Ted Kennedy

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, as this debate comes to a close, I am reminded of the great moments in our Nation's history in which we look to the future and invested in future generations of Americans. We did it when we passed the GI bill. We did it when the Federal Government created the student loan program. We did it when we created Pell grants. And we do it again today with the largest new investment in student aid since the GI bill. A vote for this bill is one we can cast with pride and great hope-- pride in doing our part for the future of our great country and hope that our actions tonight will mean a better future for millions of young Americans. By passing this bill tonight, we will recognize that principle once again. We know that our students today face significant challenges in paying for college. Each year, over 400,000 talented, qualified students do not attend a 4-year college because they cannot afford it. In 1993, fewer than half of all students took out loans to finance their education, but today, more than two-thirds of students borrow for college. Today, the average student leaves college with more than $19,000 in student loan debt. That is why this higher education legislation is so important. We will provide more than $17 billion to help students and families pay for college. This legislation will help reverse the crisis in college affordability in several ways: It will immediately and dramatically increase the amount of aid for Pell grant recipients; it will help students manage their debt, by capping student loan payments at 15 percent of their monthly income; it will provide longer deferments in loan repayments for student borrowers facing economic hardship; and it will completely forgive the loans of those who enter society's most needed professions. It will restore balance to our grossly unfair student loan system by reducing unnecessary subsidies for lenders. Everything we know about the college affordability crisis tells us that low-income students and families are struggling the most. With this bill, we will increase the maximum Pell grant to $5,100 next year--a $790 increase--and to $5,400 in 2011. I am very pleased that our legislation will expand loan forgiveness to borrowers who stay in public service professions for 10 years. Our society needs more teachers, more emergency management and law enforcement professionals, more public health doctors and nurses, more social workers, more librarians, more public interest lawyers, and more early childhood teachers. Under our bill, we will produce more of them, because they--and all the groups I have just mentioned--will be eligible for loan forgiveness. The bill before us will deliver long-overdue relief to students and families across the Nation who are struggling to afford college. But there is more we can--and must--do to improve higher education for students and families. Next week, we will take up other important changes in our higher education amendments of 2007. In this bill, we take commonsense steps to improve higher education. We will address the rising cost of college, pursue needed sunshine ethics reforms to the student loan industry, and steps to simplify the federal financial aid application form. These are critical reforms--but the most critical steps are the ones we take tonight to dramatically increase college aid for our Nation's students. From our earliest days as a nation, education has been the engine of the American dream. We can look to the landmark success of the GI bill to see what a difference higher education makes. The GI bill produced 67,000 doctors, 91,000 scientists, 238,000 teachers, and 450,000 engineers. It also funded the education of three Presidents, three Supreme Court Justices and about a dozen Senators who served in this very Chamber. This bill is a big step in the right direction. It dedicates over $17 billion for students and families to benefit from a college education and keep our country strong in the years ahead. It will help keep the doors to college open for all students, regardless of income level or background, just as the GI bill did half a century ago. We can't let the engine of education stall today. More than ever college is the key to opportunity for students and the key to a strong America for the future. I urge the Senate to approve this important legislation.

Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that upon passage of H.R. 2669, the Senate insist on its amendment, request a conference with the House on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses, and the Chair be authorized to appoint conferees on the part of the Senate, and that the HELP Committee be appointed as conferees, with the above occurring without intervening action or debate.

Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. I thank the good Senator from Iowa for all his work on our education proposal. He has been a key member of our Committee on Education, and he has not only worked on it in terms of our committee but also as one of the important leaders on the Appropriations Committee to make sure that what we have authorized actually gets funded. I hope the young people in Iowa understand that, because we certainly understand it, and we are very appreciative of it. Quickly, though, the Senator has outlined in careful detail how we have put the greatest amount of the savings of $18 billion, $17 billion to provide relief for the students in the Pell grants. But I want to underline one other aspect of the program which says that if young people are going to volunteer in terms of public service, they will pay no more than 15 percent of their income in return. Therefore, they will save a good deal of the amount that otherwise they would have to save, and then they will get the loan forgiveness at the end of the day. I just list here the various areas of public service. His particular interest would be about halfway down, since the Senator from Iowa has also been our great leader dealing with the challenges of disabilities, and also with the elderly--public services for individuals who work with the disabled, also with the elderly, also with independent living issues as our population grows older. So we have public health and social work in public service agencies, education, early education, childcare, our legal system, public defenders and libraries--working, even in the tribal areas. As the Senator from Iowa found in his travels around Iowa in many of the schools and colleges, young people welcome the opportunity to be a part of giving something back to the local community, giving something as a teacher or helping the disabled. They are glad to do that. In too many instances, they can't afford to do it because they have too big a debt, but under this bill they will be able to do that, and at the end of the day, a grateful nation will say: If you do it for 10 years, your debt is forgiven. I ask if the Senator will not agree with me that this is really one of the important provisions in this legislation, one of the compelling provisions? We have tried to provide help and assistance to those in the Pell program, but we are also trying to incentivize and give opportunity to young people who want to give something back to their communities by showing a grateful nation will forgive their debt.

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent it be in order to ask for the yeas and nays on all the other amendments.

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on those other amendments.

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I have heard the Senator speak very eloquently today about the elements of the legislation and his outline of his strong, continuing, ongoing support for the DREAM Act which I welcome the opportunity to support and will work very closely with him to try to achieve this very important legislation. I have listened to him also talk about the division that is in America--whether we are growing as one country or whether we are finding out that we are really growing as different nations. The Senator remembers very well, in the postwar period, if you look back at the economics, the lowest income, the medium income, the highest income families--all of them moved along together. They all improved together. We had the GI Bill which, over a 6-year period, invested the equivalent of a third of the total Federal budget for the year 1951. That is the kind of priority we had as a nation in terms of education, and many believe it is the principal cause of the creation of the great middle class in our country, the backbone and the strength of our democracy, our economy, and our national security. I listened to the Senator talk about the DREAM Act, but I have also listened to him talk about the divisions that exist in our country. This is a chart here, which is really self-explanatory, which shows that low-income students are far less likely to graduate from college. This is what is happening today. As one who is committed to seeing that we are going to be one country with one history and one destiny, does it not underline the point that we have important responsibilities to try to ensure that all students, regardless of family income, can earn a college degree? I am interested in, if we are really talking about the divisions that exist in our country--we see them so dramatically in the area of education--whether we have some real responsibility to try to equalize those disparities, and would he not agree with me that if we don't do that, we are going to be a nation that is going to continue to be a divided country with all of the implications that it has in terms of fairness and equality and opportunity for the future?

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, the Senator may remember the extraordinary work that was done in this area of education by a former mentor of his and a very close personal friend of ours, Senator Simon of Illinois. Whenever we had the debate on higher education, he always reminded me of the great debate we had in this country in 1960. One of the principal issues that divided the two political parties at that time was the issue of education. At that time, Senator Kennedy believed that what we ought to have in higher education is a program that is going to give assurance to every young person in this country that if they have the ability to gain entrance into any college, that regardless of their resources, they were going to be able to put together a student aid package that would permit them to go where their talent leads them. He believed the country was a lesser country unless we were going to have that opportunity. Talent was going to be lost in terms of our Nation and our people. That was basically the philosophy behind the Higher Education Act. As my colleague knows, two years ago the maximum Pell grant covered 55 percent of the costs at a public four-year college. Of course, that has completely been reversed in recent years, with the resulting disparity we see here. The maximum Pell grant covers just one third of the costs today. Does the Senator not agree with me that we ought to at least set the goal that ideal we had at the time of the passage of the act; that is, any young person who has the ability and wants to work, can put together whatever their family can contribute and receive the aid they need to attend college. But we ought to, as an ideal and as a nation, move toward that particular goal where we are going to give assurance to every young person that if they work hard, they can afford a higher education. This is a matter of national priority; our belief in young people, our belief in their families, and our belief in the future of this country demands it. I was always impressed by Congressman Silvio Conte, who is a Republican, and like so many people in this body--we heard from Senator Murray who talked about members of her family who are all professionals now who got the Pell grants, and Senator Cantwell, a very successful entrepreneur before she entered the Senate. Does the Senator agree with me that this is an investment we should be involved in as a matter of national priorities, and that we ought to be, as a country and as a people, really leading the way toward having a goal of providing that kind of help and assistance to our country as well as to the individuals?

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, finally, the Senator remembers that this body passed the COMPETE Act, which was legislation that came out of our committee--Senator Bingaman from New Mexico, Senator Alexander from Tennessee were leaders on that bill--which had very strong, virtually universal support here, which gave focus in terms of encouragement in the areas of math and science and engineering. This is something, I know the Senator agrees, we ought to make sure we are going to invest in. When we passed the GI bill, over those 6 years, we produced 450,000 engineers--450,000. We had three Presidents of the United States who used the GI bill, three Justices who served on the Supreme Court of the United States, and several Senators who were educated under the GI bill. This is investing in education. We know what to do. The question is whether we have the will and whether the American people are going to be responding to this challenge. I thank the Senator. I think we have work to do in this area. We have been able to find additional resources for the downpayment toward closing these gaps, and I give the assurance to the Senator that we will work closely with him to make sure we get the DREAM Act achieved and passed and we will also continue to eliminate the disparities in these charts.

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

Mr. KENNEDY. If the Senator will be kind enough to let me examine it. That is dealing with the alternative minimum tax and deductibles that, quite frankly, as I was thinking about it, the Finance Committee deals with, and they would probably be the most valuable to try to address this. If we could deal with this first issue first, and then, if I might, try and get some member on the Finance Committee to come over and respond to the Senator's question because I think it deals with the alternative minimum tax. I am not trying to delay, but I see the Senator from Maryland is here and would like to speak. I will be glad to respond to the Senator's presentation and move ahead in a timely way.

Mr. KENNEDY. Will the Senator who made the unanimous consent request--it is No. 2332 and then----

Mr. KENNEDY. I do not have a copy of that second amendment. I don't intend to object. If the Senator can withhold his unanimous-consent request until I look at this amendment.

Mr. KENNEDY. Finally, to the Senator, in this legislation, we have provided individuals in public service professions with loan forgiveness. We are talking about those working in public safety; we are talking about law enforcement; we are talking about public education, early child education, and child care. We are talking about individuals who are going to work with the disabled and the elderly. The Senator has spoken so eloquently about the changing demographics in the country, and increasing concerns for our elderly to make sure that there are going to be alternative choices for those elderly people such as independent living. This bill also provides loan forgiveness for those in public legal services, library sciences, school-based service providers, and those who work at tribal colleges. These are areas where there are critical shortages. Would not the Senator agree with me that these represent--represent--professions which are making a difference for other people, for other individuals? If we are able to have dedicated, competent, able, gifted people who work in those years, we are going to be a better Nation for doing it.

Mr. KENNEDY. I wish to thank the good Senator from Maryland. She has a way of speaking and taking complicated issues and simplifying them and getting to the core and the root of them. She has done so in a very important way, which addresses an underlying aspect of the Sessions amendment; that is, the value of work in the public sector, the value of work in the public sector as differentiated from the private sector, because of the value it makes and the difference it makes to other people. That is what we have tried to do in this legislation, in providing the loan forgiveness. I wish to thank the Senator for her eloquence, and I wish to thank her for helping on this particular amendment. Effectively, the Sessions amendment would eliminate the provisions in this legislation that say that after 10 years, after 10 years of working in the public sector, the remainder of your loan would be canceled. Now, that is the provision he has made. Now, a couple points I wish to address in terms of the Senator's representation. The fact is, in the legislation there is what we call an income cap. The earnings have to be less than $65,000. So if you go to work in a public service place and somehow you earn in excess of $65,000, you do not have your loans forgiven. So this is targeted to the kind of individuals whom Senator Mikulski has talked of, the examples we have given out here, those who are in law enforcement, those who are teachers, those who are working in the nursing professions, those who are working in special needs; those provisions on page 30 of the legislation. We feel strongly that this loan forgiveness is a critical part of this bill, and this is the distinction we draw from the Sessions amendment, and it has been stated so eloquently by the Senator from Maryland, the distinction between the public and the private sector and the great needs we have in terms of the public sector. That is very important. I wish to remind my friend from Alabama, according to this legislation, he is one of the fortunate Senators in higher education, the increased grant aid for students for the State of Alabama is going to increase to $442 million over the period of the next 5 years. My own State of Massachusetts is $319 million. Alabama has come out very well, one of the most favored States in terms of the totality. We always try to look out after the Senator from Alabama and Alabama. I thought the Senator would be interested in that.

Mr. KENNEDY. I would be glad to.

Mr. KENNEDY. I thank the Senator. I am a very strong believer in the nursing profession, and have been. I think they are the backbone of our whole health care system. We provide relief for nurses in this bill, whether they are in the public or private sector. For those in public health, there is loan forgiveness after 10 years in the profession. And for all graduates, we provide income-based repayment, which caps their monthly loan payments at 15 percent of their discretionary income. If a nurse works in the private sector, works at Mass General Hospital, gets a good salary there, or works out in the community in terms of trying to work with foster children or otherwise, they would both get some kind of student loan debt relief under this bill. But on the loan forgiveness, the Senator is quite correct. We have targeted those individuals who are going to be working in what we consider to be the public sector, for the common good, for a larger sense of purpose for the country, as expressed so eloquently by the Senator from Maryland, to be eligible for the forgiveness. That is the point the Senator has made. For example, under this bill, as I understand, a public school teacher in Alabama who earns $31,000 and the average loan debt in Alabama is $17,559, they could have the loan payments capped at 15 percent so it reduces his or her monthly payment by $59, from $203 to $104. That is about a 30-percent reduction which is not insignificant. Then after 10 years of teaching, under our legislation, all the remaining debt would be forgiven. In this case, a benefit of some $10,000, which is very significant. But they would have to teach for 10 years to be eligible for this. We think this is a better investment, a better trade, than continuing to give so much in Federal subsidies to the banks. We have taken it effectively from the profits of these lending institutions, and we see they are going to survive. We have the CBO figures that show that they are. We have their own figures, for example, from Sallie Mae, that show even with this legislation the profits they are going to make over the next several years. We think this is a good trade. This is a good policy matter. I saw the Senator from Alabama leave the Chamber. I haven't talked with my friend and colleague, but we will be ready to move ahead and vote on that at the appropriate time. We will talk with our colleague and see if we can't figure out the best time to address this issue.

Mr. KENNEDY. I yield time from the bill to the Senator from Minnesota.

Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, I want to indicate to the leader that we have a pending amendment, the Sessions amendment. But we have effectively ended the debate on education. The students of this country and the parents of this country ought to know that we have done our duty, our responsibility. It is going to be those who are going to be offering amendments that have nothing to do with educating the children of this country who are going to be delaying what is a vital interest to the students and working families. We have been here, ready to deal with the amendments. We have a pending amendment with the Sessions amendment. But it ought to be very clear to every student who is watching this program and every parent who is watching that Senator Enzi, myself, and our committee--we have done our work. We are ready to have final passage. The House of Representatives has acted on this proposal. We are ready to go ahead and get to conference and get these benefits to students. If Members of this body have other issues, they ought to consider those at another time, or in another place. But every parent of every child ought to know, when we start having these dilatory amendments that are being offered, who is offering them and who is delaying the most important education program we have had here in the Senate since the GI bill in World War II. That is what this is about. I thank the leader for both scheduling this and his willingness to stick with it. We are fine. It is 6 o'clock on a Thursday evening. We are glad to work, and we are glad to work through tomorrow, Monday, whatever it is. But the American people ought to know, when these amendments that have nothing to do with education are offered, who is on the side of the students and who is on the side of working families, who is on the side of middle-income families. We have been out here ready to deal with education amendments. We have one that is pending. But the idea that they are going to use this as some kind of vehicle to tack on every single amendment to cause what they consider to be difficult political votes, they are basically insulting the families of this country who know how important this issue is. Make no mistake about it, we will know very soon who is on the side of the students and who is not.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate in order to conduct a hearing entitled ``Increasing Government Accountability and Ensuring Fairness in Small Business Contracting,'' on Wednesday, July 18, 2007, beginning at 2 p.m. in room 428A of the Russell Senate Office Building.

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Special Committee on Aging be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, July 18, 2007 from 10:30 a.m.-12:30 p.m. in Dirksen 628 for the purpose of conducting a hearing.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Res. 274 submitted earlier today.

Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, and that any statements related thereto be printed in the Record.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 275, and that the resolution be agreed to and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, I ask that the Chair lay before the Senate a message from the House on S. 966, the Passport Backlog Reduction Act of 2007. The PRESIDING OFFICER laid before the Senate a message from the House as follows: