading a committee tasked with placing a new statue of these two amazing leaders in New York. They gave a voice to millions of women and changed history forever following Anthony's vow that ``failure is impossible.'' A unique crossroad of history resides at 77th and Central Park West in New York City with statues of two U.S. Presidents, Theodore Roosevelt astride a horse outside the American Museum of Natural History and Abraham Lincoln who stands on the steps of the New-York Historical Society. Near Lincoln is a statue of abolitionist Frederick Douglass symbolically carrying books at a building that safeguards history. I am pleased to announce that permission was granted in May 2015 for a suffragist statue to be installed at the West 77th Street entrance to Central Park. It will be the very first statue of a woman in this park's 160-year history. New York City park commissioner Mitchell J. Silver awarded this site for a statue of Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony, pioneering leaders of the women's suffrage movement. Included in the sculpture design are the names of many remarkable women instrumental in the fight toward winning the vote. Its installation in September 2017 will coincide with New York State's centennial of women's voting rights. The New-York Historical Society announced that in the transformation of its fourth floor there would be a new Center for the Study of Women's History that will present special exhibitions, as well as public and scholarly programs. Over 50 million visitors each year are welcomed to New York City, with over half reporting they spend time in Central Park. Placing the Stanton and Anthony statue at this highly visible locale that resonates social justice will undoubtedly draw local residents and visitors of all nations to history lessons that include the story of the equal rights and suffrage movements in America. I ask that we give tribute on August 26, 2015, the 95th anniversary of the passage of the 19th Amendment, to the early suffragists who were steadfast in their pursuit of equality for all citizens, which is a sacred trust that we must continue to support today.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, I rise to strongly oppose this cynical and opportunistic ploy to fulfill a longtime ideological goal to defund Planned Parenthood. Let's talk facts, not rhetoric. The fact is no Federal funds can be used for an abortion. No Federal funds can be used for an abortion, except in the dire circumstances of rape, incest or the life of the mother. Here is another fact. Only 3 percent of Planned Parenthood's work is dedicated to abortion services. The other 97 percent of their work is dedicated to preventive women's health services, such as STD testing and screenings, contraception, Pap tests, breast exams, cancer screenings, and other services, such as adoption referrals, pediatric care, and immunizations. So when someone says let's defund Planned Parenthood because they never liked that it ever existed, what they are saying to women, particularly low-income women, women in low-income communities, and many women of color is that they won't have access to a wide range of essential services because of an ideological desire to control what choices are being made by women and their doctors. I fail to see the logic here. This exploitative movement, advanced by special interests, would effectively tell a half million American women: Sorry, you can't have a breast exam this year. Of all the issues that we are going to debate on the floor right now, why are we debating this? Why are we telling 400,000 American women: Sorry, you won't be able to have a lifesaving screening for cervical cancer. We have kids in all 50 States who are going hungry during summer vacation because their parents can't afford to have that extra lunch they normally got from school. We have college graduates who can't afford to start their lives, buy a home, get married, and have kids because they are drowning in student debt. We have men and women in this country who work 40 hours a week, with no vacation days, no sick days, and are still stuck in poverty. That is not my vision of the American Dream. We have millions of hard-working Americans who have to quit their jobs and lose paychecks every time they have a family emergency. It doesn't matter if it is a new baby. It doesn't matter if their husband is dying of cancer. It doesn't matter if their mother is on her deathbed. They don't have access to paid family and medical leave. We are literally the only industrialized country that doesn't have paid leave. This makes no sense in a country that believes if you work hard every day, you will be able to get into the middle class. That is simply not true for low-wage workers who are working 40 hours a week and are still below the poverty line and cannot meet those family needs because they have no paid leave. But the issue this body wants to debate is defunding Planned Parenthood. This body wants to make sure that millions of women don't get basic access to health care. Whether or not to maliciously hurt an organization that provides vital health services to millions of American women--this is the issue our colleagues are using to threaten yet another government shutdown--controlling women's choices about their health, about their families, about their reproductive health care. It is clear that some of my colleagues just want to roll back Roe v. Wade. That is their goal. That is their mission in life. It is ideologically driven and funded by special interests. That is their mission. But we should not return to the days when women had no medical independence. Some of my colleagues will use any excuse they can to overreact and force this same tired old Planned Parenthood debate on us. But here is the fundamental truth about Planned Parenthood. Millions of women in this country--women in low-income communities, women of color, women in every State--rely on Planned Parenthood for basic health care-- mammograms, cervical screenings, access to contraception, and family planning. They rely on it to prevent disease. They rely on it to detect disease. They rely on it to treat disease. We cannot and will not defund Planned Parenthood. I yield the floor.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, I rise to urge my colleagues to support my amendment No. 1578, the Military Justice Improvement Act, to ensure that survivors of military sexual assault have access to an unbiased, trained, military judicial system. Last year, despite the support of 55 Senators, a coalition spanning the entire ideological spectrum, including both the majority and minority leader, our bill to create an independent military justice system free of inherent biases and conflicts of interest within the chain of command was filibustered by this body. But as we said then: We will not walk away. The brave men and women in uniform who are defending this Nation deserve a vote. That is our duty. It is our oversight role. It is Congress's responsibility to act as if the brave survivors of sexual assault are our sons, our daughters, our husbands, our wives, who are being betrayed by the greatest military on Earth. We owe them that at the very least. Over the last few years, Congress has forced the military to make many incremental changes to address this crisis. And after two decades of complete failure and lip service to zero tolerance, the military now says, essentially: Trust us this time; we have it. They misrepresent data to claim that their mission is accomplished, but when you dig below the service of their top lines, you will find that the assault rate is exactly where it was in 2010--an average of 52 cases every single day--and 3 out of 4 servicemember survivors still don't think it is worth the risk of coming forward to report crimes committed against them. Seventy-five percent don't trust the current system. One in seven victims was assaulted by someone in their chain of command. And in 60 percent of the cases, a supervisor or unit leader is responsible for either sexual harassment or sexual discrimination. This is not the climate our military deserves. It is no surprise, then, that one in three survivors believes that reporting would hurt their career. For those who do report, they are more likely than not to experience retaliation. Despite a much touted reform that made retaliation a crime, the DOD made zero progress on improving the 62-percent retaliation rate that we had in 2012. According to a Human Rights Watch report, the DOD cannot provide a single example of serious disciplinary action taken against those who retaliated against a victim of sexual assault. A sexual assault survivor is 12 times more likely to suffer retaliation than to see their offender get convicted of a sex offense. In my close review of 107 cases--from the largest domestic military bases and one from each service--in 2013, I found that nearly half of those who did move forward and report ended up dropping out of their cases. Survivors still have little faith in this system. Under any metric the system remains plagued with distrust and does not provide the fair and just process that our men and women in the military deserve. Simply put, the military has not held up to the standard posed by General Dempsey 1 year ago when he said: We are on the clock, if you will . . . the President said to us in December, you've got about a year to review this thing . . . and if we haven't been able to demonstrate we are making a difference, you know, then we deserve to be held to the scrutiny and standard. I urge my colleagues to hold the military to that higher standard. Enough is enough with the spin, with the excuses, and the false promises. Just yesterday I received a letter from a survivor of military sexual assault who is serving Active Duty. She says: The reason I am writing on her behalf is because I fear she will be retaliated against for speaking out. While the military is on the Hill lobbying Senators not to support the Military Justice Improvement Act (MJIA), I am asking you to take a stand with survivors and their families. These military lobbyists have good intentions; however, I am doubtful any of them will represent my perspective. I have experienced the anguish of a child who has been raped by another servicemember, a fellow brother-in-arms whom she should have been able to trust. Please support the Military Justice Improvement Act, a commonsense law that significantly improves the military justice system. Our military sons and daughters who survive these heinous crimes carry high rates of post-traumatic stress disorder and suicide. I believe that if the MJIA is passed, it could save lives and will positively affect the lives of survivors, both victims and their families. No one should have to worry about retaliation from their chain of command when they report these crimes. Retaliation happens so often that a majority of these assaults go unreported. Every military victim of sexual assault deserves due process, professional treatment by a trained military individual, and equal opportunity to seek and receive justice. Our military has promised improvement and has had adequate time in which to improve, but the numbers show that the military has failed to live up to its promise. The Department of Defense has admitted that it made no progress since 2012. It is time for the chain of command to be removed from decision-making in sexual assault cases and replaced by those trained, non-biased military personnel, educated in the law and experienced in handling sexual assault cases. Further, MJIA specifically carves out sexual assault and other serious crimes, with the remainder of military crimes being left in the chain of command. Please hold the military to a higher standard by voting yes to an unbiased military system, promoted in MJIA. We have to listen to our victims, our survivors, the men and women who give their lives to this country, who will sacrifice anything for this country. America's military, if they do these reforms, will have fewer dangerous criminals and far more heroes. The brave men and women we send to war to keep us safe deserve nothing less than a justice system equal to their sacrifice. By listening to the victims, we can deliver that. I urge everyone here to listen to our brave survivors, support our bill, and do the right thing. I would now like to yield the floor to one of the authors of the Military Justice Improvement Act, the Senator from Iowa.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, I wish to respond to the last point and the first point that my colleague made that somehow this reform makes commanders less responsible.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. I ask unanimous consent to continue the debate for 5 minutes.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, this statement that somehow commanders are removed from responsibility and that we are not keeping commanders responsible, that couldn't be further from the truth. Today, commanders are the only ones responsible for good order and discipline at every level. The unit commander is responsible for order and discipline. Every aspect of the chain of command is responsible. It is their jobs to train troops, to maintain good order and discipline, to prevent rapes and crimes from being committed under their command, and to punish retaliation. They have failed in that duty. In this chain of command, 97 percent of commanders are responsible and do not have the convening authority we would like to give to prosecutors--97 percent, their job doesn't change one iota. So to say you are making commanders less responsible is a false statement that has no bearing. In fact, they are 100 percent responsible for good order and discipline, for training their troops, to prevent these rapes, and to prosecute retaliation. In 1 year--they have been on notice for years about this, 25 years, and we have this zero tolerance. They are super on notice now--in 1 year, not one prosecution of retaliation. This guy can prosecute retaliation under article 15. This guy can do something about retaliation. This guy, this guy, this guy. Only 3 percent have the right to convening authority, and that 3 percent needs to be moved to someone who is actually a lawyer, who is trained, who knows how to weigh evidence and can make the right decision, and that is not what is happening today. So right now this supervisor and unit leader--in 60 percent of the cases where there is alleged gender discrimination or sexual harassment, it is the unit leader. One in seven of the alleged rapists is one of these commanders--chain of command. There is a perspective by a survivor that this chain of command ``does not have my back.'' So I would like to give it to another chain of command--senior military prosecutors--to make this decision, so her perspective can be: Someone has my back. This chain of command may well be tainted for her if her unit commander is harassing her and her rapist is in the chain of command. We need to professionalize the system. We are trying to make the military the best prosecutorial system in the world, and they can do this mission. We need to give them the tools, and having this current status quo--the status quo that has been in charge of no retaliation and no rape for 25 years--is failing. To have the same rate of retaliation we had 2 years ago when the commanders said: You must trust us to do this--every one of these commanders does not have convening authority, but every one of these commanders could have stopped retaliation. When you say it is just peer-to-peer, it is dishonest. Thirty percent of the cases of retaliation are administrative, 30 percent of the cases are professional. Only a commander can administer administrative or professional retaliation. This culture must change, and if Congress doesn't take their responsibility to hold the Department of Defense accountable, no one will. I yield the floor.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, I rise to urge my colleagues to vote yes on this strongly bipartisan amendment. The central question is simple--whether this Congress is doing everything we can to protect members of our military. The metric of success is not how many reforms we have passed; it is whether we have passed all of the reforms that are necessary to make the difference. If you think the assault rate that is exactly where it was in 2010 is unacceptable, then vote yes. Some 20,000 sexual assaults, rapes, and unwanted sexual contact in 1 year alone is unacceptable. If you think an average of 52 cases every single day is unacceptable, then vote yes. If you think it is unacceptable that three out of four servicemembers still don't feel it is worth the risk of reporting, then vote yes. If you think that zero progress on retaliation isn't good enough, then vote yes. If you think a sexual assault survivor being 12 times more likely to suffer retaliation than see their offender get convicted for a sex offense, then vote yes. Let's do the right thing. Let's take action and stop the assaults, stop the retaliation, and build trust and professionalize our military justice system. I yield the floor.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND

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

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, I want to speak on my amendment but not call it up at this moment. It is amendment No. 1578. The purpose of the amendment is to create an unbiased military justice system. I believe the Senate needs to vote on this amendment. Over the last few years, Congress has forced the military to make incremental changes to address the crisis of sexual assault. After two decades of complete failure and lip service to zero tolerance, the military now says, essentially: Trust us. We have got it this time. They spin the data, hoping nobody will dig below the surface of their top lines, because when you do, you will find the assault rate is exactly where it was in 2010. We see an average of 52 new cases every day. Three out of four servicemembers who are survivors still don't think it is worth the risk of coming forward to report these crimes committed against them. One in seven victims was actually assaulted by someone in their chain of command. In 60 percent of cases, the survivor says a unit leader or supervisor is responsible for sexual harassment or gender discrimination. So it is no surprise that one in three survivors believes reporting would hurt their career. For those who do report, they are more likely than not to experience retaliation. Despite the much touted reform that made retaliation a crime, the DOD has made zero progress on improving the 62-percent retaliation rate we had in 2012. So in 2012, 62 percent of those who reported a crime against them were retaliated against for doing so. In 2014, again, 62 percent were retaliated against. Human Rights Watch looked into these figures and into the stories, and they found the DOD could not provide a single example from the last year where disciplinary action was actually taken against someone for retaliation. A sexual assault survivor is 12 times more likely to suffer retaliation than see their offender get convicted of sexual assault. In my close review of 107 cases from 2013 from our four largest military bases--one for each service--I found that nearly half of those who did move forward to report in an unrestricted report, half of them withdrew from their case during the first year. So we can talk all we want about reporting, reporting, but if half of those who report withdraw during the year of their prosecution, it shows there is no faith in the system. Survivors do not have faith in the current system. Under any metric, the system remains plagued with distrust and does not provide fair and just process that survivors deserve. Simply put, the military has not held up to the standard posed by General Dempsey 1 year ago when he said the Pentagon was on the clock. I urge my colleagues to hold the military to this higher standard. Let us put these decisions into the hands of trained military prosecutors. Enough is enough with the spin, with the excuses, and with false promises. We have to do the right thing and we have to act. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Madam President, I rise today to speak on my amendment No. 1578, the Military Justice Improvement Act, to ensure that survivors of military sexual assault have access to an unbiased and professionalized military justice system. Last year, despite earning the support of 55 Senators--a coalition spanning the entire ideological spectrum, including both the majority and minority leader--our bill to create an independent military justice system, free of the inherent bias and conflicts of interest within the chain of command, fell short of overcoming the 60-vote filibuster threshold. But, as we said then, we will not walk away. We will continue to fight to strengthen our military because that is our duty. It is our oversight role in Congress to act as if the brave survivors are our sons and daughters, our spouses who are being betrayed by the greatest military on Earth. We owe them at least that. Over the last few years, Congress has forced the military to make many incremental changes to address this crisis. After two decades of complete failure and lipservice to ``zero tolerance,'' the military now says essentially: Trust us. We have got this. They spin the data, hoping nobody will dig below the top line because when you do, the clear conclusion is that survivors still have little faith in the system and that the military has not actually made a dent in the problem. Even after much-lauded reforms, the estimate for 2014 is 20,000 cases of sexual assault and unwanted sexual contact--the same level as 2010--an average of 52 a day. A much-touted reform made retaliation a crime. That made a lot of sense, but a sky-high 62- percent retaliation rate remains unchanged from 2 years ago. The system remains plagued with distrust and does not provide the fair and just process the survivors deserve. Simply put, the military has not held up to the standards posed by General Dempsey 1 year ago when he said, ``We are on the clock if you will . . . the President said to us in December, you've got about a year to review this thing . . . and if we haven't been able to demonstrate we are making a difference, you know, then we deserve to be held to the scrutiny and standard.'' So I am urging my colleagues to hold the military to that standard. Enough is enough with the spin, the excuses, and the promises, because throughout the last year, we have continued to see new evidence of how much further we actually have to go to solve this problem. We have a very simple choice. We can keep waiting, hoping that the reforms we put in place--that we actually forced the military to put in place--will somehow restore trust in the system, while an average of 52 new lives are shattered every day, three-quarters of whom will never come forward because they see what happens around them and they don't trust the system and don't see how justice is possible because commanders hold all the cards, or we can do the right thing and act. We can accept a system where, according to the DOD themselves, three out of four servicewomen and nearly half of servicemen say sexual harassment is common or very common or we can do the right thing and act. We can accept a system where women who were sexually harassed were 1,400 percent more likely to be sexually assaulted that same year or we can act. We can accept a climate where supervisors and unit leaders were responsible for sexual harassment and gender discrimination in nearly 60 percent of all cases or we can act. My friends, I believe it is time that we provide our servicemembers with an unbiased justice system, one that is professionalized, where the decisionmaker is trained in military justice. It is time to finally listen to the survivors who have told us over and over again that this reform is required to instill long-lost confidence in the system. It is very much time to do the right thing and act because every time we look at this problem, it seems to get worse. My office just reviewed 107 sexual assault case files from the largest base in each of the services. We requested these files, and that was for 1 year of sexual assaults. We requested the data to understand what actually happens once the reports are filed, how they are investigated, and how they move forward within the military justice system to see if there is any other challenges we have to address. It took the Pentagon a year to respond to my document request. These 107 files are just a snapshot of the thousands of estimated cases that occur annually. What we found, which was unexpected, was an alarming rate of assaults among two survivor groups who are not represented in the DOD survey. The DOD survey is all servicemembers. But what we found is that civilian women and military spouses are not counted in that survey, and of these 107 cases, in 53 percent of them, the survivor was either a military spouse or a civilian. These two categories of survivors are hidden in the shadows. According to the DOD themselves, the real scope of this problem, unfortunately, is much larger than the 20,000 that were estimated for last year alone. These obviously aren't just numbers; these are real lives being broken, and they deserve a fair shot at justice. It should disturb everyone in this Chamber that instead of hope for justice at these four military bases, nearly half of the survivors who initially filed a complaint--some of them going through the medical exam, going through testimony, going through evidence--nearly half who filed withdrew their complaint during the process before trial. What does that tell us? Is there a form of retaliation taking place? Is it just a lack of faith in the system? To have about half of these cases not move forward is very troubling. Even when a case did move forward, just over 20 percent of them went to trial, and only 10 percent of these cases resulted in sexual assault convictions with penalties of confinement and dishonorable discharge. Ten percent. Only 10 percent ended in conviction. The cases that did proceed to trial but failed to obtain a sexual assault conviction typically resulted in a more lenient penalty, such as reduction in rank or docked pay. There was a new report published by the Human Rights Watch. They issued a report which told us that servicemembers who reported a sexual assault were 12 times more likely to suffer retaliation than to see their offender get convicted of the sexual offense. Let me repeat that. A survivor who reports a sexual assault is 12 times more likely to see retaliation than to see justice. How can anyone say this is a system our survivors can actually have faith in? Despite the DOD's reported 62 percent retaliation rate--and this is so troubling--there was not evidence of a single serious disciplinary action against anyone for retaliation. Not one. There was not one disciplinary action for 62 percent of survivors who were retaliated against. That borders on the impossible. But the reality is, without independent review, we are actually relying on commanders to charge themselves with retaliation. It doesn't make any sense. According to the DOD's own SAPRO report, retaliation remains at 62 percent for women. Over one-third experienced administrative action, and 40 percent faced other forms of professional retaliation. That means your job changes in some meaningful way. DOD admits they have made zero progress since 2012. The carefully crafted and widely bipartisan Military Justice Improvement Act is designed to reduce the systemic failure that survivors of military sexual assault describe, in deciding whether to report the crimes committed against them, due to the bias and inherent conflicts of interest posed by the military chain of command's current sole decisionmaking power over whether a case moves forward. This reform actually protects both the victim and the accused. We do not want to see an innocent person convicted any more than we want to see a guilty person go free. Due process, professionalism, training, equal opportunity to justice is how we restore a broken system. It is time to move the sole decisionmaking power over whether serious crimes akin to a felony go to trial from the chain of command into the hands of nonbiased, professionally trained military prosecutors, where it belongs. And we do this while leaving military crime in the chain of command. So we completely carve-out anything that is military-related, such as missing in action or not honoring a command. In fact, the decision whether to prosecute the vast majority of crimes, including 37 serious crimes uniquely military in nature, plus all punishable crimes that have less than a year of confinement as a penalty, remain in the chain of command. The brave men and women we sent to war to keep us safe deserve nothing less than a justice system that is actually equal to their sacrifice. We owe that at least to them. Thank you, Madam President. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that my national security fellow, Robert Palladino, be given floor privileges through the end of this Congress.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND

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

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, I rise to speak about two bipartisan bills that would help to modernize the way this country approaches cyber security. Congress needs to get with the times and realize that the Internet is no longer a new concept. Swiping a credit card, conducting online banking, storing prescription records online--these are not new activities. The cloud is no longer new. Hackers are no longer new. So why are we still so taken aback, in shock, every time we suffer another major cyber attack? Why are we still not requiring that consumers be notified when their information has been stolen? Why aren't we unleashing law enforcement to go after cyber criminals? If we want to defend against 21st-century threats, then we have to bring our laws into the 21st century. We have to get out of the mindset that the only way we can be hurt is from an actual physical attack. Hackers don't operate on battlefields; they operate in basements and in cubicles. Our approach to cyber security so far has been certifiably wrong. We have the largest defense budget in the world by far, but that hasn't stopped our hospitals and banks from falling victim to a near constant barrage of attacks. Last year, data breaches in this country hit a record high; they were up more than 27 percent from the year before. In New York State, between 2006 and 2013, we had nearly 5,000 individual data breaches that were reported by businesses, not-for-profits, and government entities. In the same period, 23 million personal records of New Yorkers were exposed to criminals. And that is just my home State. Imagine how big that number actually is nationwide. We are long overdue for a new national approach to cyber security, and I am introducing two bills that would finally make this happen. The first is the Data Breach Notification and Punishing Cyber Criminals Act. It would set, for the first time, a national standard for how and when victims of cyber attacks will be informed. When an attack takes place on a business, for example, one that has your financial data or medical information, this law would require that you be informed quickly, with information about what was targeted, what was taken, and whether you were personally affected. This bill would seriously increase the penalties on people found guilty of hacking and cyber crime. It would raise the allowable fines and imprisonment sentences for many of the most common cyber crimes, including identity theft and theft of personal information. The second bill is the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Credit Act-- a bill that would incentivize America's businesses to share cyber security information critical to preventing attacks, without having to involve their competitors. Instead, businesses would be encouraged, with significant tax credits, to adopt the preferred, most efficient method for information sharing; that is, membership in private, sector- specific cyber security networks designed to protect an industry, such as health care and hospitals, from attack. At the individual level, companies, hospitals, and banks can only do so much to protect us. Any good cyber defense has to involve information sharing so that patterns can be recognized, industries can bolster their defenses, and the same hacks aren't just repeated over and over again. To modernize America's approach to cyber security, we as individuals have to take action, companies have to take action, law enforcement has to take action, and local governments must take action. Most importantly and most urgently, Congress has to take action. We desperately need to modernize our cyber security laws. I urge my colleagues to support these two bills.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, I rise to speak about two bipartisan bills that would help to modernize the way this country approaches cyber security. Congress needs to get with the times and realize that the Internet is no longer a new concept. Swiping a credit card, conducting online banking, storing prescription records online--these are not new activities. The cloud is no longer new. Hackers are no longer new. So why are we still so taken aback, in shock, every time we suffer another major cyber attack? Why are we still not requiring that consumers be notified when their information has been stolen? Why aren't we unleashing law enforcement to go after cyber criminals? If we want to defend against 21st-century threats, then we have to bring our laws into the 21st century. We have to get out of the mindset that the only way we can be hurt is from an actual physical attack. Hackers don't operate on battlefields; they operate in basements and in cubicles. Our approach to cyber security so far has been certifiably wrong. We have the largest defense budget in the world by far, but that hasn't stopped our hospitals and banks from falling victim to a near constant barrage of attacks. Last year, data breaches in this country hit a record high; they were up more than 27 percent from the year before. In New York State, between 2006 and 2013, we had nearly 5,000 individual data breaches that were reported by businesses, not-for-profits, and government entities. In the same period, 23 million personal records of New Yorkers were exposed to criminals. And that is just my home State. Imagine how big that number actually is nationwide. We are long overdue for a new national approach to cyber security, and I am introducing two bills that would finally make this happen. The first is the Data Breach Notification and Punishing Cyber Criminals Act. It would set, for the first time, a national standard for how and when victims of cyber attacks will be informed. When an attack takes place on a business, for example, one that has your financial data or medical information, this law would require that you be informed quickly, with information about what was targeted, what was taken, and whether you were personally affected. This bill would seriously increase the penalties on people found guilty of hacking and cyber crime. It would raise the allowable fines and imprisonment sentences for many of the most common cyber crimes, including identity theft and theft of personal information. The second bill is the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Credit Act-- a bill that would incentivize America's businesses to share cyber security information critical to preventing attacks, without having to involve their competitors. Instead, businesses would be encouraged, with significant tax credits, to adopt the preferred, most efficient method for information sharing; that is, membership in private, sector- specific cyber security networks designed to protect an industry, such as health care and hospitals, from attack. At the individual level, companies, hospitals, and banks can only do so much to protect us. Any good cyber defense has to involve information sharing so that patterns can be recognized, industries can bolster their defenses, and the same hacks aren't just repeated over and over again. To modernize America's approach to cyber security, we as individuals have to take action, companies have to take action, law enforcement has to take action, and local governments must take action. Most importantly and most urgently, Congress has to take action. We desperately need to modernize our cyber security laws. I urge my colleagues to support these two bills.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, I request that the U.S. government officially recognizes the last week in March as Black Women's History Week. During the week of March 23, as part of Women's History Month and in honor of the U.N. declaration of 2015 as the decade of Afro descendants, this week marks the perfect occasion on which to begin an annual recognition and celebration of Black women's history and contributions to American society. Black women have long gone above and beyond the call of duty in their contributions to American society through civic engagement, high voter turnout, and stepping up as leaders and bulwarks in their communities. Even in the face of grave oppression throughout our Nation's history, Black women have continued to stand strong and contribute to the well-being of their families, communities, and our country as a whole. A recognition of Black Women's History Week on the part of the Obama Administration and Congress would send a critical message that the government wishes to elevate their role in history and contemporary society and recognizes the unique struggles they continue to experience today. Black women have consistently played a critical role in this Nation's history, often with little thanks or recognition. Harriet Tubman escaped slavery and bravely returned to the enslaved South 13 times to herald her people to freedom on the Underground Railroad. A century later, Rosa Parks witnessed the oppression of her people--specifically her fellow Black sisters--and took an active role in organizing the Montgomery Bus Boycott. Today, a Black woman is our nation's First Lady. Recognition of Black Women's History Week would honor and uplift the sacrifices of women such as Harriet Tubman and Rosa Parks, who paved the way for Barack and Michelle Obama to reach the White House, and me to address you on their behalf today. Yet at the same time that Black women from our Nation's history have become inspirational symbols of strength and perseverance, Black women today continue to face the necessity to persevere through undue burdens as they navigate American society. They must try to hold their families together as primary caregivers when family members are incarcerated or killed, support their children as they grow up in food deserts and attend failing schools, they must continue to persevere when our society does not provide them with adequate support and equal rights. All the while, many Black women struggle to forward their own careers and provide for their families. Recent U.S. Department of Labor data shows that while job prospects are improving for nearly every group in America, one glaring exception remains: Black women. Since August 2013, Black women are the only group for whom unemployment rates have not fallen. Karen McLeod's experience as a 59-year-old college graduate with two degrees who cannot find steady employment sheds light on the economic tribulations many Black women face. Karen went from making $30 per hour as a respiratory therapist to $16 per hour at a nonprofit, to $8.67 per hour, working only 4 hours per week. In her current circumstances, she has had to make a series of tough decisions to get by. Karen sold her jewelry to pay for gas, pawned her television for food, and was forced to ask local nonprofits for rent assistance. Karen's story represents the experiences of a growing number of Black women, whose conditions are not improving with economic recovery. White House recognition of Black Women's History Week will serve to acknowledge and call attention to the continued struggles Black women face in our society today and will send the critical message that their government cares about what they are going through. This year, a coalition of organizations advocating for the well-being of women and communities of color will partner to elevate the stories, histories, and realities of Black women's lives. Each day of the week, starting on March 23 and continuing through March 29, will focus on a different issue Black women face in American society today, from economic disparities to educational achievement to police violence. Exploring these issues and acknowledging the centrality of Black women to our history and social fabric, along with recognizing the uniquely gendered and racialized inequities they face, is critical as we seek to extend equal rights to all Americans. I hope and request that this will be the first year in what will become an annual tradition of celebration and intentional recognition of our sisters through Black Women's History Week.