Mazie Hirono

Ms. HIRONO

Ms. HIRONO. I object to the request for a modification.

Ms. HIRONO. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. HIRONO. Mr. President, I intend to call up H.R. 4329, the Native American Housing and Self-Determination Reauthorization Act, but I would like to say a few words about the bill before I do. This bill reauthorizes programs that support housing for Native Hawaiians, Alaska Natives, and American Indians. Earlier this week, the senior Senator from Montana asked unanimous consent that the Senate take up and pass S. 1352, the Native American Housing and Self-Determination Reauthorization Act of 2013. The bill would reauthorize programs that promote and support affordable housing for Native Americans, Alaska Natives, and Native Hawaiians. My good friend, Mr. Lee, the Senator from Utah, who is on the floor this afternoon, objected to passing this important Senate bill, noting his objections to the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act. I am here on the floor today to offer an alternative--H.R. 4329. Like the Senate bill which was objected to earlier this week, this bill is a bipartisan bill. H.R. 4329 reauthorizes the Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant, the Section 184 Indian Home Loan Guarantee Program, and programs that provide support for housing funding for Native American veterans. Let me note here that we know that Native Americans enlist in the military at a higher rate than other segments of this country. Of course, the House bill I am referring to supports many other good programs and, yes, including the Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant and the Section 184A Native Hawaiian Home Loan Guarantee Program. We know the housing need in Indian country is staggering. Congress knew and recognized this fact when it created the broader Indian housing programs earlier to help address those needs and when it reauthorized these programs again and again. Is the House bill perfect? I would say no. But I must applaud my good friend, Congressman Don Young of Alaska, my colleagues, Congresswomen Colleen Hanabusa and Tulsi Gabbard, and of course the bill's sponsor, Congressman Steve Pearce, for their work in crafting a bill that passed the House by voice vote. There were no Republican objections. There were no Democratic objections. To rely on an old adage, let us not allow perfection to be the enemy of the good. And this is a good bill. Should we forget our promises and responsibilities to our indigenous population? I freely admit that we have not always been good stewards of our responsibilities, and we have not always been good friends with Indian Country. But we try, and with this bill we again are trying. Let me now turn to address Senator Lee's specific early objections to the Senate bill. The Senator stated that he believes the blood quantum requirement in the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act is unconstitutional. I would say to my friend from Utah that in the context of Federal Indian law, which is applicable here, blood quantum requirements are not viewed as unconstitutional racial classifications. Instead, they demonstrate connectivity to an indigenous political entity which Congress can treat under the Indian commerce clause. It is why Congress set a blood quantum requirement of 50 percent or more for the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, a blood quantum requirement of 50 percent or more for the Indian Reorganization Act, and 25 percent or more for the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act. Native Hawaiians, Native Americans, and Alaska Natives are indigenous people all, which my colleague Senator Lee acknowledges. My colleague might argue that in the Supreme Court's decision in Rice v. Cayetano, the Court held that ``ancestry . . . is a proxy for race.'' I would respond to my colleague by saying that I was the Lieutenant Governor of Hawaii at the time, serving under Ben Cayetano, who is named in the Rice v. Cayetano suit, and I had the opportunity to sit in the Supreme Court while the Rice case was being argued. That case is broadly, but often incorrectly, cited because it was quite narrow in its applicability. The Supreme Court in that case held that a State--a State--could not restrict who could vote for members of a quasi-State agency. In contrast to such State action, Congress has given wide latitude and broad deference in dealing with America's indigenous people. So Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Indian Affairs Committee be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 4329 and that the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration; that the bill be read a third time and passed; and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

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

Ms. HIRONO

Ms. HIRONO. Mr. President, I rise today to celebrate the successes of Hawaii's Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs, GEAR UP. Next Monday, September 22 marks the beginning of National GEAR UP Week. GEAR UP is a national program that provides grants for States to help low-income students with college preparation, enrollment, and completion. In 2011, the U.S. Department of Education awarded the University of Hawaii a 7-year GEAR-UP grant to improve college access and completion for low-income students. The P-20 Partnerships for Education manages this grant with its partners, the State Department of Education, the UH ten-campus system, and other public, nonprofit, and private entities. Hawaii GEAR UP is helping reach the goal of having 55 percent of working age adults hold a 2- or 4-year degree by 2025. In shorthand, ``55 by `25.'' To reach this goal, GEAR UP Hawaii runs many programs to help low-income middle school and high school students focus on academic preparation, explore Early College options, learn more information about college access and financial aid, and improve college enrollment and completion. In January of 2014, I had the chance to meet GEAR UP Hawaii students at Waipahu High School. The school's Early College High School program helps students earn college credit while still in high school. One of the students I met was Juanito Moises, National GEAR UP Youth of the Year. He came to Hawaii from the Philipines at age 9, not speaking English. He took rigorous courses and eventually earned a 3.98 high school GPA. He will be the first in his family to attend a 4-year college, and thanks to GEAR UP he will already have English 100 out of the way. Juanito is just one of the thousands of low-income students in Hawaii and nationwide who GEAR UP is working to serve. The program's results show that GEAR UP students are more likely to complete rigorous coursework, apply and enroll in college, and earn college degrees, when compared with other low-income students who do not have the opportunity to participate. Since I first came to the House in 2007, I have supported Federal funding for GEAR UP program, and I urge my colleagues in the Senate to do the same. During National GEAR UP Week, let's celebrate GEAR UP's success and continue our efforts to help Hawaii students enter and complete college.

Ms. HIRONO

Ms. HIRONO. Mr. President, I object to the unanimous consent request.

Ms. HIRONO. Mr. President, reserving the right to object. This bill has not been brought before the Judiciary Committee, which has jurisdiction over these issues. This bill affects fundamental constitutional rights and should be given the full deliberation of the Senate. Legislation that grants the government the ability to strip citizenship from Americans is a serious matter raising significant constitutional issues. Again, we have not had the opportunity to fully consider and register a significant bill. In addition, objections to this bill are detailed in two letters, both dated September 2014. The letters are from the bipartisan Constitution Project and the American Civil Liberties Union. I ask unanimous consent that these letters be printed in the Record.

Ms. HIRONO

Ms. HIRONO. Madam President, I rise today to support the Paycheck Fairness Act. Equal pay for equal work is the law of the land. It has been for over 50 years. Yet the law is one thing and the reality is quite another. Women still get paid far less than men for the same work. Last year Hawaii News Now, a TV station in Hawaii, shared the story of a woman in Honolulu. She had been asking for a raise for over a year, to no avail. Her employers acknowledged that she was underpaid, but they didn't do anything about it. Then she found out a new male hire with less experience would be paid $5,000 more to do the same job. She is not alone. In Hawaii a woman makes, on average, 83 cents for every dollar a man makes. While that is better than the national average, it is still not equal pay for equal work. Research shows that the gender gap in pay begins with a woman's first job and widens from there. So when a young woman graduates and takes her place in the workplace, her starting line is already behind that of her male colleagues. That makes it harder for her to catch up, no matter how hard she works. The women I know work incredibly hard. Many of them are heads of households and sole breadwinners, which makes the pay inequality that much tougher for them. The gender pay gap persists even for workers with the same level of experience and education. The gap is even wider for older women. Congress passed the Equal Pay Act over 50 years ago. As I said earlier, this is the law of the land. Yet the pay gap persists. While the gap has shrunk--not by much--women only earn 77 cents on the dollar nationally. As Senator Mikulski often says, in 50 years, women have only gained a few cents. In 2009, I was proud to support and vote for the Lilly Ledbetter Act which President Obama signed into law. It was the very first bill he signed into law after his election. Without this law, women had only 180 days after their first discriminatory paycheck to challenge it, even if they only found out about it years and years later. After all, Lilly's employer did not announce they were discriminating against her in pay. So in her case it took many years, and she was far beyond the 180 days the Supreme Court said would be the timeframe in which she could try and get redress. While the Lilly Ledbetter Act addressed one part of the equal pay problem, if we are going to make sure all women get a fair shot, we need to pass the Paycheck Fairness Act. This bill would require employers to prove that pay gaps between men and women are based only on a business reason and not on gender. The Paycheck Fairness Act will make it easier for workers to compare their salaries and figure out whether they are victims of discrimination. Right now, without this act, employers can still fire workers for sharing the basic information about how much they are getting paid. This bill strengthens penalties for companies that discriminate against women. It would bring class action protection for women in line with other civil rights laws. The bill includes an exemption for small businesses and a phased-in time for businesses to learn what they are required to do. In addition, the Paycheck Fairness Act would help prevent pay discrimination in the first place by providing training for both management and workers. This past April 8 was Equal Pay Day. That is the day when women's earnings in this country caught up with men's earnings from the previous year. In other words, it took women 16 months to catch up with what their male counterparts were making in 12 months. The very next day, here on the Senate floor, every single Republican Senator voted to filibuster the Paycheck Fairness Act, which failed on a procedural vote. I hope our Republican friends will reconsider their position on this important issue this time around. This year President Obama signed an Executive order to implement parts of the Paycheck Fairness Act for Federal contractors. That is a major step forward for thousands of women. But there are millions more who are not covered by this executive action. Today in the Senate we have another chance to give the women of our country a fair shot, another chance for us to live up to a law that we passed 50 years ago. I urge my colleagues to pass the Paycheck Fairness Act without delay. Fifty years is long enough to wait. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Ms. HIRONO

Ms. HIRONO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that privileges of the floor be granted to the following member of my staff, Maeve Whelan- Wuest, for the duration of today, September 9, 2014.

Ms. HIRONO

Ms. HIRONO. Madam President, listening to the good Senator from Texas, I feel as though I am in a parallel universe. I rise to support S.J. Res. 19, an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that ensures our democracy is for the people--for the people, not for corporations. I am proud to cosponsor this measure. I am also proud to stand with the overwhelming majority of this country in support of restoring commonsense and fair campaign finance rules. The current Supreme Court has been noted as among the most pro- corporate Supreme Courts in our history. In decision after decision, a narrow conservative majority of the Court has placed the voices of the corporations and special interests over the voices of the people. The Court decided Citizens United in 2010. Corporations are people with free speech rights, said the Court's 5-to-4 majority. Under this construct that corporations are people, this ruling, Citizens United, granted special interests the right to use corporate treasuries to drown out the voices of the people without being subject to meaningful disclosure requirements. We have already seen the impact of this decision. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, this election year outside groups have spent triple the amount they had at the same time in 2010, and the election is still months away. The Court thrust the floodgates even wider with the ruling in the McCutcheon case. This ruling struck down aggregate limits on contributions by individuals. So now billionaires could spend hundreds of millions of dollars to influence elections--and they are doing just that. In these two decisions, the majority willfully ignored the reality of the corrupting influence of Big Money in our democracy. It is clear to me that the Court got it wrong in both cases. To fix what has been done, Congress must act. The need for action is not just a Democratic or Republican issue. Nearly 80 percent of Americans support overturning the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision. Campaign spending is out of control, and the American people strongly support reform. Seventy-one percent believe that individual contributions should be limited, and 76 percent believe that spending by outside groups should also be limited. The American public is clear on this issue. Only in Washington, DC, has this become such a polarized debate. Unchecked and unaccountable, spending on campaigns impacts politics and policy across the country, even at the State and local levels. From Arizona to Montana to my home State of Hawaii, the Supreme Court's extreme decisions on campaign finance are undermining fair, democratic processes. The Citizens United and McCutcheon cases also limit the ability of Congress and the States to fix the problems caused by these decisions. Why? Because the Supreme Court has decided that unfettered spending in elections is a constitutional right. So the only way we can fix these wrong decisions is by amending the Constitution. The Supreme Court's majority claims that allowing unlimited spending in elections is essential to protecting the First Amendment, that unlimited spending by corporations and individuals is a constitutional right. Guess what. Before the Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United and McCutcheon, the First Amendment and constitutional rights were alive and well. So the Court argued that restricting campaign spending would limit the right of individuals and groups to participate in our democratic process--never mind that they have been participating in our democratic processes before these decisions. In reality, these rulings institutionalize the power of Big Money in politics at the expense of regular Americans. The Court's decisions have the effect of saying that in our democracy those with the most money should have the loudest voices and that the very identity of those voices can be hidden from the voters. The huge undisclosed expenditures that these decisions allow have diluted the core principle of democracy: one person, one vote. The vast majority of the American people disagree with the Supreme Court's unprecedented interpretation of the First Amendment. The Court has left us with the option we are pursuing today--amending the U.S. Constitution. When the Supreme Court said that women did not have the right to vote, Congress and the people passed the 19th Amendment. So amending the Constitution to protect our democracy is not some new or radical idea. When the Supreme Court said States could impose poll taxes on the poor, Congress and the people passed the 24th Amendment, and the list goes on. Why? Because the Supreme Court is made up of human beings, and as human beings they sometimes get it wrong, as they did in the Citizens United and McCutcheon decisions. As retired Justice John Paul Stevens wrote in his dissent to Citizens United: The Court's opinion is thus a rejection of the common sense of the American people, who have recognized a need to prevent corporations from undermining self-government since the founding, and who have fought against the distinctive corrupting potential of corporate electioneering since the days of Theodore Roosevelt. Justice Stevens has it right and so does the overwhelming majority of Americans. Republicans, Democrats, and Independents all agree that the Court's ruling in Citizen's United and McCutcheon stand for something that is completely inconsistent with America's Constitution, history, and values. I say that the First Amendment was alive and well before the Citizens United and the McCutcheon decisions. The constitutional amendment before us does not repeal anything in the Constitution; rather, it undoes the damage that five members of the Supreme Court have done to free and fair elections. By the way, money buys speech, it is not speech. I urge my colleagues to support S.J. Res. 19. I yield the floor.

Ms. HIRONO

Ms. HIRONO. Madam President, I rise today to support S. 2648, the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act. I recently led a congressional delegation to McAllen, TX, and to Lackland Air Force Base to see firsthand what the administration was doing to handle this border crisis. It was clear to me that the hard- working men and women on the front lines of this crisis are doing the best they can under very difficult circumstances. We should pass this important bill to provide the necessary resources to fairly address this humanitarian crisis. We should provide Customs and Border Protection the resources they need to pay their agents overtime when needed, and to provide the necessary food, water, and medical supplies to these children. My colleagues and I saw children in these CBP facilities as young as 7. We learned that many of these children arrive severely malnourished and dehydrated. They are clearly desperate. They are not traveling here simply because they want to. They are fleeing mortal danger at the hands of violent drug gangs. These gangs have rendered their home countries some of the most dangerous places in the world to live. We should be working together to make sure these children are given proper care in our facilities and that our CBP agents have the support they need. It was also clear to me that these CBP facilities, meant to safely hold dangerous criminals, are no place for children to be held, even for just a few days. This is a view also shared by CBP officers on the ground who said this is no place for children. That is why I believe it is so important to provide necessary funding to the Department of Health and Human Services so they can continue to maintain shelter capacity at places such as Lackland Air Force Base where we visited. At Lackland, I was given hope. I saw children being educated, being taught English, praying if they chose to, and learning the Pledge of Allegiance. I saw a place that reflected our values as a country. This is why I strongly oppose altering the protections of the 2008 Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act. The answer is not expediting screenings and deporting these children as soon as possible at the border. All this will accomplish is to send these children back into harm's way--indeed, into the murder capitals of the world--even more quickly. I have actually seen what these expedited screenings look like. During our trip we saw small children sitting on concrete blocks in a noisy and overwhelming CBP facility. In this environment, these children struggle to answer questions from uniformed Customs and Border Protection officers. Let me be clear. That officer was doing the best he could, but children arriving here after a dangerous journey are in no condition to quickly explain their reasons for coming to the United States, much less understand the legal basis for their claim to relief under U.S. law. When children are asked to provide that explanation in the kind of harsh environment we saw in McAllen, they have little chance of making a compelling case for asylum or other protection. At this facility children cannot access legal help to make their case. Many of these children have legitimate legal claims that they have been physically abused, raped, or victimized by gangs or human traffickers. We must give them a fair chance to tell their stories. This bill, which I support, does not repeal these protections. Instead, it takes the important steps of funding our immigration courts to levels necessary to timely hear these children's claims. This bill also helps with legal representation and orientation services--something the faith communities and other advocates we met with told us were necessary. This will help to speed up the legal process, while ensuring that the rights of these children are protected. Just as importantly, this bill funds our efforts to address the root causes of why these children are arriving in our country in the first place. It will help us stop drug trafficking from this region and will help stabilize these economies that have been ravaged by the narcotrafficking violence. This past weekend, columnist and commentator George Will eloquently spoke on this issue. He said: My view is that we have to say to these children welcome to America. You're going to go to school and get a job and become Americans. We have 3,141 counties in this country. That would be 20 per county. The idea that we can't assimilate these 8-year- old criminals with their teddy bears is preposterous. We can handle the problem is what I'm saying. We've handled what Emma Lazarus famously called: ``the wretched refuse of your teeming shores,'' a long time ago, and a lot more people than this. George Will is right. We are a country that welcomes refugees--as many of these children are--from all around the world. I urge my colleagues to support this important supplemental appropriations measure. I yield back my time. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. HIRONO

Ms. HIRONO. I rise today to speak about the ongoing humanitarian crisis on our southern border. I thank my colleagues, Senator Heinrich and Senator Mikulski, for their eloquent words in speaking to this issue. As a woman and as an immigrant, my heart breaks for these children. My mother fled Japan, where I was born. She fled out of desperation to escape a terrible marriage. I came with her to this country as a young girl, and I remember how uncertain I was about what was in store for me. Although we came by boat in steerage, at least we traveled safely and together. We did not face the kind of danger as did these children who are risking everything to be here. Their journeys to our border are lined with smugglers and traffickers. Children are arriving injured and malnourished. Yet they continue to come, not only to the United States but to other nearby countries, fleeing their countries out of desperation. These children don't care about the DREAM Act or the Senate immigration reform bill. They are terrified of the violence, abuse, and death in their home countries. Young girls, who represent about 40 percent of the children who arrived this year, often face sexual assault and rape. Let me share some recent stories from young girls who are fleeing. One girl fled an area of El Salvador controlled by gangs. Her brother was killed for refusing to join a gang that tried to forcibly recruit him. She was raped by two men and became pregnant as a result. She fled El Salvador and was attacked on her journey to the United States. Another girl was kidnapped by a gang in Honduras that attempted to traffic her into prostitution. She escaped and reported the kidnapping to the police. The gang then abducted her again, raped her, and burned her with cigarettes. She fled to the United States and is seeking asylum. Yet another girl fled El Salvador when she was 8 years old. Gang members had kidnapped her two older sisters. The girl's mother did not want her 8-year-old daughter to suffer the same fate, so she arranged for her daughter to be brought to the United States. These are horrific stories. It is clear that something needs to be done. I have worked with my colleague Senator Menendez to introduce a comprehensive plan to address this issue. The plan aims to curtail trafficking and smuggling, contain the violence and discord in Central America, and ensure that these children have access to legal assistance and are in safe and humane conditions when they arrive. This Friday I will also take some of my colleagues to McAllen and San Antonio, TX, to view facilities housing these children during the processing and removal process. We will see for ourselves the conditions that these children are in and meet with officials and leaders on the ground. This crisis clearly demonstrates that inaction is not an option with regard to these children. I urge my colleagues to support the supplemental funding needed for our country to meet their humanitarian needs. We have a responsibility to ensure that those in our custody are treated according to our values as a nation, and the President's request will allow our government to keep these commitments. I would also urge my colleagues to reject the idea that the solution is to speed up the deportation of these children back to the dangerous conditions they fled. Stripping away basic legal protections for children in these terrible situations will not solve this problem. As Senator Heinrich so eloquently showed us, the conditions in their home countries are truly horrific. To really address this situation, we need to do more work with our partners in the region to reduce violence and improve opportunities in their home countries. We must provide resources so that we can safely, fairly, and timely process these children, including asylum determination, as provided by law. We should all look to our conscience in seeking a path forward. Surely we can do better than sending these children back to the horrific conditions that they are escaping. Out of sight is not out of mind. That is not what our country stands for. I strongly urge my colleagues to support the President's supplemental request, and I urge my colleagues to work together toward resolving the underlying process of this crisis. I yield the floor.

Ms. HIRONO

Ms. HIRONO. Mr. President, I now ask for a second reading en bloc, and I object to my own request en bloc.

Ms. HIRONO. Mr. President, I understand there are two bills at the desk, and I ask for their first reading en bloc.

Ms. HIRONO

Ms. HIRONO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 10 a.m. on Tuesday, July 15, 2014; that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day; that following any leader remarks, the Senate be in a period of morning business until 12 noon, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each, with the time equally divided between the two leaders or their designees, with the majority controlling the first half and the Republicans controlling the final half; that following morning business, the Senate proceed to executive session as provided for under the previous order; further, that following the cloture vote on the LaFleur nomination, the Senate recess until 2:15 p.m. to allow for the weekly caucus meetings; finally, if cloture is invoked on either of the nominations, the time until 3 p.m. be equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees and at 3 p.m. the Senate proceed to vote on confirmation of the nominations, as provided under the previous order.

Ms. HIRONO

Ms. HIRONO. Mr. President, at 12 noon tomorrow there will be two cloture votes on the Bay and the LaFleur nominations to be members of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and, if cloture is invoked, votes on confirmation of the nominations at 3 p.m.

Ms. HIRONO

Ms. HIRONO. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it adjourn under the previous order.

Ms. HIRONO

Ms. HIRONO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate be in a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Ms. HIRONO

Ms. HIRONO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Kinnon McDonald, an intern in Senator Leahy's office, be granted floor privileges for Tuesday, July 15, 2014.

Ms. HIRONO

Ms. HIRONO. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Ms. HIRONO

Ms. HIRONO. Mr. President, I rise to speak about the humanitarian situation on our southern border. Over the last year, we have seen a flood of unaccompanied children come from Central American countries such as El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala. In fact, the number of children has more than doubled in the past year to nearly 60,000. This is a humanitarian crisis, and it is heartbreaking. Sadly, there are some who believe they have found a simple solution to this problem--that we can somehow just round up these young children and send them back on a plane where they came from immediately. I disagree. The United States has always been a leader in providing aid and assistance to those in danger and in need. These are values our country and Congress have overwhelmingly endorsed. In fact, the current procedures for dealing with children from these countries were set in a 2008 law. The law was signed by President Bush and unanimously passed by both the House and the Senate. These procedures are in place because our values as a nation dictate that we do what we can to protect children from violence and trafficking. It saddens me that there are some who have even called for changing this underlying protective law, presumably so we can just ship these children back to where they came from without the due process protections this law affords. Of the thousands of children showing up at our doorstep, many of whom were at risk in the hands of criminal smugglers during their trip, 40 percent of them are young girls. Many are under the age of 12 and have been sent on their own without the protection of their parents or other family. These children aren't coming here because of President Obama or Democrats or Republicans. They are coming to our border because of the terrible violence and conditions they face in their home countries. In fact, there is a direct correlation between growing violence in these home countries and the increasing waves of children coming to the United States. For example, many face join-or-die gang recruitment situations which amount to forced conscription such as we saw with the child soldiers in other countries. They are subjected to sexual violence and brutality. It is hard for someone from our country to imagine how severe this violence is, but data from the United Nations offers some perspective. The U.N. estimates that the murder rate in Honduras in 2012 was 30 percent higher than U.N. estimates of the civilian casualty rate at the height of the Iraq war. That is a staggering level of violence for any nation to endure. We all agree the current situation is unsustainable and needs to be addressed, but simply sending children back into harm's way is not the answer. We should be working together to address the root causes that are pushing these children to make these dangerous journeys. I am proud to have worked with my colleague Senator Menendez, from whom we just heard, to introduce a comprehensive plan to address this issue. That plan is a bit more complicated than simply rounding up children and shipping them out, but it is clear this crisis requires action on several fronts. First, we should continue to crack down on human smuggling and criminal activity in concert with the children's home countries. Second, we have to honor our domestic and legal requirements related to the treatment of children, refugees, and asylum seekers. This means supporting the administration's efforts to provide humane treatment to these children. Third, we have to redouble our efforts to support peace, economic growth, and social development in Central America. I look forward to discussing more of the details of our plan with any of my colleagues who want to work together constructively to solve this problem. Only by focusing on addressing the root cause of this crisis can we truly address it. The President has been managing a coordinated response to handle this very difficult, heartbreaking situation. I hope we can work together to provide adequate resources to professionals on the ground. We must also continue pressing for comprehensive immigration reform so our system will not be so overwhelmed in times such as these. I yield the floor.

Ms. HIRONO

Ms. HIRONO. Madam President, it has been 2 weeks since the House and Senate Veterans' Affairs Committees held our first conference meeting to fix the VA health care system. It is a disservice to our veterans that we have not met again. My fellow conferees and I should be at the table actively negotiating a path forward. Chairman Sanders is right when he says the situation at the VA is an emergency. I had the opportunity to meet with veterans last week in Hilo, HI. My discussion with them underscored the urgency of addressing the longstanding issues at the VA. For those who have not visited Hawaii, Hilo is on the Big Island of Hawaii, and it is home to volcanoes, rain forests, and just about every other climate. It is also twice as big as the rest of Hawaii's islands combined. In fact, it is roughly the size of Connecticut but with only a fraction of the population. It can take hours to drive from Hilo to the second largest town, Kailua-Kona. Of the roughly 143,000 people living on the island, 15,000 are veterans. I am raising these facts because I want my colleagues to understand that veterans in communities like those who live on Hawaii Island need our help and they need it now. The veterans I met in Hilo expressed to me that they cannot get care anywhere other than the VA on the Big Island, as private physicians are few and far between. In fact, while 90 percent of Hawaii Island residents have health insurance, there is a serious physician shortage. This results in long wait times for non-VA health care. Given these long wait times for private physicians, Big Island veterans rely on VA for their primary care. Those Hawaii Island veterans who have private insurance have, out of their own pockets, paid for flights to the island of Oahu to get the care they need. This means over $300 out-of- pocket just to get to their medical appointments. The $300 does not include any costs associated with the care itself. This is another reason that expanding access to non-VA providers is needed to immediately address the VA health care emergency. With this expansion, we must ensure that every veteran in our country, whether rural or urban, can more easily get the care they need if the VA is unable to accommodate them. Rural and urban veterans in Hawaii and across our Nation deserve better. A recent audit of the VA in Hawaii found that veterans were waiting over 140 days to receive care. A more recent update found that while progress is being made, the wait is still over 100 days. Nationwide, nearly 60,000 veterans are waiting simply to get an appointment, and of course that is unacceptable. This is why I stand eager and ready to work with my Senate and House colleagues to ensure that the veterans of this country get the care they need and the benefits they have earned. This conference committee must reconvene as soon as possible to move forward on the important task to finalize legislation that does three important things: No. 1, directly addresses the emergency circumstances that have been uncovered at the Veterans' Administration; No. 2, ensures that all of our veterans receive access to the care they deserve; and No. 3, begins the long-term work of restoring veterans' trust not only in the VA but in Congress's ability to effectively oversee the VA and provide the resources necessary to care for our veterans. Nearly the entire Senate agrees that the current VA situation is an emergency and that Congress must act. I am hopeful we can all agree on that point, but my fellow conferees need to be at the table now, face to face, to work out solutions to make the VA work for our veterans. I hope we will include provisions in the Senate-passed legislation that will provide for 26 major medical facility leases and provide for the resources and authority to expedite hiring of VA doctors and nurses. In addition, while I agree that accountability of executives is needed, we should avoid politicizing the nonappointed civil service process and allow some due process for VA employees. Furthermore, our veterans rely on the services of qualified, committed professionals at the VA. In fact, the veterans I met with last week indicated that they really liked VA care; however, they were concerned that VA doctors were already overstretched in terms of patients. I don't believe that simply telling VA doctors to see more patients is the only or best answer, nor is it enough to allow veterans to seek care from private providers. We should be doing more to attract more health professionals to VA, especially primary care providers. We have to recognize the long-term benefits of attracting a high-quality workforce to VA and that we can improve accountability in a carefully balanced way. Investing in the VA is an essential step toward building back the trust of our veterans. I understand my colleagues' concerns with the cost of the proposals before us, but inaction will not overcome those concerns. Those of us serving as conferees need to sit down and discuss how to get our veterans what they need quickly. The time for action is now. Veterans in Hawaii and across the country are counting on us and deserve no less. I yield the remainder of my time and note the absence of a quorum.

Ms. HIRONO

Ms. HIRONO. I yield back.

Ms. HIRONO. I rise today because we need a fair shot for the middle class. To join and stay in the middle class today, a college degree is more important than ever. In Hawaii, by 2018 about two of every three jobs will need some training or a degree past high school. But students are struggling to get ahead. We all know college costs have gone up way beyond inflation and students are borrowing more and more to pay for college. Last week I joined several of the women in the Senate. We pointed out that student loan debt affects women more. Why? Because it takes longer to repay a student loan if, as a woman, you are making only 77 cents for every $1 a man makes. I have heard from both men and women in Hawaii who are struggling under the burden of student loan debt, people such as Dawn from Honolulu, who told me, ``I've been teaching for over 3 years and can barely survive on my paycheck after paying student loans and rent,'' and Karen from Hilo, who said, ``Two of my three kids have loans that are almost non-repayable, given their size. They have a master's and almost-completed a PhD and one is home already using her expertise on our community. The other is coming this fall. Our prices are prohibitive enough without excessively high loans hanging over their heads.'' Their stories are not unique. Last year over 20,000 Hawaii undergraduates used Federal loans to pay for school. In Hawaii the average graduate with a bachelor's degree has over $23,000 in student loan debt. Nationwide, overall student loan debt has skyrocketed to over $1.2 trillion. I know previous speakers have talked about that, but it bears repeating--$1.2 trillion nationwide in student loan debt. That is more than credit card debt or auto debt. The burden of student loan debt makes it very difficult to buy a home or start a family. Older Federal student loans are stuck at high rates of interest, and there is no option to refinance. Private loans often have even fewer consumer protections and higher rates. In 2007 I was on the House-Senate conference committee for the bill that created the income-based loan repayment program signed into law by President Bush. This week President Obama took Executive action to help more borrowers cap their student loan payments at 10 percent of their income. The administration will also extend partnerships with private companies, departments, and nonprofits to increase consumer protections and get the word out on existing programs. These are positive steps and ones that I have urged the President to take. But the President can only do so much on his own to help with student loan debt. Congress needs to do its part. The bill we are discussing on the floor today would allow student loans to be refinanced down to today's low rate for new borrowers. Think about it. Just as homeowners can refinance a mortgage, we should allow student loans to be refinanced. Last year there was overwhelming bipartisan support for a bill keeping the student loan rates low for new loans. I ask my Republican colleagues to join Democrats once again in voting for today's refinancing bill. In addition to today's bill, I wish to point out another way we can combat student loan debt. A big reason students are taking on so much debt to go to college is the decline in State and Federal grants. Fewer college grants means more reliance on loans, resulting in more student debt. In recent years State support for higher education has dropped. From 2008 to 2012 State higher education spending per student plummeted by 28 percent. That is a cut of over $2,000 per student on average. At the Federal level, the Pell grant was once our main commitment to our students. Pell grants were the primary form of student aid to help low- and moderate-income students join and stay in the middle class. Like the GI bill after World War II, which invested in our veterans, investing in low-income and moderate-income students pays off. From a strictly economic standpoint, we know these students get degrees, get better jobs, and pay taxes. In the 1970s the Federal Pell grant covered nearly 80 percent of the cost of attendance at a 4-year instate public university. Today the Pell grant covers less than one-third. To make matters worse, Congress chipped away at Pell grant eligibility and completely cut off the year-round Pell grant. In 2011, before this year-round program was eliminated, over 1,600 highly motivated Hawaii college students used year-round Pell grants to get a degree sooner. They are among 1.2 million students nationwide who used year-round Pell grants in that year alone. One of those Hawaii students works in my office now--my University of Hawaii law school fellow, Janna Wehilani Ahu, who is on the floor with me. Her family is from a small fishing village in rural Hawaii Island. She graduated from Kamehameha Schools, the University of Hawaii at Manoa, and now attends the university's William S. Richardson School of Law. She used a summer Pell grant in 2010, and without it she says she wouldn't have been able to attend summer school and move more quickly toward a degree. Wehi is one of many Hawaii students who have told me how Pell grants helped them. Another student, Lehua from Waianae, wrote: I would like to thank you for supporting the Pell Grant program. Pell Grants have allowed me to increase my education and [have] provided me with a higher paying job. Who would ever think that a country girl from Wai'anae--who grew up with society telling me that we had the lowest reading and math scores in the state of Hawaii, the highest of everything such as welfare, crime, teen pregnancy and substance abuse in the state--can get a college degree. Today, I . . . want to help people from Wai'anae to achieve their dreams. Pell grants have made it possible for this Native Hawaiian, single mother, and country girl--as she calls herself--to be graduating with an associate's degree in early childhood education and transferring to the University of Hawaii West Oahu. With ever-increasing college costs, we should be strengthening Pell grants, not cutting back on them. That is why I introduced the Pell Grant Protection Act with several my colleagues. Recognizing the importance of Pell grants, Congress has been providing discretionary funds for this program for over 40 years. It is time to put this program on the strong footing our students deserve by making this a mandatory funded program with a cost-of-living adjustment. The bill would also include an updated, clearer version of the year-round Pell grant. The bill has the support of 25 national organizations representing students, professors, financial aid administrators, college presidents, and advocates for the middle class. The Associated Students of the University of Hawaii passed a resolution of support, and several University of Hawaii campus chancellors have also come out in support. I also worked with my colleague, Senator Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, on a related Pell grant bill--her Middle Class CHANCE Act. Senator Landrieu's bill would restore year-round Pell grants, increase the Pell award to keep up with college costs, and let students use Pell grants for more semesters. I look forward to working with Chairman Harkin on these and other bills to make college more affordable. These efforts are investments in our young people and in our collective future. Today is a start, and I urge my colleagues to vote for Senator Warren's refinancing bill. Mahalo. I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record Hawaii stories of student loan debt.