quorum call:

mr. cassidy: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from louisiana. mr. cassidy: are we in a quorum call? the presiding officer: the senate is in a quorum call. mr. cassidy: i request the quorum call being vacated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cassidy: mr. president, i rise rise in support of designating the shreveport federal building as the stag building. john stag was an inspirational figure. he joined the united states army preparing for world war ii. he rose to the rank of captain earning the combat infantry man badge, a bronze star for valor, another bronze star for meritorious service, the purple heart with oak leaf cluster.

at one point he was saved from death when a german bullet was stopped by a bible that he carried in his pocket. it was as if he was fated to live. after world war ii, tom attended cambridge and then l.s.u. law center and then served in a private practice. tom's reputation was described as a combination of intelligence, spirit, patriotism, wisdom and wit and resulted in his nomination to serve on the federal bench for the western district of louisiana in 1974. he was named chief judge in 1984, a position he held until 1991. many testimonials one of which a encloses colleague -- close colleague said of judge stagg, he was the finest judge i ever met. he served as a role model. to which served with judge stagg on the bench for 12 years is a, was a singular honor.

this remarkable man left a legacy of love of family, of duty and honor and love of this nation. his judicial system and the rule of law. the colleague continues, tom stagg loved being a federal judge. we will all miss him. judge stagg assumed senior stau on the court in 1992 but didn't retire. he maintained a full caseload serving on federal circuit court of appeals stau. he loved being a judge but his love for the job came second. judge stagg married mary o'brien and she survives as do their two children julie and margaret mary. thank you and i yield back. and i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. thune: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from south dakota. mr. thune: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. morning business is closed. under the previous order, the senate will resume consideration of h.r. 3636, which the clerk

will report. the clerk: calendar number 55, h.r. 636, an act to amend the internal revenue code of 1986 to permanently extend -- mr. thune: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent the reading be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. thune: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, i want to speak briefly to the legislation that is before us, the f.a.a. reauthorization. the committee on commerce, science and transportation which i chair was instrumental in bringing this bill to the floor. our committee has a long and proud history of bipartisan cooperation on important matters under its jurisdiction, and this extends to the bill that is before us today, the federal aviation administration reauthorization act of 2016, which i along with my colleagues, senators nelson, ayotte and cantwell, introduced and we marked up in front of our committee. this legislation before us today includes the most passenger- friendly provisions, the most significant aviation

safety reforms and the most comprehensive aviation security enhancements of any f.a.a. reauthorization in recent history. this bill helps passengers and americans who use the national airspace for many different transportation needs. for example, since the last reauthorization of the federal aviation administration in 2012, the use of drones has increased dramatically. according to its most recent aerospace forecast, the f.a.a. estimates that annual sales of both commercial and hobby unmanned aircraft could be $2.5 million in 2016, a number they estimate may increase to seven million units annually by 2020. but the f.a.a. has an outdated legislative framework being used to shape the use of this rapidly growing technology for both hoists and commercial operators. this is slowing down innovations

in advancement and safety. our bill gives the f.a.a. new authority to enforce safe drone usage. this includes efforts to make sure that drone users know and follow basic rules of the sky to avoid dangerous situations. to support job growth in the aerospace industry, our legislation reforms the process that the f.a.a. uses for approving new aircraft designs. our goal is to shorten the time that it takes for u.s. aerospace innovations to go from design boards to international markets while maintaining safety standards. for the general aviation community, we're also streamlining red tape and adding safety enhancements for small aircraft by including provisions from the pilot's bill of rights two. also we included funding for the airport improvement program which pays for improvements to infrastructure like runways with $400 million with existing

surplus funds. this allows us to help meet pressing construction needs without raising fees on the traveling public. we developed this bill through a robust and open process that allowed every member of the commerce committee to help guide the content of this critical aviation legislation. last year, the commerce committee held six hearings on topics that helped inform our legislation. at the committee markup last month, we accepted 57 amendments 34 which were sponsored by democrats and 23 which were sponsored by republicans. since debate began on the bill last week, we have successfully included an additional 19 amendments here on the floor of the united states senate. ten of these amendments are sponsored by democrats and nine by republicans. mr. president, this bill deserves the senate's support, and i urge members to remember that all of the important improvements that this legislation puts in place are there for aviation security, consumer protection, american innovation, safety and job

creation. i hope that we'll be able to send this bill to the house soon. we are on a pathway that will enable us to do that. as i mentioned before, we have had a number of amendments that have been disposed of processed here on the floor already. 19 amendments have been added to the bill since it came to the floor, in addition to the 57 that we adopted at the committee level, and i want to credit the hard work that's been done by the staffs on both sides, the commerce committee staff obviously have been very involved on the majority side as well as the minority side in helping to shape this as it came out of the committee and to the floor. lots of hours put in to getting us to where we are today, but i think where we are is we have a bipartisan bill that has been broadly supported coming out of the committee which has numerous safety enhancements in it, the most that we have seen in a decade, and a bill that is worthy of all our senators' support. now, having said that, there are

other amendments that have been filed. we had i think at one point -- i'm not sure what the number is today, but we had 198 amendments that have been filed to the bill, and we are continuing to work with those -- the sponsors of those amendments to try and get additional amendments adopted. you know, we have to have cooperation obviously from members on both sides in order for that to happen, but we have another list of another ten or dozen amendments that we think could be clear that could be added to the legislation, but we're going to need to have members who currently have holds on that process to lift those holds. but we are on a glide path to get this bill to some final votes coming up tomorrow, so we have today and perhaps part of tomorrow in which to process additional amendments, and so i hope that members will decide to work with us. this bill obviously we think has been very well vetted. as i said, it's been debated heavily both at the committee

level and we have had opportunities now to offer amendments on the floor, but there are always ways in which it can be improved, and there are a lot of amendments that -- worthy amendments that members have interest in adding to this legislation, some of which are germane to the legislation, some of which are not, but obviously once we get to cloture on the bill, only those amendments that are germane would be able to be voted on. but we would luke to get other amendments processed. so i guess what i'm egg is to members throughout the day today, full work with us and for those members who are currently having holds on that process moving forward, if you would lift those, it will enable us to process a lot of amendments that senators are interested in having added to the bill. and so we will continue throughout the day to negotiate with members and hopefully have an additional list of amendments that we can adopt. and i would say again that my colleague, the ranking democrat on the commerce committee, senator nelson, and i have

worked very call ofly throughout this process -- very carefully throughout this process to make sure it is an open process that incorporates the best ideas from both sides. we have before us a bill that does that. that's why it is very worthy of our members' support. we have a lot of participation, as i said, to members of our committee on both sides had ample opportunities to get amendments considered and voted on and 57 of which were adopted during the committee deliberations on this. so it's the product of a lot of work, and i think we are at a place where when we report this out, it is a product that we can be proud of, that we can send to the house of representatives in hopes that they will pick it up or if they decide to pass their own version of this legislation meet us in conference where we can work out the differences but get these important safety measures, these important measures that will support jobs and innovation in our economy on to the president's desk where it can be signed into law and they

can be implemented and put into effect. that's where we are at the moment, and again i thank all of our colleagues for their cooperation to date and hope that we can see more of that moving forward because it will enable us, in my view, to continue to strengthen this bill before it gets to its ultimate passage, which i hope will be sometime later this week. we've been on it now for a couple of weeks and i.t. time to i -- and it's time to i think, get it on the floor and on to the house and hopefully to the president's desk. with that, i yield the floor. mr. lankford: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator oklahoma. mr. lankford: as i traveled all over oklahoma during the state work weeks in march, i -- workweeks in marks i heard -- de state workweeks in marks i heard over and over concerns from my constituents. how could the administration

release over $1 billion to iran the same month that our states were facing new cuts from c.m.s. that billion dollars that was sent to iron could have bailed out every single rural hospital in america. i talked to a move in lawton that did not understand why there was a conversation in d.c. about closing the guantanamo bay detention facility and bringing those individuals into the united states. i talked to a dad in tulsa, a dad of a soldier, that wanted to know what's happening with terrorism and what's america's response. i talked to an oklahoma business owner who is very, very concerned about cybersecurity and the threat of his business' network being attacked. as details came out from the brussels terrorist attack, every american has in mind their security and their family. i continue to pray for the victims of those awful attacks and work to determine the best

way our great nation can confront this threat. as the only member of this body that severned in both the homeland security -- that serves in both the homeland security security committee and, i have the privilege to make sure that americans have a strong voice in our nation's national security priorities. floss single messaged to confront terrorism but we must be absolutely clear that terrorists will find no quarter in the home of the baiive. as a member of the senate intelligence committee, i walk behind a heavy door several times a week to hear the sobering details about foreign threats and the amazing work that americans do to confront them. i believe americans would be very proud of the work that's going on. we could talk about disrupted terrorist plots an and an insigt into the threats. there are hard questions behind those closed doors. oversight should be expected and open discussion should be

expected. let me say today how incredibly grateful i am for the people on the intelligence -- in the intelligence the community that work hard every single day. a mex our military, members of law enforcement around the country wear uniforms and we get a chance to say thank you to them personally when we see them. the members of the intelligence community are patriotic merntion that are working to protect their families and our families every day that we don't get to say thank you to because we don't know who they are. let me say from our country, thank you to them today. right now members of radical islamic groups around the world are calling out on social media through encrypted messages and public forums around the world to the small minority of muslims who believe like they do and believe in their hate-filled doomsday mission. they tell people this they believe like they do, they should kill like they do. isis is enraged by our views on freedom of religion, girls ad tending school, equal pay, equal

opportunity and evening voting in elections. it's almost impossible for americans to imagine their hatred for the modern world and for freedom and basic human rights. so how do you win against an enemy like that? you confront them is how you do it, not ignore them. you deal with their ideology that spreads like skerred around social media platforms around the w0r8d. some people say poverty and lack of education creates radicalism. i would tell you there are billions of people in the world that live in poverty. most of them do not practice this particular form of radical islam. the shooters in san bernardino, california, weren't in poverty or lacking education. the killers in paris and brosless were not -- brussels were not isolated and poor. while undoubted by refugees in isolated communities are breeding grounds for anger and frustration, but that is not the primary cause of terrorism. there are millions of people living as refugees in the world right now that are not extremists. they're not terrorists. they just want peace so they can go home and have a norpal life

again. -- a normal life again. we do have a moral and national security obligation to help the vulnerable when we can. the refugee crisis is immense and it is affecting millions worldwide. many countries are at the brink and we need to stay engaged. but america has already given billions of dollars in aid. no country -- no country has done more for the refugees than the united states. our logistics, our sport, our financial aid -- our support, our financial aid has sustained most of the refugee communities either through direct aid or through what we're doing through the united nations route now. the people living as refugees need access to education and training so that their kirn will grow up in skills and opportunity.we an help them have a second chance. but that's not the primary source. we need to engage in religious leaders around the world. we cannot and we will not define faith for them.

but we can challenge any faith that promotes the death of people because of those individuals' race, belief, or gender. we should work to shut off terrorist financing around the world, their illegal energy trade, their drug trafficking, their extortions, and persons in wealthy countries who send money with the implicit promise that those terrorists will not bring terrorism to their country, if only they'll send them money to do terrorism in other places. we must also fight and confront those individuals militarily. we must learn the lesson of 9/11. they're not just a group of radical thugs over there that we can ignore. they hate us and they will find every way possible to attack us here and a tack our allies. no one wants war. but we cannot stand by and watch terrorists behooding egyptian -- we heading egyptian christians on the beaches of libya, killing shia muslims because of their faith in iraq.

blowing themselves up in an airport in brussels, shooting people up at a rock concert or synagogue in paris. we can't put our head in the hand and ignore what is really happening and assume it will just go away if we do nothing. as long as they hold territory, they call out to people worldwide to join them in their caliphate to come fight for them or to fight where they are. we're americans. we lose track of that at times i'm afraid. no one in the world has the same logistical capability as the united states of america. no one in the world has the most moral, most powerful military in the world like the united states of america. no one has our intelligence capability. no one in the world has our tactical planning capability. so the whole world is waiting on america to decide what we're going to do so they can decide if they're going to join us in this fight against this radical islamic terrorism. it is not about massive troops on the ground. it is about a clear plan and

strategy to carry it out. it is why the russians look more mobile and capable than us all of a sudden. now the question rises large in this body: there are multiple proposals in state and foreign operations for how we can engage in peaceful activities, helping refugees, helping those in poverty, helping bring education to places, helping engage diplomatically with religious leaders around the world and with other countries to deal with terrorist financing. those are things we could and should doondz should do more aggressively. the national defense authorization is coming. it's coming soon. we need to give great military clarity, not only rules of engagement on the battlefield but what is the clear purpose militarily for the united states in this battle against radical islam? number three is tougher for this nation parntsly. toss believe and understand that iran is one the key areas in this fight. i believe this administration

has been too eager to believe good news about iran and is ignoring the concerns that many of us hold. i've stood here several times in the past year to speak out against the president's reckless nuclear deal with the iranian ayatollah. i didn't like it then. i still don't like it and i still don't believe iran can be trusted to carry out its end of the bargain. i recently offered a resolution that clearly authorizes the resolution how to respond if and when iran breaches the nuclear agreement. we should reapply a wave of sanctions and u.n. security counsel resolutions and limit their ability to input equipment so they can stop fortifying their operations. as i've said many times, until iran proves it is a peaceful, reasonable player in the middle east, the international community must be vigilant at pushing back against iran's harmful and destructive

influence amongst its ma neighb. last woke i spoke with adam szubin and he communicated to me exactly what everyone already knows and fears: that iran has become even more of a destabilizing factor in the region after the nuclear deal was signed. this is clearly evident in iran's support for terrorism and terrorist organizations like hezbollah, their propping up of the assad regime in syria, a government which continues to blow up its own people and butcher its own people. and iran's shipments of weapons to rebels in yemen to be able to fuel their civil war there on saudi arabia's border. we haven't dossed iran's testing of ballistic missile, in direct violation of international law. if iran can't be trusted to uphold the law now, how can it be trusted to uphold an agreement it hasn't even signed? , the joint exreengive plan of

action? let's be honest about this. regardless of what some people may say about the momentum and the reformist inside of iran, iran's foreign policy, especially in dealing with the united states, runs through the ayatollah khomeini, and he has made it crystal clear that his regime is built on called islamic view and his particular view of shia islam that though it is opposed to isis, is supportive of spreading their views around the world. and it is absolutely anti-american. it's essential that treasury continue to completely shut down irng's access to the u.s. dollar. and it is essential that treasury regular us arely enforce the stillstanding human rights and trim-related human rights on iran. i spoke with d.n.i. clapper just a few weeks ago. jim clapper when i asked the director of national intelligence, has there been any

change in iran's focus on being the largest state sponsor of terrorism in the world? this administration's director of national intelligence said there's been no change in iran's behavior since the nuclear deal was signed in relation to terrorism. we should not -- we should not release known terrorists or bring them to u.s. soil. i can't believe i have to even raise this as an issue in this nation. we should keep guantanamo bay, what is known as gitmo, that detention facility open and operational rather than releasing known terrorists back into the battlefield or bringing them to the united states. in this area of -- in this era of growing threats, why would we irresponsibly release these individuals? senator kirk and i althoughing within four other members of this body, introduced a bill last week to prohibit the president from transferring

terrorists detained in guantanamo bay to any other state that -- where they may go and actually sponsor terrorism. it is not a hard decision. it's common sense. our bill is very clear. if those individuals are transferred out of guantanamo to some other state and then they later commit some act of terrorism, that state's foreign aid is cut off. the expectation is if these individuals go to that location, that location is going to actually monitor them. now, americans assume that at this point but it's not happening. senator inhoffe and i will introduce a bill later today which prohibits the transfer of the united states to the united states or the release of terrorists at guantanamo. it also goes farther than what we do with senator kirk's bill and it prohibits the president from closing the facility entirely. the president should not risk our nation's national security

just to fulfill some campaign promise that makes absolutely no sense and puts our nation at risk. the executive branch occasionally laments congressional engagement in foreign policy but this is the way the american people speak out because the people in oklahoma are absolutely concerned about what's happening in national security and they want this administration to hear it loud and clear. there seems to be no clear plan and the plans that are clear seem to weaken our resolve on national security. so today i simply ask my colleagues to join me in doing what the people that we represent sent us here to do: assume the mantle of responsibility as leaders, that we are not afraid to work with this administration or any administration and take responsibility for setting the nation's national security agenda. it must be done. it can't be done just militarily, but it must be done

in a broad method of reaching out not only strategically through our state department and diplomatically but also militarily with a clear focus to make sure that we protect the nation. don't release terrorists and actually do what we are supposed to do, guard this nation's security. with that, mr. president, i yield back. i would note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

the presiding officer: the assistant democratic leader. mr. durbin: i ask consent the quorum call be suspended. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. durbin: if you ask most americans what's the difference between a for profit college university, a not for profit university, a private university, most of them would say i'm not sure i could tell you. well, certainly for profit by definition is a business. it is primarily a business that generates a profit for the company if it's successful. it pays for the salaries,

compensation of those who work for the company, and if there are shareholders, tries to increase the value of their shares, maybe even pay a dividend. for the others, the not for profit, by definition, doesn't do that. and most private universities are also not for profit. examples: university of illinois, public university. university of maryland. private universities, georgetown university, george washington university. for profit universities: the university of phoenix, probably heard of it. durye out of chicago illinois, i.t.t., these are for profit colleges and universities. are they different? they're dramatically different? let me give you three numbers that defining the difference between for profit colleges and universities and all the others. here are the numbers flt ten,

10% of all kids graduating from high school in america go to for profit colleges and universities, like the university of phoenix. these online universities, kaplan, 10% of the students. 20% of all the federal aid education goes to fo for profit colleges and universities. why is it twice as much as the percentage of students? they're darned expensive. they have tuition that's much more costly usually than other colleges and universities. 10% of the students, 20% of the federal aid to education, and the next number is 40, 40. 40% of all the student loan defaults in the united states of america are students attending for profit colleges and universities. 10% of the students, 40% of the student loan defaults. why? the answer is obvious.

they're very expensive. students who enroll and start on the courses at for-profit colleges and qliewfortses -- universities get in over their head and drop out, the worst possible outco. here they are -- outcome. here they are deep in debt with no degree and fall into default on their loan. after they stacked up all this debt, they graduate from a for-profit college and university and find out the diploma is worthless. that's the reality of higher education in america today. for quite a long time, i've come to the senate floor and talked about the for-profit colleges and universities. i got into this by meeting a young woman from a southern suburb of cook county. she went to a place called westwood college, for-profit college and university based out of colorado.

she'd been watching all these nrchlts c.i. -- n.c.i. shows and the rest of them. she was caught up in law enforcement. she wanted to get into law enforcement. so she enrolled at this for-profit college westwood and started attending classes. well, it turned out to be expensive. and then it turned out to be a disaster. five years later she graduated and received her diploma from westwood. she took the diploma to police departments and sheriff's offices all around the region and they looked at her and said, sorry, that's not a real university. you've gone to school there five years and i know you have the diploma but we don't recognize westwood. westwood college is not a real university. so she found out her dip bloam ma -- diploma was worthless. she couldn't get the job. here's the worst part. at that point she had $95,000 in student debt. $95,000 in debt, a worthless

diploma. where do you turn? well, let me tell you what happened to her. she moved back in with her parents living in the basement. her dad came out of retirement, took a job to try to help her pay off her student loans at westwood, and she started to think about how do i go to a real school now, a community college or something so i can get an education? she wasted five years of her life and her decisions from that point forward will reflect the fact that she had this terrible experience. there are things which these for-profit colleges and university dos which other universities wouldn't do. i want to talk about one of them today. the abuses in this industry are clear. hundreds of thousands of students have been deceived, misled, and harassed into rolling -- enrolling in these schools where they end up with a mountain of debt and a worthless diploma. every day seems to bring news of another for-profit college scam. and i've been giving these

speeches for a while. and it keeps unfolding day after day. here's the latest. the complaint that the massachusetts attorney general filed recently against i.t.t. tech for abusive recruitment tactics. now i know this i.t.t. tech because in my hometown of springfield, illinois, at white oaks mall, they have a big sign. they look like the real thing. but when massachusetts took a look at their recruiting tactics, turned out they were lying to the students. you see, they need to lure in students to sign up at i.t.t. tech and they make promises they can't keep. and many times they lure in students who are not ready for college. why do they do that? because the minute a low income student signs up at i.t.t. tech, the pell grant which goes to low income college students flows through the student to i.t.t. tech. there's $5800 just for being low income and signing up, not to mention what follows, the

college student loans. if the student's lucky, if they're lucky, the for-profit college will lead them to the college loans sponsored by the government. those are more reasonable, but if they're unlucky, they get steered by these for-profit colleges to private loans with dramatically higher interest rates, and terms which are not the least bit forgiving. and you say to yourself, well, these students ought to know better. just how smart were you when it came to the ways of the word when you were 19 years owe he owe world when you were 19 years old? how much did you know about borrowing $10,000 when you were 19 or 20 years old and they shove across the desk a stack of papers and say if you'll sign these for your loan, you'll be able to start classes monday. you know what happens. the students sign up. they've been told their whole lives this is what you need to do when you finish college, you go -- finish high school, you go to college.

well here's another part of it that's very important. right now the department of education is working on new federal regulations. so that when the students go to these for profit schools or any school for that matter, and the school engages in unfair deceptive or abusive conduct, there's some protection. the department is set up for rule making. because the negotiations with outside stakeholders hasn't reached a consensus, so they're still working on the rule. let me talk about one issue that i think is critical that's under consideration by the department of education when it comes to these for profit colleges. mandatory arbitration clauses. you're going to find at for profit colleges, virtually no other college, a little paragraph stuck in that loan agreement, stuck in your enrollment contract which says if you have any grievance with that for-profit school, if you think they deceived you,

defrauded you, lied to you, if you think that you got in debt for a promised degree that was going to lead to a job, you can't plead your case in court when you sign this agreement. you have to go to mandatory arbitration. mandatory arbitration for those not familiar with it is a closed door process. and the company, the school in this case, sets the standards about who will decide your fate and whether anything about what happened to you ever becomes public. why do the for-profit schools do this? they don't want to be taken to court. no company does. they certainly don't want to face a class action lawsuit by the students who have been defrauded by these for-profit schools, and they certainly don't want the department of education to know that a certain number of students at a for-profit school have a grievance with the way they're treated. so they come up with these mandatory arbitration clause,

documents a student has to sign to go to class. students by and large don't even see them. they're buried in a document. and if they did, they would find it hard to even explain. these clauses require students to give up their right to a day in court. it means, for example, that if a student is misled or deceived by the school's advertising, web site, a student goes into debt, then can't find a job or can't qualify for a job that they promised you could, you don't get a day in court. instead, the student is forced into the secret arbitration proceeding where the deck is stacked against them. it allows students to avoid -- pardon me, it allows schools to avoid accountability for misconduct. it prevents pis prevents perspes from knowing that there were an awful lot of students at the same school that had the same bad experience. it is fine for schools to give students a choice of arbitration. but to say it is mandatory, you

have no other choice? that's wrong. mandatory arbitration clauses are not used by legitimate not-for-profit colleges and universities. not-for-profit colleges, public and private, are comfortable with being held accountable to the students. they don't require mandatory arbitration for the students to sign up for classes. the association of public land grant universities, the national association of independent colleges and universities, the association of community college trustees, the american association of collegiate registrars and admissions officers -- they've all confirmed what i've just said. but unfortunately mandatory arbitration clauses are a hallmark of the for-profit college industry, used by nearly all major companies. devie, university of phoenix, i.t.t. tech, just to name a few. these same clauses were used by a for-profit school called corinthian. you split heard of that one -- you might have heard of that one because it went bankrupt. what happens when a for-profit

college goes bankrupt? they've received the money through the student from the federal government. they've received all those pell grants. they've received the moen for government loans -- they have received the money for government loans. now they are officially out of business. where does that leave the student in we give them a pretty tough choice. first choice: keep the credits and transfer to another for-profit school. is that worth the effort? wcialg the student has to -- well, the student has to decide. or drop those credit hours at the for-profit school and drop your loan. you don't have to pay it back. who loses in that deal? the taxpayers. the taxpayers have sent thousands of dollars to these worthless for-profit schools. so i'm hoping the department of education will promulgate a rule which protects students and their families when it comes to these for-profit schools. there's one last thing i want to say about college loans and it probably is the most important thing. if you borrow money for a car who are a home or a piece of

property somewhere or to buy some goods and then fall on hard times, somebody in the family gets sick, big medical bills, lose a job, a divorce, and you are forced into bankruptcy court to clear your debts, you're going to find out if you have a student loan, you can't discharge a student loan in bankruptcy. is iit means, frankly, it's witu for a lifetime. so when grandma decides to cosign her granddaughter's college loan and her granddaughter defaults on the loan, the collection agency calls her grandmother. we've had cases that have been reported where grandmothers have their social security checks basically gar garnished to pay f the granddaughter's student loan. it is a debt frankly that will be with you for a lifetime. thhy tat's ws conversation is

so important. a few years ago the for-profit colleges and universities ended up with the same treatment as every other college and university, and they, too, when it comes to student debt have their investment protected because the student cannot discharge it in bankruptcy. i think the department of education has the authority to: this up. i ask unanimous consent to submit a legal analysis outlining this authority. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. durbin: mr. president, countless veterans groups, consumer advocates, legal aid lawyers and student organizations support a full ban on mandatory arbitration clauses in higher education. i hope the department of education responds to this. i hope that they have the resolve and the will, the political will, to get this done. it's sad when students end up with a good diploma and a ton of debt. it is un forgivable for us to understand up when students end up with a ton of debt and a

worthless diploma from a college or university. i ask that a second statement i am about to make be placed in a separate part of the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. durbin: the federal aviation administration is now operating under its second extension. we just keep potching the system. last year the senate worked to pass a five-year transportation bill, finally, after over 30 patches of our national transportation program. both parties came together to pass the first long-term bill in over ten years. this was an important step for the nation and for my state of illinois. fixing and maintaining our infrastructure involves planning and planning includes certainty. if you don't know that you're going to be funded six months from now, it is very tough to plan a highway, a bridge, or how you're going to administer an airport. now we have an opportunity to do the same for the federal aviation administration. senators thune and nelson, republican and democrat, put together a bipartisan bill that

we're currently debating. i hope we can give this bill careful consideration. one of the items we should carefully consider is security at airports. since 9/11, we have focused more and more on the security of airports and when we hear of these terrible terrorist incidents overseas, we understand that we can't drop our guard. 32 people died in belgium. many were injured. the terrorists targeted people who were just going about their dailyroutine, catching an airplane. at the airport, two bombs were set off before any security screening took place. that should be a wake-up call for all of us. last week senator heinrich introduced an amendment i was proud to cosponsor with commonsense measures to strengthen security at u.s. airports, transits -- and places like transit stops. i am pleased the senate passed it with strong bipartisan support. it adds extra security for people taking planes and trains

before w we are vulnerable. it gives more flexibility to our states and cities like chicago, which i'm honored to represent, to use their homeland security grant funding for better protecting these vulnerable areas. and more flexibility in spending their money. o'hare is one of the busiest airports inned world. 77 billion passengers last year. chicago is also host to many national global events with millions of travelers, and we have one of the busiest networks of commuters and travelers by transit. 1.6 million people ride chicago's c.t.a. every day, getting to work by bus or train. nearly 300,000 passengers take chicago's metro commuter rail every day. we must ensure we are doing everything we can to keep them safe. communities like aurora,

illinois, will remember september of 2013. i am filing an amendment to this bill to improving security at our air traffic control facilities after the experience we had back in 2014. there was a fire at the air traffic facility in aurora. that center directs around 9,000 flights a day, over six states including the chicago region. the fire grounded thousands of flights. it's impact was felt for two weeks. it caused $5.3 million in damages to the facility, the traffic control facility, and hundreds of millions of dollars in economic impact. the air traffic controllers and local police and fire department did all they could do but there turned out to be bigger issues at play here. that was case of arson by an employee at the air traffic control facility. i think went in and actually saw the damage that he did. following the incident, i worked with the f.a.a., called on the

department of transportation to investigate what happened, come up with recommendations on how to improve security. after the investigation, f.a.a. and d.o.t. found that there was not enough focus on insider threats and clearly better equipment is needed to help communication from going down. once again we're dealing with an area that is not as secure it is a should be -- as it should be. the amendment i offered builds on some of the recommendations. it requires the f.a.a. to make a plan to work with law enforcement and other authorities in the event of an incident. it requires the if a to develop guidelines for training and response to security threats and active shooter incidents a understand to ensthiewr as the f.a.a. makes investments in infrastructure and basic equipment such as electrical systems and telecommunications, they think about resil resiliend survivability. we learned those lessons the hard way in shivment -- in chi. i hope the senate will take up

my amendment so other airports will be ready in the future. we need to have a commitment to our security at our airports and around the united states. while i'm on the subject of airports, i want to recognize my friend and former colleague in the house, congressman ray lahood. he was then named secretary of transportation by president obama. the peoria airport honored him naming their new international terminal after him. he served four years as president obama's secretary of transportation. secretary fox went out to me otherria to show his support for his predecessor. ray lahood has been and continued to be a strong advocate for illinois and for our nation's infrastructure. this is a fitting tribute and i congratulate my former colleague, congressman ray lahood, and i yield the floor. mr. rubio: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator florida. mr. rubio: thank you, mr. president.

first, i have an item that i want to speak about on the pending bill. there is another item i want to discuss first of all, but even before that i just wanted to add that i caught the tail end of the senator from illinois' statements about student loans. i can tell you when i first arrived here in the senate and i was sworn in standing right there where our pages are sitting now, i had over $100,000 in student loans that i had taken on during my undergraduate did you primarily my postgraduate. had it not been for the blessings of -- proceeds of a book that i wrote called "american son," i'm not sure i would have ever paid those loans off. i was fortunate to have got an law degree. i know firsthand the struggles that americans are facing. some students graduated from institutions with pieces of paper, degrees, that unfortunately are not worth the paper they're printed on. as a result, they are stuck with a debt that can never be

discharged. there are only two ways to get rid of a student loan: you die or you pay it off. there is a looming crisis in america of student loan debt. you won't gate loan to buy a home. if your wages are being garnished and other things that come as a result of not being able to pay it off or, it is just a re-debilitating problem that people face. we have discussed throughout the years the hope of things we can do to address that. i hope we'll have a chance do that before this congress finishes its work. i want to -- before i speak on the bill, i want to pay tribute to a distinguished group of american here roarks a group that was for too long denied the benefits they were owed. it is the 65th infantry regiment. they are known as the brinkeers. it was the only spannic unit to

fight in every globe war of the 20th century. they were denied equal combiests for their service. this is despite the enact their regiment shared equal risk and equal duty during world war i, world war ii and the korean war. they have been deducte decorater their extraordinary service. the regiment received more thank 2,700 purple hearts, 600 bronze stars, 250 silver stars, nine distinguished service crosses, and one medal of honor. there is another medal however that has yet to be presented. that will change later this afternoon. when the brinkanneers will celebrate the unveiling of the long overdue congressional gold medal. this is the highest civilian honor in the united states. the medal will be unveiled today at a hai a ceremony in the capi. it is my hope that more than --

that the more than 1,000 veterans living throughout the united states as well as the family members of those fallen and departed and missing in lacks now that at lotes -- will noknow that at least their serve has been received -- the brinkanneers never faltered or failed to prove just how valuable they are to the cause of freedom. my naiforts example is the story of operation portrix. a military exercise that occurred on the eve of the korean war. it was intended to test how the army and marines, navy and air force would do as liberators of an enemy-controlled island. the borinqueneers were tasked with playing the role of the enemy aggressors, and attempting to prevent the more than 3200 american troops from liberating the island in this exercise. and it was a task that quite frankly they were not expected to accomplish andet