[background sounds]. >> follow the federal response to the coronavirus at cspan.org/coronavirus. you can find white house briefings, hearings with key public health officials and interviews with public health specialists pretty review the latest events anytime at cspan.org/coronavirus. statement cspan, your unfiltered view of government. created by cable in 1979 and brought to you today by your television provider. the u.s. senate about to gambling on this tuesday morning. senators will continue working on legislation combining more than 50 energy and environment bills. attempts to limit debate in advance the bill failed yesterday. in the meantime more than 200 amendments to the package have

been filed in there under negotiations. life coverage now to the floor of the u.s. senate here on "c-span2". ... ... ...

www.iowaculture.gov. i yield the floor and i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. mcconnell: madam president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent that further proceedings under the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: yesterday evening the president, the vice president, and their task force offered an extensive public briefing on ongoing efforts to combat this new virus, which has spread from china throughout the world. as the director of the c.d.c. explained, officials are now tracking more than 500 cases across our country. nationwide, the risk to any individual american remains low. but as the vice president and the experts reminded us, the time is now for all americans to engage in basic commonsense measures and for americans at heightened risk to take additional precautions. detailed recommendations for individuals, families, and employers are available online

at coronavirus.gov. president trump also announced that in parallel with the public health response, his administration is considering ways to mitigate the impact of the virus on our economy. senate republicans look forward to discussing this with secretary mnuchin and the president's team so we can all consider the best ways to move forward for the american people. and as our government continues to prepare and protect our nation, i would urge all of our colleagues on both sides of the aisle in both chambers to put reflexive partisanship aside. this virus does not care -- does not care -- about partisan divisions. this disease poses a challenge, no question. but our nation is well-aequipped and we have overcome far, far

greater challenges before. as the vice president put it yesterday, we're all in this together. now, on another matter, this week we had the opportunity to pass major legislation to strengthen our domestic energy. chairman murkowski, senator march chin and the energy and natural resources committee have assembled a strong, bipartisan bill. i luke forward to passing t i was disappointed yesterday when the senate failed to advance and clear a path forward to completing the bill. the committee's product includes about 50 different bills and contributions from nearly three-fourths of the members of this body and contrary to the democratic leader's assertions on the floor, i'm certainly not blocking any bipartisan amendments. i've stated right here on the floor that i hope and anticipate that we will vote on amendments this week. so don't be fooled by the finger-pointing. i am not standing in the way of bipartisan amendments. what is really helping is that the democratic leader is -- what

is really happening is that the democratic leader is moving the goalpost. there had been a bipartisan understanding about how to finish this bill. but yesterday the democratic leader decided to change his tune and demand a vote on something outside the scope of the current debate. i hope we can get past the showmanship, finish this bipartisan legislation and send is it to the house so we can get it on the president's desk. let's don't squander this real opportunity. chairman murkowski and senator manchin's compromise product will help our nation move toward greater energy efficiency and affordability for years to come. new support for energy efficiency efforts, new incentives for innovation, new tools to secure our electrical grid, new ways to strengthen our domestic supply chain for important minerals, and on and on and on. this chamber got it right last

week when it proceeded to the bill by a vote of 90-4. it hadn't suddenly become controversial overnight. everyone knows there are plenty of outside issues that senators do not agree on. we should let ourselves agree on what we do agree on. let me say that again. we should let ourselves agree on what we do agree on and complete this legislation this week. let's keep legislating. let's get it done. the american people deserve it. now, on a final matter, this afternoon all senators will have the opportunity to attend a briefing on election security from administration experts who tackle the issue every day. the f.b.i. director, the acting secretary of homeland security, general nakasone of the n.s.a., and entirety command, hand a number of other senior leaders will come here to the capitol to discuss this critical subject. i look forward to hearing about the significant and strong steps the trump administration has

taken over the past three years to secure our democracy and punch back against the real and varied foreign efforts to interfere. i look forward to hearing more about the unprecedented level of coordination that has connected nonpartisan federal experts with all 50 states, u.s. territories and thousands of local jurisdictions and private-sector leaders to make sure the unpreparedness and inaction that defined the obama administration's failures in 2016 was not repeated in 2018 and will not be repeated in 2020 or beyond. i look forward to hearing about how the record sums of money -- hundreds of millions of dollars that congress has put aside -- for direct grants so state and election officials can shore up their systems are making our democracy safer. i expect i'll have more to say following the briefing. i expect many of our colleagues will, but beforehand, i'd like to say this.

the american people have confidence in our democracy, as they should. just last month a survey found that more than 70% of americans are confident their state or local government will conduct a fair and accurate election this november. just last month -- let me say this again -- a survey found that more than 70% of americans are confident their state or local government will conduct a fair and accurate election this november. and they should be confident about the resilience of our institutions. our nation is strong. the trump administration has made huge strides, and after eight years of weakness, this administration's foreign policy has made it clear to our adversaries that the united states of america is not going to be pushed around. but the american people also know we must remain vigilant. as long as russia and other nations seek to meddle, we need to be ready.

election security is critically important for our nation, and it can only be handled right if it is handled with good faith and bipartisanship. but washington democrats used this particular topic as a platform for demonizing the other side or for pushing tangential policy proposals which the left has sought many years, many years before 2016, everyone can see right through it. it only signals unseriousness. so i encourage all my colleagues to attend the bipartisan briefing today, and then let's preserve that bipartisan spirit and that unity. let's focus on fighting against foreign interference, not fighting each other. we should not just snap right back into tired old partisanship. we should not let putin or anyone else bait americans into talking down our own democracy or sewing more -- sowing more fear and discord among ourselves than our adversaries could ever

hope to do themselves. i understand there is a bill at the desk due a second -- the presiding officer: under the previous order -- the clerk will read the title of the bill for the second time. the clerk: s. 3422, a bill to amend united states code, and so forth and for other purposes. mr. mcconnell: i ask for a second reading. mr. mcconnell: in order to place the bill on the calendar under the provisions of rule 14, i would object to further proceedings. the presiding officer: objection having been heard, the bill will be placed on the calendar.

mr. mcconnell: i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

the presiding officer: the democratic leader. mr. schumer: are we in a quorum? the presiding officer: we are. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent the conform be dis -- the quorum be dispensed with. the presiding officer: we are. mr. schumer: before i get to remarks about the coronavirus, i want to mention leader mcconnell did not give the right story when he talked about the energy bill. 13 democrats voted for cloture. 15 republicans opposed cloture.

it was a republican, senator kennedy, who led the charge to deny cloture, and that it was well known that democrats simply wanted an amendment on the kennedy bill. a republican amendment wanted the ability to vote, and once again leader mcconnell, because he do not allow amendments and debate and instead adds more items to his legislative graveyard, the bill went down. but 13 democrats voted for cloture. so if he had had his republican troops together, he might have been able to pass it anyway. so to blame democrats and say we're moving the goalpost is just a total misstatement of what happened. now on covid, as our country continues to experience the spread of coronavirus, covid-19, the effects are beginning to be more acutely felt. first and foremost, our hearts go out to the families of those who have lost loved ones during

this illness. second, our health care systems are under tremendous stress. businesses have been forced to cut back. and the virus is already starting to take a toll on the economy. as the impact of the coronavirus spreads, the administration appears to have shifted its focus, holding a press conference yesterday to talk about measures the administration might pursue to calm the markets. i would remind the white house that by far the best way to ensure economic security for the american people is to deal directly with the coronavirus itself. again, getting a handle on the crisis and addressing the virus itself is by far the best way to respond to any negative effects on our economy. the administration seems to believe that the answer to any problem is another tax cut.

and no matter how -- no matter what they say about it when they put it together, it always seems to benefit the wealthy and the big and powerful corporations. but this is a health care crisis. it demands a health care solution. to borrow an expression, you must treat the disease, not the symptoms. mr. president, do you hear that? you must treat the disease, the coronavirus. not the symptoms, which is the result of the coronavirus, which is the economy. the president only wakes up to a problem after it has an effect on wall street, and his solutions are often aimed misguidedly, only at calming the nerves of those on wall street. the real answer in this case is to protect the american people, focus on their health and economic security and competently respond to the public health crisis at our

doorstep. speaker pelosi and i have mentioned several actions we could take. from paid sick leave for impacted workers, to unemployment insurance, food and housing security, and protections against price gouging. but one thing the administration must focus on right now above all is fixing the problems we're having with testing. the most powerful tool in responding to a virus is to know precisely where it is and how it is spreading. because the administration took weeks before they developed an accurate test, because the administration was slow to ramp up the number of americans tested and is now having trouble turning around the results of those tests at a fast enough pace, we are now far behind where we ought to be in understanding how far the virus

has already spread. the united states has the best hospitals, doctors, and scientists in the world. yet, currently we are lagging far behind other countries when it comes to testing our citizens. we're behind the united kingdom, behind france, behind china, behind switzerland, the netherlands, israel, japan, and italy. every day we read a new story in the press about americans having difficulty getting a test for a coronavirus, even though they are displaying symptoms. our own secretary of health and human services was unable to say how many americans have been tested. it is shocking, it is infuriating. if other countries can do this, why can't we? if other countries do it right, why can't we? south korea, which has far more prevalent amounts of coronavirus, is already seeing the number of new reports go down because they've done

extensive, thorough, and accurate testing. the results here, why we are not doing as well as other countries, is a direct result of the colossal failure of leadership and planning from this administration and this president. one word describes the trump administration's response to the coronavirus so far -- incompetence. i know there are hardworking c.d.c. scientists and experts trying to help the american people. the political appointees are the ones who seem not to get it and are putting politics over the safety and security of the american people, and it goes right to the top. in the midst of a public health crisis, a serious and dangerous public health crisis, the president has repeatedly pushed unscientific claims about the coronavirus and the availability

of a vaccine and given bad advice -- bad advice -- to americans who might have symptoms. if the president would just keep quiet, it would be better than what he's doing now which is negative. but what we really need is leadership. more than ever we need the president to drop the conspiracy theories, end the optimism and unscientific speculation. now more than ever we need president trump to lead our government's response with competence and to be truthful with the american people. as i said yesterday, we're all rooting for that, but the president and his administration must take a hard look in the mirror, focus on the problem at hand, not the side effects, and get to work on fixing it. now, h.r. 1. this past sunday marked one year since the house passed h.r. 1, the for the people act.

this bill takes urgent and long overdue steps to renew our democracy. it will reverse the corrupting effects of citizens united. it will restore protections for voting and will take aim at washington's culture of corruption which has run rampant under this administration. it could not come at a better time. every election we see the sweeping power of big money. state legislatures have found new ways to deny americans, often minorities, access to the ballot. our adversaries, including the russians, work day and night to influence our elections and sow confusion in the public sphere. h.r. 1 would forcefully and directly address each of these issues. but like every other bill passed by the house over the past two years, it has been buried in leader mcconnell's legislative graveyard. we must move it.

this bill is about making our democracy work and giving american citizens some faith in the future. republicans rather than working with democrats to strengthen our democracy, have stood in the way. they have blocked election security legislation and sanctions to deter foreign adversaries from trying to interfere in our democracy. they have enabled president trump's assault on the separation of powers through their silence on the president's many abuses of power. even today the republicans are putting forward a nominee for the federal election commission who expressed doubts regarding the benefits of even the most reasonable restrictions on campaign spending including disclosure. when h.r. 1 first passed the house, leader mcconnell called this bill to restore voting rights and get money out of politics a terrible proposal and a power grab. well, if leader mcconnell thinks that getting big money

out of politics is a terrible idea, if he truly believes making it easier for americans to vote is a power grab by democrats, then god help the republican party and god help this country. madam president, democrats will not stom fighting for this -- not stop l fighting for this bill, nor will we ever stop fighting to restore the democratic values that have guided our nation for two and a half centuries. in the united states, each person's vote should have the same weight as everyone else's. that's a hallmark of our democracy. a fair and free election is the wellspring of our democracy. it's what americans have died for in the battlefields around the world, what civil rights activists have marched for across the bridges and the generations. and though the republican leader has been adamant in his opposition to this legislation, the american people, thank god, will have a chance this november to elect a new senate that will move this country in a

dramatically different direction. i yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

thune madam president? the presiding officer: the majority whip. mr. thune: madam president, is the senate in a quorum call? the presiding officer: we are. mr. thune: i would ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be lifted. the presiding officer: without objection. under the previous order, the leader is reserved. morning business is closed. under the previous order, the senate will resum consideration of the s. 2657, which the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 357, s. 2657, a bill to support innovation in advanced geothermal research and for other purposes. the presiding officer: the majority whip. mr. thune: thank you, madam president. madam president, the united states is poised for nationwide deployment of the next generation of internet technology, 5g. 5g will mark a giant leap forward for internet technologies, delivering speeds that are up to 100 times faster

than today. it will be vastly more responsive and be able to connect 100 times the number of devices that can be connected with 4g. while that will make it even easier to do the things that we do today, like check our e-mail or stream our favorite shows, the biggest benefits of 5g lie in the other technologies that it will enable -- precision agriculture, medical and surgical innovations, safer vehicles, and more. madam president, 5g is already being deployed in cities across the country including sioux falls in my home state are introducing 5g networks. but there's still work to be done before it will be extended nationwide. like all internet technology, 5g relies on radio spectrum or what we commonly call the airwaves. in the united states, radio spectrum is owned by the american taxpayer but is licensed to companies who make

use of the spectrum to broadcast tv and radio programs, connect cell phone calls and transmit internet data. radio spectrum is divided into bands -- low band, midband and high band according to frequency and wavelengths. current wireless technology mostly relies on low-band spectrum. but 5g will require the full spectrum -- low band, midband, and high band. the united states has done a good job. but we still need to free up more midband spectrum to see full-scale 5g deployment. midband spectrum, madam president, is crucial to 5g. it combines strong data capacity with good geographical coverage and allows 5g signals to penetrate buildings in more urban areas. and midband speck frum is particularly crucial for rural 5g deployment as it provides

less populated areas. the current chairman of the commerce subcommittee on communications technology and the internet, i have been working on 5g for a number of years now. in 2019, my mobile now act was passed. this past november, the 5g spectrum act was passed which which are the federal election commission to free up the c-band for 5g use. while congress did not enact our legislation, at the end of february, the federal election commission announced that it would make 580 megahertz available for c-band. currently it is licensed by satellite companies who use the spectrum for television and radiobroadcasters. under the f.e.c.'s new rules, the majority of this midband spectrum will be made available.

they will still be able to provide the services they currently provide. the licenses for the remaining portion of the c-band spectrum will be returned to the government which will then offer up the spectrum to wireless companies in. satellite companies will be reimbursed for the cost for relocating their services and will be offered incentives for moving their operations quickly so space can be freed up as soon as possible. madam president, i was very pleased by the f.e.c.'s decision which i think provides the most expeditious and efficient way to free up the necessary midband spectrum. some have argued that rather than reimbursing satellite companies, the government should just pull the satellite companies' licenses. but there are a number of problems with that approach. first of all, while it's true that radio spectrum is owned by the taxpayers, satellite

investors have invest add lot of money. while they will still have enough c-band spectrum to provide all their current services, shifting their operations to the upper band will require substantial investment and it is fair that they be reimbursed for this. furthermore or, reimbursing companies and providing incentives for them to quickly free up spectrum is the fastest way to make that spectrum available. simply demanding that companies relinquish their control of a substantial portion of the c-band could tie the government up in litigation for years while countries like china take the lead on 5g. finally, setting a precedent for the government to see spectrum licenses would create a disadvantage. why should companies invest major sums of money in bringing next-generation technologies to market if they're like lay to have the licenses on which those

licenses depend seized without warning. the truth is that taxpayers will see a bigger return for deficit reduction, rural broadband, and other priorities if companies are incentivized to invest. madam president, the united states was at the head of the 4g revolution and we need to ensure that we are at the head of the 5g revolution as well. winning the race to 5g will provide huge economic benefits and it will allow the united states to set security standards for telecommunication networks worldwide. i'm very pleased that the f.e.c. has acted to free up midband spectrum needed for full-scale deployment of 5g around the country. and i will continue to work to ensure that american companies and american workers have the resources that they need to bring us into the 5g future. madam president, i yield the floor.

mr. durbin: madam president? the presiding officer: the democratic whip. mr. durbin: madam president, perhaps later today or perhaps one day in week on the senate floor we will have a debate and a vote, and that vote literally will decide the future for over 200,000 young americans. now, politicians and elected officials are prone to exaggeration, but i don't exaggerate when i say that because we will have an opportunity here to debate and vote on a system that was put in place years ago to protect students from being defrauded by the colleges they attend. it's called the borrower defense program. it was started years ago, and it was really designed for the rare situation where a student would take out a government loan to go to college after the college

made misrepresentations about the education they offered. the student would rely on those misrepresentations, sign up for the school, sign up for the government loan, and learn to their disappointment months or years later that the school had lied to them. the school may have told them that if you take this certain course at this school, you will qualify for a certain job or licensure. the school may have misrepresented to the student that the courses that they took at the school could be transferred to other schools, if the student decided to go to a different university to complete their education. the misrepresentation may have been something as basic as all of our professors and instructors at this school have certain college degrees, qualifying them to teach you. or the school may have misrepresented to the student that if you complete this

course, here are the jobs that are readily available to you to fill. students listened to those promises, sometimes relying on them, oftentimes signing loans with the federal government that need to be paid off later, and then they learned they were lied to. and because they were defrauded or lied to or misrepresentations were made, we set up a provision in the law that said, there's a way out for the student. you just don't end up holding the bag here when a college or university, which the united states government has recognized as accredited -- when they lied to you, you're not left holding the back. there's another way out. our department of education will take a look at your circumstances, decide whether there's evidence that this school has lied to you, misrepresented, and if we find

it, we can restructure or forgive some part or all of your student loan. you know, that makes all the difference in the world to these students because here they are holding the bag with tens, if not hundreds of thousands, of debt because of lies that were made by the schools that tried to entice them into enrollment. it's called the borrower defense program. under president obama, thousands of students came to the program and said, we were lied to by these schools. most of the schools are for-profit colleges and universities. one of the most notorious -- corinthian colleges, now bankrupt and gone. but for years enticing thousands of americans into their programs, young students, signing them up for courses, making them sign the loan agreements, and then after that was done, the students learned later on the education was

virtually worthless. well, what happened to corinthian? well, the people who started this for-profit college and university did quite well, thank you. all these students paid thousands of dollars to them, and even though they misrepresented the school to the students, they ended up taking the money, going home into bankruptcies, the school still faces the school and its future and the students are left holding the bag. that's the unfortunate reality that we face. we can do something about it today. the secretary of education, mrs. devos, has decided to change the way that students have to go through proving up their losses, and that's why we're here today. the house has voted overwhelmingly saying secretary devos' approach was unfair. i'll describe to you why we think it's unfair. what we're asking for members of the senate today to do is to take an honest look at the

plight of these students and decide whether or not they are entitled to any relief. under the proposal by secretary devos, we estimate that fewer than 3% of the students will receive any kind of relief because of the approach that she use. what we can do today is to reject that approach. we're not suggesting an alternative approach. we think that we should sit down with the department of education and actually negotiate a better way to deal with this. i've talked to members on the republican side about doing just that. but the first step is to stop this new rule by secretary devos, and that will be an opportunity we have today. if we stop these rules that she has promulgated, then the students have a chance, a chance to have some part of their student loan forgiven, perhaps all of it, if they can prove through evidence that they've been defrauded. let me be more specific about what we're facing here. in 1992, congress added a

provision to the higher education act, which i've just described, called the borrower defense program. it allowed student borrowers defrauded by their schools to have their federal student loans discharged. consequently rightly didn't want students left hoe -- congress rightly didn't want students left holding the back because the schools had been guilty of misconduct. it was a rarely used portion of the law until the year 2014, with the collapse of the for-profit giant corinthian colleges. corinthian had lied to students one after the other. they inflated their job placement rate saying to the kids, take these courses and there are plenty of jobs waiting for you. they took out loans for students without the knowledge of the students, and then they lied tote students about -- lied to the students about employers recognizing their degrees. but corinthian was not unique.

nearly ever other major for-profit college has been the subject of lawsuits for similar practices. since 2015, just five years ago, nearly 300,000 student borrowers, mostly from these for-profit colleges, have applied to our u.s. department of education for borrower defense discharges. what they have said is we were lied to. these schools lied to us about what the education would mean to our futures. they enticed us into student loans. and we learned too late that we had been the subject of this fraud. and now because our lives have been compromised with the great debt that we carry, we're asking for conversation, we're asking for relief from a 1992 law that had been established. almost 220,000 of these students have filed claims with the u.s. department of education. they are pending at the u.s.

department. do you know how long they have been waiting for a resolution so they know if they can get on with their lives? many of them have been waiting for years. the claims come from every state in the union, large, small, red, blue, purple. it doesn't make any difference. sadly, it's not going to stop. the department of education estimates show nearly 200,000 borrowers, student borrowers will be subject to illegal practices by their schools in 2021 alone. as schools continue to make these misrepresentations to students. with their new borrower defense rule, secretary devos at the department of education will make it virtually impossible for these future defrauded borrowers to receive the borrower defense discharge that congress intended. the devos rule places unreasonable new burdens on defrauded borrowers, including requiring the student borrowers

to submit evidence that they will have to obtain by hiring lawyers and private detectives. for example, deyou frauded borrowers have to show that the school intentionally misled them. how are they supposed to do that? in addition, the rule requires defrauded borrowers to apply and submit evidence individually instead of being able to apply as a group when many borrowers have experienced similar misconduct across a program in their school. think about these schools that have been investigated by so many different states and found guilty of predatory practices exploiting these college students who have been found guilty of defrauding these students by state after state after state under the new rule by secretary devos, future efforts to be discharged under this borrower defense program, each one of the students has to lawyer up. each one of the students has to hire an investigator. what is the likelihood of a

student, burdened with debt, struggling to find a job, is going to go out and make those expenditures? well, it's next to nothing. in fact, it turns out to be about 3% of the students who are likely to take advantage of that. secretary devos is basically telling these student borrowers you're on your own. lawyer up. hire a private detective to find the evidence. that is unfair and unrealistic. we need to go no further than the department's own statistics to realize that 97% of the students have no chance under this devos rule. only 3% by the expert's best testimony have a chance of recovering under this new approach. and that's the rule that we will get a chance to vote on this week. whether or not that rule should continue. the department claims that these new hurdles for borrowers are necessary to guard against fraudulent claims, but there is no evidence, none, of widespread

fraud among the 300,000 borrower defense claims that have already been submitted. in fact, the department itself notes that it does not have sufficient information to determine the extent of any potential fraud. so this notion that secretary devos rule is needed because of fraud in the department, there is no evidence of that whatsoever. the new rule just means that defrauded borrowers with legitimate claims are not going to get relief. the department also claims the devos rule protects taxpayers, shifting the burden of relief from taxpayers to the schools who commit misconduct. but it then turns around and acknowledges other changes in the rule will, in fact, reduce recoveries from schools, compared to the 2016 rule, and that means more cost for taxpayers. the truth is of the small amount of relief that will be awarded under the devos rule, schools will be on the hook for about one-third of it at most. in reality, the devos rule

achieves savings on the backs of the borrowers who were victims of fraud. it eliminates $11 billion in relief while ruing the share of relief which the schools that are guilty of fraud have to pay. the department also acknowledges that the devos rule is not expected to significantly change the percent of loan value subject to misconduct. in other words, this rule will not only generate less money from the offending schools, it is less likely to discourage future misconduct by the same schools. on the other hand, the former department inspector general said the 2016 rule would, quote, avoid costs to students and taxpayers that result in school closures. i could go on, but the bottom line is this -- if we want to stop this insidious practice of defrauding students, having them pile up debts for schools that are phony and eventually all go out of business, we have got to

have a program that is sensitive to the needs of the student borrowers and puts these schools that are guilty of misconduct on the hook for paying off rather than the taxpayers. the devos rule eliminates a prohibition in the 2016 rules that prevents schools from using mandatory arbitration and class action restriction as a condition of student enrollment. what is mandatory arbitration? it is basically saying to the student and their family you can't go to court. you've got to come to a closed room, sit across the table from one of our lawyers, and take it or leave it. that's what mandatory arbitration is all about. class action restrictions means that the students of one school which defrauded thousands of students can't come together in any kind of legal action. now, you don't see those kinds of provisions for mandatory arbitration in class action restrictions in the contracts that most students run into when

they sign up for colleges and universities. it's almost exclusively in the area of private for-profit colleges and universities. the clauses are often buried in stacks of enrollment documents that students rarely, if ever, read. it means the schools can defraud and mislead students and men are protect -- and then are protected from being held accountable in court. businesses around america are held accountable for conduct and misconduct. why would we let the for-profit colleges and universities off the hook? students have nowhere else to turn other than the taxpayers to the borrower defense program that we're discussing here. instead of allowing borrowers to hold their schools directly accountable for misconduct in court, secretary devos' rule shields these schools from accountability and puts american taxpayers on the hook. over the weekend, the "shortly observer" published a letter by

sean joyce from greensboro, north carolina. i ask unanimous consent that this letter be made a part of the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. durbin: thank you, madam president. sean is one of nearly 6,000 borrowers from north carolina who have applied to the department for a borrower defense discharge. he attended the art institute of charlotte, thinking it was his path to a successful future. he was told by recruiters the school would prepare him for a job in video game designing and that they would connect him with people who would help him land that job. that's a pretty serious promise to a young person, isn't it? he says they kept pushing him to take on more and more courses and more and more debt. he eventually had so much debt, he felt no other option than to finish the degree. he had to go all in with this school, the art institute of charlotte. he says, and i quote, as a young black man, the last thing i wanted to do was become just another statistic by dropping out of school, end of quote.

today sean owes nearly $100,000 in student loan debt for a degree that did not prepare him for a job in the very industry he was promised. when he asked the art institute about career opportunities, do you know where they sent him? craigslist. today sean works online writing telephone messages for a marketing company and attends classes at his community college where not one of his art institute credits can be transferred. he has asked the senate to overturn the devos rule. he knows the struggles defrauded student borrowers go through. i want to share with you the story of a u.s. army veteran. his name is jared thoma. jared is from the state of colorado. after jared left the army, he wanted to pursue his lifelong passion for electronics by pursuing a degree in engineering.

he signed up at the for-profit devry university in westminster, colorado. he says he quickly realized he was not getting a quality education that he was promised. course materials and equipment for instruction were subpar and not as advertised. he says although devry was more than happy to cash all of my g.i. bill benefits, my complaints about the quality of the courses they were offering fell on deaf ears. when he tried to transfer, he found out that his credits wouldn't transfer to a public university or even a community college, even though devry had promised him that they would. in addition to using his entire g.i. bill benefit for serving this country, he accumulated $52,000 in additional student loan debt to finish his program at devry. on top of that, jared says upon entering the job market, i quickly found that the degree was not worth the paper it was

printed on. it actually hurt my job prospects. jared's waiting, along with 3,800 other coloradans for the department to act on his borrow er defense request, and he has urged the senate to overturn the devos rule to help future borrowers, veteran borrowers like him. let me also show you husha burkeholder. i met her recently. she is a u.s. army veteran from lima, ohio. she enrolled in i.t.t. tech, another notorious for-profit school. after she had been honorably discharged from serving in our united states army. she was promised by i.t.t. that her g.i. bill benefits would cover the cost of her program and that her program would lead to a job in her field after graduation. at one point, she tried to transfer only to find out that other schools wouldn't accept

the credits she had earned at i.t.t. tech. she didn't have many options. she had to continue at i.t.t. not only did she exhaust her entire g.i. benefits at i.t.t. tech, she had to take on additional federal student loans despite all the assurances of i.t.t. that that was not going to happen. today tasha's student loan debt to attend i.t.t. tech is almost $100,000, beyond her g.i. benefits, all for a degree that she says no employer takes seriously. of course this puts a lot of pressure on her now. tasha is married and has a family. she is facing overwhelming stress, anxietiesy, -- anxiety, and depression because of the miserable experience she had at i.t.t. tech and the student debt she incurred. she served her country, she risked her life for america.

when it came to her g.i. benefits, she lost all of them at this for-profit school. she is asking for a chance to start over with her life, and our vote on the senate floor may decide that. she even questions herself as a wife and mother of four young children because she is unable to provide for her family, still unable to get a job in her field. she has lost cars, homes, and she has had to move from state to state. she supports overturning the devos borrower defense rule because she once defrauded veterans like her to have a shot at relief. veterans like jared and tasha are the reason that i'm bringing this matter to the floor and asking my republican and democratic colleagues to join me. so many of us give speeches about our appreciation for the veterans and their service to our country. so many of us voted for the g.i. benefit package, saying to veterans we owe it to you. you served our country. we want to be on your side after that service so you can build a

good life for america, and then schools like corinthian, schools like i.t.t. tech defraud these students out of their g.i. benefits and then pile additional debt on top of them. that's why this has become such a major veterans' issue. take a look at the veterans' organizations that support the measure that i'm bringing to the floor today. the american legion -- and i'm going to quote a letter from their commandant in just a moment. the student veterans of america. the iraq and afghanistan veterans of america. national military families association. the paralyzed veterans of america. the tragedy assistance program for survivors. vets first. vets for common sense. and veterans' education success. i'd like to show you with this last poster here a letter which i received from bill oxford. bill as you can see is national commander of the american legion. he wrote to me on behalf of two

million american legion members that he represents because he wanted to go on the record and give me a chance to bring this evidence before my fellow senators, republicans and democrats, many of them are being visited today by representatives from these veterans organizations, including the american legion. i hope they can spare a minute of time in their office in honor of these veterans to listen to the plea that they're going to make for a vote in favor of the measure that i'm going to bring before the senate. here's what bill said in his letter to me. thousands of student veterans have been defrauded over the years, promised their credits would transfer when they wouldn't, given false or misleading job placement rates in marketing, promised one educational experience and given something completely different. bill calls this rule by secretary devos fundamentally rigged against defrauded borrowers and says that it, quote, flagrantly denies defrauded veterans fair and timely decisions on their claims. bill closes his letter by

calling on congress to overturn the devos rule. how many times have each of us stood on this floor and talked about honoring the sacrifices of men and women who serve our country in uniform. well, we have a chance to do it with a vote this week to put our votes where all of our speeches have been. we have a chance to stand up not just with the american legion, but all the veterans groups which i referred to before to give defrauded student veterans and student loan borrowers a fair shot at federal student debt relief that congress intended for them. we don't do many things on a bipartisan basis around here anymore more, and it's a shame. i hope that this will be an exception. frankly, all of us have given these speeches on both sides of the aisle. all of us have said how much these veterans and their families mean to us. well now they're asking us to be on their side with this vote. i'm urging my colleagues to show america that when it comes to supporting our veterans, the senate on a bipartisan basis can

come together and do the right thing. madam president, i yield the floor.

mr. cornyn: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from texas is recognized. mr. cornyn: madam president, student debt and student loans, a frequent topic of conversation, and of course that's what we're discussing here today. as someone who took about 20 years to pay off my law school loans, this is personal. fortunately i was able to do so due to generous interest rates and lending that helped facilitate people pursuing higher education and beyond. across the united states, student loans and debt totals nearly $1.6 trillion. it has made up of some 45 million borrowers. as more and more americans are going to college and beyond, which is a good thing, this

widespread problem isn't going to to go away any time soon. i agree that we need to take some action here in washington to address the financial burden for those with existing debt and help give prospective students a better understanding of what the debt that they will assume will mean to them in their future life before it's too late. of course it's -- one of the l leading candidates for president on the other side of the aisle, mr. sanders, has suggested that we just make education free and that we eliminate all debt. well, that is a fantasy of course. there is no such thing as free. i'm tempted to quote the milton freeman, who said there is no such thing as a free lunch.

and of course what he meant by that is somebody eventually will pay. it may not be the immediate person who is the object of your bounty, but somebody will pay. and of course it's not financially responsible to just suggest you're going to wipe away all debt, and certainly not fair to those who worked hard to earn the money to pay for their school and only to find that those who did not find themselves with no debt. so we've got to come up with some commonsense answers, not just live in a fantasy land. of course to say we're going to wipe away the debt is not fair to the parents who started saving for their kids' college even before they started walking or the college student who worked multiple jobs to graduate with little or no debt at all or decided to go to a community college at a lower cost before they then transferred to a four-year institution and found a way to mitigate or keep their

debt manageable. and of course this idea of wiping away debt or making everything free is unfair to the person who chose not to go to college, only then to be saddled with someone else's debt. that's not fair. so the problem with wiping away debt is it's never really gone. you just pass the responsibility on to someone else. and we see that concept, that mentality at play here today when it comes to this rule promulgated by the trump administration that our friends across the aisle seek to reverse. last fall the department of education took a big step to forgive loans for students who had been defrauded by an institution of higher education without placing the serious burden on taxpayers. i think that's a good thing.

people who commit fraud ought to be held to account, and those loans should be forgiven. but the burden should not be placed on taxpayers. there have been similar regulations around for decades, and in 2016 the obama administration made some serious changes which actually broadened the types of claims a student could make. they issued a rule that said a school's substantial misrepresentation could result in a student's loans being forgiven. but if my time in a courtroom taught me anything, it's that a good lawyer can portray even a factually accurate advertisement as somehow a misrepresentation. there's no requirement that it be material, but just that there be some abstract misrepresentation. i don't have any doubt about the intent of the law and that the intention is good, but the concept is far too broad.

and the sad truth is being so broad is ripe for abuse. and that's exactly what the current rule in place ought to change. maintain the ability to relieve debt as a result of fraud but not make it so broad that it was subject to further abuse. the new rule establishes a clear standard for students to get individual debt relief and helps those impacted by school closures to find a way to finish their degree. it also takes big steps to hold schools accountable, which i believe is absolutely critical. we have the strange system where the school itself receives the tuition but has no accountability if the student is unable to complete their course of study or ends up getting a degree or certificate in something that does not generate the income they need in order to pay that debt back. so we need to find ways to hold schools responsible as well.

as well as prevent predatory behavior from impacting more students. for example, targeting of veterans and then draining their g.i. bill of benefits and leaving them with basically nothing to show for it. those are the types of things we ought to be focusing on. overall, this rule, the underlying rule that our democratic colleagues seek to reverse, includes commonsense reforms to ensure it achieves the goal of helping students who are defrauded while preventing taxpayers from footing the bill from a far too definition of what represents misrepresentation. in doing so it it would cause serious harm to students and schools and to the american taxpayer. they will end up left holding the bag.

rather than zeroing out the loan balance for tens of millions of borrowers or allowing broad and vague allegations of fraud, we need to look at targeted changes that can make a huge difference. one place that i mentioned a moment ago where we need to focus is our veterans. i've heard from a number of my constituents who are straddled with student debt, many before the time they actually served in the military. if someone goes to college after leaving the military, the g.i. bill rights will cover a substantial part of their education. but what about those who went to college or graduate school before they went in the military, those who took out loans prior to their service? well, in most cases the g.i. bill cannot be applied retroactively and service members are left footing the bill for an education that otherwise would have been covered if they had gone to school after their military service.

well, i don't think we should categorically exempt student debt and tuition incurred before military service, and thus make the g.i. bill of rights if you go to the military after that worth basically nothing. these men and women should have the choice and the flexibility to use the benefits they've earned to pay off their student loans. in other words, use their g.i. bill of rights retroactively just as they would be able to use them pursuing a new degree. i'll be introducing legislation soon to make that change and help our service members address loan debt using the benefits that they've already earned. we can't just look at preexisting debt, though. we need to ensure that prospective students are making wise financial decisions on the front end. unfortunately, that's easier said than done. there is no clear system that makes it easy for students to compare financial aid packages

from one school to another and decide what the true cost of each will be. many times it's like comparing apples and oranges, and sometimes it can be down right misleading. depending on how a school displays information about scholarships or other financial information, the difference in the price tag can be pretty stark. it doesn't matter whether you're a 17-year-old heading straight to college from high school or somebody who's been in the workforce for years and is now heading back to school, the process is far too confusing, and it does not need to be. there are a lot of resources to help students get a clear picture about their loan obligations and their expected salary after graduation and how that will impact their loan payments. every student who incurs a penny of debt ought to have the information they need to be able to determine whether, what

amount of debt is acceptable in light of their future earning capacity and whether they will actually be able to get a degree that will allow them to pay back the money that they borrowed for their school. and i believe that's a shared responsibility. not only is that something that the student bears responsibility for, i think the school that they attend bears responsibility as well. at the very least, we ought to provide accurate information. for example, the department of education has a calculator on their website that lets students calculate net price of a degree before ever deciding which school to go to or what kind of loan to take out. the issue, though, is that this information isn't always easy to find and colleges and universities are not doing a great job at promoting it. that needs to change. i'm a proud cosponsor of several pieces of legislation that would help prospective students better

understand the cost of their higher education on the front end. three of these bills have been introduced by our friend from iowa, senator grassley, and would simplify the process for prospective students. one of these bills would standardize the format in terms much financial aid, so these students are comparing apples to oranges. another one would have net price calculators to help students make informed decisions before deciding where to apply. the third would strengthen student loan counseling provided to schools so students are made aware of every option made available, making it less likely they'll borrow than they are likely to be able to pay. so despite what our colleagues across the aisle are saying,

outright loan forgiveness across the board isn't the only path here. there are other options which i intend to pursue to make incremental changes that will have a huge impact on people working to repay their student debt without spreading that burden to each and every single american taxpayer. while these ideas may not fit on a bumper sticker, that does not mean that they are not worth pursuing. so, madam president, i look forward to working with our colleagues to try to address this problem of mounting student debt and the difficulty many students have of paying that debt back because of misinformation or bad decisions they made unaided by the schools they attend to determine whether the degree they are pursuing and the debt they are incurring is -- we can address this

sensibly and responsibly and in a way that does not negatively affect each and every american taxpayer. madam president, i yield the floor and i would note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: quorum call:

quorum call:

the presiding officer: the senator from washington is recognized. a senator: i ask unanimous consent the quorum call be lifted. the presiding officer: without objection. a senator: i ask unanimous consent to speak as if in morning business. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. murray: thank you, madam president. madam president, later today the senate will be taking up the

borrowed defense c.r. and likely to be voting on it tomorrow. each senator will have a choice. they can side with working students or they can side with predatory, for-profit colleges. it should not be a hard choice. that choice certainly should not be partisan. students who were cheated and defrauded by for-profit colleges rn often left with crushing debt and no path forward. that's why the president helped to get the debt relief they so urgently need. but since taking office, secretary devos has put up roadblock after roadblock for students and borrowers. first she refused to implement the borrower defense rule that was on the books until a court forced her to. she stalled on debt relief to

hundreds of thousands of borrowers who were left waiting for an answer with tens of thousands of them falling into default and collections. once again, federal courts were forced to step in. now secretary devos is trying to deny full relief to students who were clearly cheated bring predatory colleges. for some people getting relief on your student debt means the difference between making ends meet or not, the difference paying your rent or not and the difference between getting back on your feet or not. now to make matters worse, secretary devos has gone further than delaying and limiting the relief. she has issued a disastrous new borrower defense rule intentionally designed to make it harder for defrauded borrowers to get relief even when predatory colleges violated

the law. it will prevent students from getting their day in court and let predatory colleges often the hook financially. this rule says in the fine print that students will be stuck repaying 97% of their fraudulent debt. the department even admitted that students will be cheated out of $2.5 billion per year. but students will only get three cents back for every dollar of fraud they experience. that is cruel and wrong. the congressional review act, or c.r.a., would immediately halt secretary devos's rule in its tracks and prevent it from going into effect. mr. president, it is time to put an end to the nonstop efforts by this administration to prioritize the interest of predatory for-profit schools over the interest of our students. and it's time for senators to decide once and for all if they will support our student loan borrowers who have been cheated

out of a quality education or help corrupt institutions with their bottom line. i want to personally thank senator durbin for his tireless efforts to push this important issue forward. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor.

lex mr. president -- mr. alexander: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. a senator: i have seven requests

for committees to meet. they have the apositively of the majority and minority leaders. the presiding officer: duly noted. mr. alexander: mr. president, if your car is a lemon, you don't sue the bank. you sue the dealer. a college can be a lemon just like a car can be. a college could promise a potential student a job and then tell them that 50% of their students scored perfectly on their s.a.t. test, potential student might use that information to take out student loans and enroll in a college. and then the information turns out to be false. the student may be stuck with student loans they can't afford to repay. but unlike a car, if your college is a lemon, you do sue the bank and the bank is the taxpayer. today democrats are forcing the senate to vote on a congressional review act that if passed would overturn the trump administration's borrower defense rule. this process allows a borrower

of a federal student loan to have their loan forgiven if their institution misled them and that misrepresentation led to financial harm. first, if your college closes, it's important for you to know that your loans are forgiven. let me say that again. if your college closes, it's important for you to know that your student loan is forgiven. there are about 6,000 colleges and universities in our country. 783 of them closed in 2018. for example, when corinthian college closed, that made a lot of news. many students, though, transferred to another college. but if they didn't transfer, they weren't stuck with their student loan. their loans were forgiven. so we're not talking about that today when we vote. if your college isn't closing but it does defraud or mislead you, then you can file a claim. you can file a claim to have your loan forgiven and you file

it with the united states department of education. there are 42 million americans with an outstanding federal student loan. in 2018 about 106,000 of those 42 million americans filed what we call borrower defense claims. they claim they were misled when -- by the college when they used their student loan to go to that college. in november of 2016, the obama administration issued a rule that required a borrower to demonstrate only that they had been misled, not that they had been financially harmed. the trump administration fixes that overly broad regulation while still protecting borrowers and the taxpayer. here's the difference. under the obama administration, if one student had filed a claim and proved that he or she had been defrauded, all the other

students in that program, all they have to do is to attest that they'd been misled in a similar way before having their loans forgiven as well. sort of a class action. it was unnecessary for the first student or subsequent students to prove that they'd been financially harmed by that misrepresentation. what this meant is, if you went to school but had misled students your loan could be forgiven even if you had a job making $85,000 a year. under the trump administration, each student needs to file a claim, prove that they were defrauded, and that they were financially harmed. and then their loan would be forgiven by the taxpayer. remember, the bank is the taxpayer. secretary devos's borrower defense rule restores the original intent of the law that a borrower must be misled and

harmed. the new rule establishes a fair and clear process for what a borrower must administrate, number one -- demonstrate that the school misled them, it two that the school relied on the misinformation to enroll in the school and the student was harmed. it ensures that the department is basing their judgment on all available information. the devos rule also protects the taxpayers who spend roughly $100 billion a year on federal student loans. it continues to allow the secretary to recoup funds from an institution who has with defrauded or misled borrowers, it doesn't involve the federal government and the new rule allows the government to evaluate the harm to each individual borrower filing a claim and gives the appropriate amount. for example, if you were told by

a school that you would make $45,000 a year by the time you graduated, but only making $40,000, the department could decide to forgive a part of your loan. the obama administration's rules went too far and allowed borrowers to have their loans forgiven whether or not they had actually suffered financial harm. secretary devos's new borrower defense rule restores the original intent of the law that the borrower must be misled and harmed. i encourage senators today to vote against today's congressional review act. i thank the president. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the senate previous order, the senate

live coverage of the senate when they gavel back in here on c-span2. >> if they if it comes out to ba campaign, it with one candidate that is standing up for the working class and the middle class, , we're going to win that election. >> for those who have been knocked down, counted out, left behind, this is your campaign. >> presidential primaries and caucuses continue tonight for six states including idaho,,

michigan, mississippi, missouri, north dakota and washington. watch our campaign 2020 coverage of the candidates speeches and results. the night live on c-span, c-span.org or listen from wherever you are with the free c-span radio app. >> during this election season the candidates beyond the talking points are only revealed over time but since you can't be everywhere, , there's c-span. our campaign 2020 programming differs from all other political coverage for one simple reason, it's c-span. we brought your unfiltered view of government every day since 1979. and this year will bring you an unfiltered view of the people seeking to stew that government this november. in other words, your future. this election season go deep, direct an unfiltered. see the biggest picture for yourself and make up your own

mind. with c-span campaign 2020, brought to you as as a public service by your television provider. >> federal response to the coronavirus is going to lead the discussion of senators attend the weekly policy meetings. president trump is in republican meeting. senate leaders began this morning with, it's on the and the government response. >> yesterday evening the president, vice president and their task force offered an extensive public briefing on the ongoing efforts to combat this new virus which is spread from china about the world. as a director of the cdc explain, officials are tracked more than 500 cases across our country. nationwide, the risk to any individual american remains low. but as vice president and experts reminded us, the time is now for all americans to engage in basic