A bill to require a report by the Federal Communications Commission on designated market areas.

Mr. President, today I am introducing the Small Business Intermediary Lending Program Act of 2014.

This bill would make permanent a successful small business financing program which provides startups and growing small businesses with access to capital. As a long-time member of the Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee, I have been a strong supporter of efforts to help small firms expand and thrive so they can create jobs and grow the economy.

The need for creative and effective ways to expand access to capital for small businesses is greater than ever. According to a study issued by the Brookings Institute in May, entrepreneurship is experiencing a troubling decline in the United States, a trend the authors document over the last 30 years, across all 50 States and almost all metropolitan areas. They conclude that we need to pursue policies that better foster entrepreneurship if we want to create more jobs.

One way we can foster entrepreneurship and address the lingering unemployment affecting so many of our communities is to make permanent the Small Business Intermediary Lending Pilot Program.

I proposed and helped enact the Intermediary Lending Pilot Program into law in 2010. Over the last three years, the program has provided loans of $1 million to nonprofit intermediary lenders to make small to mid-sized loans to small businesses. The program gets financing to small businesses that are not being served by banks or conventional loan programs currently available through the Small Business Administration. Small businesses seeking this flexible debt financing may have graduated from the Small Business Administration's Microloan Program, and for a variety of reasons, especially lack of adequate collateral, do not qualify for guaranteed 7(a) loans or other private capital.

Given the slow economic recovery, high demand exists for the Intermediary Lending Pilot Program. In the short life of the program, intermediaries in 20 States across the country have already made more than 300 small business loans, totaling more than $26 million. If not for the Intermediary Lending Pilot Program, the small businesses receiving these loans would have been hard-pressed to find this financing elsewhere. Almost 90 percent of the loans were in the $50,000-$200,000 range, making these loans larger than microloans. The average loan size in the pilot has been about $88,000.

The loans facilitated by the Intermediary Lending Program have done more than help small businesses; they have created or retained thousands of jobs. Building on this success and keeping the program going will strengthen our economy, get small businesses sorely-needed capital, and catalyze job creation.

Merit Hall, a full service staffing firm located in downtown Detroit, provides services and staffing to construction, landscape and facility maintenance contractors throughout southeastern Michigan. In 2013, Merit Hall received a $200,000 ILP loan to support the company's growth. Merit Hall used those funds to retain and create 10 office jobs and 300 jobs in the field. In addition, this loan allowed Merit Hall to grow their revenues to the point where they were bankable and were able to receive a $350,000 loan from a commercial bank and pay off their ILP loan.

Rubber Technologies of Coleman, Michigan, recycles tires to create premium recycled products such as playground surfacing and rubber mats. The Intermediary Lending Program loan they received will help strengthen their business, allowing them to add

equipment and retain 12 jobs. Roaming Harvest, a small business in Traverse City, Michigan, started out as a food truck and now thanks to a loan from the Intermediary Pilot program has opened a cafe featuring local food, retaining two jobs and creating two new jobs.

These small loans can add up. An intermediary lender in the state of Washington, Craft3, has already made 34 loans through the program and created 98 jobs as a result.

Intermediary lenders do more than provide loans; they provide technical assistance and counseling which often does not accompany conventional loans, helping business owners start and grow successful enterprises.

The Intermediary Lending Program is modeled after the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Rural Development Loan Program, which has existed since 1988. Like the USDA program, this SBA counterpart is a decentralized initiative relying on the capacity and market expertise of local, nonprofit intermediary lenders, but it expands this approach, serving both rural and urban areas.

The legislation I am introducing today makes the Intermediary Lending Program permanent and authorizes a funding level of $20 million for each of the next three fiscal years. The legislation authorizes nonprofit lending intermediaries, chosen on a competitive basis, to participate in the program. As in the pilot, each intermediary will receive a loan of up to $1 million at a low interest rate to create a revolving loan fund through which they will make small business loans.

The nonprofit lenders who participate in this program already tap a variety of financing programs to meet the needs of the small businesses in their states and localities. SBA has observed that one of the benefits of the Intermediary Lending Program as compared to the Microloan Program is the longer repayment term, 20 years versus 10 years, respectively. This patient capital helps to facilitate larger loans that some businesses need, up to $200,000, and it allows the revolving loan fund to revolve about 2.5 times before the intermediary fully repays the initial SBA loan.

In addition to authorizing the program, this bill makes a technical correction to the language of the pilot program. While the pilot program limited the amount that an intermediary can borrow under the Intermediary Lending Program to $1 million, it did not intend to take into account money an intermediary borrowed through other SBA programs. Unfortunately, SBA interpreted the language in a way that placed an overall cap on how much a participating intermediary can borrow from the SBA under all SBA programs. The result was that more experienced lenders with higher loan volumes, especially many strong microlenders, were unable to participate. That was simply not the intent of Congress. Rather, this program was designed to complement the microloan and 7(a) programs and add another tool to the portfolio of nonprofit community- based lenders. The bill I am introducing today changes the language to clarify our intent, maintains the $1 million loan limit, and increases the overall amount intermediaries can have outstanding from SBA under the Intermediary Lending Program to $5 million.

The Intermediary Lending Program is a small program which has already made a big difference. It is modeled on a program which has been operating successfully for almost 30 years, and it shields the government from any risks involved in lending to small businesses by having experienced intermediaries take on that risk. As we all look for ways to bolster our economy, we should build on this record of success. The Intermediary Lending Pilot is addressing a lending gap and helping create jobs across the nation. If we adopt my legislation, this program will continue to be an engine for small business growth. I urge its swift enactment.

Mr. President, I want to bring to our attention a large and growing problem laced by American workers today that has negative consequences for working families and our national economy. They are hourly service workers holding jobs that we all rely on--the folks who are serving customers in stores and restaurants, who are cleaning our offices and hotels, who are making sure that shelves are stocked, food is cooked properly, and businesses run smoothly. They are also white collar workers: professionals, managers, teachers, and more. All of these workers want to go to work and be successful at their jobs. But today, too many do not have access to one of

the most basic parts of a job: a stable, predictable schedule.

For hourly service workers, jobs are often scheduled on a ``just in time'' basis. This means that schedules are given out last minute, workers are often required to be on call, and schedules and the number of assigned hours vary week to week and month to month. Schedules are often made with no input from workers or consideration for family needs or even sleep time. A worker may have 8 hours of work one week, 24 hours the next week, and no hours for the next two weeks. A worker may have the night shift followed by the day shift, or a split shift with a few hours in the morning and a few more hours in the evening. A worker may show up after arranging and paying for child care and taking a 2 hour trip by public transportation, only to be sent home for lack of work. Assigned time on schedules is a perk, while being left off the schedule is a punishment.

These abusive scheduling practices mean that workers often can't predict their income, which makes it very difficult to budget and pay bills. It also wreaks havoc on family life. Working parents can't be home for family dinner, help with afternoon homework, or put kids to bed. Workers with elderly parents or relatives who are in need of care cannot be available when they are needed. And the inability to predict a schedule means that taking classes or getting a second job to further one's career or increase income become difficult to impossible. And yet, because these practices have become so common among hourly service jobs, moving to a different job is not an option. Workers are simply stuck.

Meanwhile, white collar workers are working longer than ever. They have to stay late long into the night and come in on the weekends. If they want a 40-hour workweek or time with family, they are too often criticized as uncommitted to the job. They, too, miss family dinners and other family events. They, too, are unable to be with children or elders when their care is required.

What these workers have in common is their lack of control over their hours and their schedules. That is why I have joined with Senator Warren and Representatives George Miller and Rosa DeLauro to introduce the ``Schedules That Work Act.'' This bill will help workers to meet scheduling challenges in ways that respect their needs and the needs of businesses.

First, the bill will allow all workers, both hourly and salaried in any job or industry, to make requests about their schedules, and it will prohibit retaliation against them for doing so. Employers will be required to engage in an interactive process in response to scheduling requests--much like that required to determine reasonable accommodations under the Americans with Disabilities Act. An employer has to consider a request, consider alternatives, and provide an answer to a worker's request. Certain requests will have some extra consideration: if an employee makes a request because of caregiving duties, to deal with a serious health condition, to take a career- related training or education course, or to meet the demands of a second job in the case of part-time workers, then an employer must have a bona fide business reason to deny the request. This ``right to request'' will open a line of communication that ensures workers have a voice but respects employers' business needs.

Second, the Schedules That Work Act will ensure that workers in retail, food service, and janitorial and cleaning jobs are paid when they are required to report in or be on call. If a worker is scheduled for at least four hours and reports to work, the worker must be paid for at least four hours, even if she is sent home early. An employer will have to provide an extra hour's pay if he requires an employee to be on call. If an employer schedules a ``split shift''--with non- consecutive shifts within a single day--a worker will earn an extra hour's pay.

Finally, this bill will require 2 weeks' advance notice of schedules for workers in retail, food service, and janitorial jobs. If changes are made with less than 24 hours' notice, employers will be required to provide an extra hour's pay. While employers can continue to make changes to schedules, we hope that this requirement will reduce the chaos that can be created by continual last-minute scheduling.

A schedule should be a basic part of almost any job. Predictability and stability in hours helps workers meet their personal and family demands. In turn, workers are more likely to stay in their jobs, reducing the expensive turnover that can cost businesses dearly A simple consideration like advance notice of a schedule goes a long way toward creating good will, fostering loyalty, and raising morale among employees.

What this bill is really about, at its heart, is respect. Respect for workers' lives and businesses' needs. I encourage all of my Senate colleagues to join me on this bill.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I come to the floor today to discuss the importance of community banks to our financial system and economy. Community banks are critical to the economic recovery and success of our local economies and small businesses. As our Nation continues to recover from the worst recession since the Great Depression, we need to do everything possible to provide measured, targeted regulatory relief for community banks, who were not part of the problem during the financial crisis.

America's nearly 7,000 community banks are the primary source of lending for our Nation's small businesses and farms. Though they compose just 10 percent of the banking industry by assets, community banks make over 57 percent of outstanding bank loans to small businesses. In Louisiana, we have approximately 140 community banks. These institutions are vital parts of their local communities; their boards are often made up of local citizens who are personally invested in advancing the interests of the towns and cities in which they live.

Today I am offering a very simple, common sense provision that would cut back on some of the onerous regulations community banks are facing without compromising the safety and soundness of our financial system or important consumer protections. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, CFPB, released its final rule on consumers' ability to repay mortgage loans under Dodd-Frank in January 2013. The final rule, implemented in 2014, defines the qualities of a ``qualified mortgage'', QM, which presume that the lender has satisfied the ability to repay requirements. While I was encouraged by many aspects of the rules, I feel there is more to be done to ensure that community banks and Main Street lenders are not stifled by onerous regulations.

My bill will allow any residential mortgage held in portfolio by lenders with less than $10 billion in total assets to qualify as a ``qualified mortgage.'' A strong indication of a bank's view of the credit risk of a loan is the decision to hold a loan in portfolio. When a bank holds a loan in portfolio, rather than selling in on the secondary market, it assumes 100 percent of the credit risk, so it has the incentive to ensure that each and every loan is well underwritten and affordable to the borrower. Community banks are in the business of knowing their borrowers, understanding their ability to repay and structuring loans accordingly. This protects the financial health of borrowers, lenders, and the economy as a whole.

I am proud to also serve as a cosponsor of S. 1349, the Community Lending Enhancement and Regulatory, CLEAR, Relief Act, which was introduced by my colleagues, Senators Moran and Tester and contains a number of other regulatory relief measures for small and community- based lenders. I encourage my colleagues to support these provisions to help community banks serve their customers, protecting the well-being of borrowers, and spur economic growth in local communities across the Nation.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Let Our Communities Access Local TV Act, or the LOCAL TV Act.

I am pleased that I've had the opportunity to collaborate with my friend and colleague, Senator Fischer, and I know we both look forward to working with our fellow colleagues on the Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee to see that this legislation is enacted.

The LOCAL TV Act directs the Federal Communications Commission to study the impact of media market areas and to assess their impact on the ability of individuals to receive relevant, local news and information.

The current structure of media markets is one in which market areas can sprawl across State lines, creating situations in which you can live in one State, but be exclusively saddled in the media market of another.

My state of New Jersey is particularly affected by this situation because

it is one of only two States in the entire Nation that is served exclusively by out-of-state media markets. We are served by New York and Pennsylvania--both great places but not New Jersey.

Why does this matter? When someone in Patterson, Freehold, or Cape May, New Jersey turns on their local broadcast station--they are lucky when they find stories about their community's latest news, schools, and our local governments. This kind of New Jersey news, unfortunately, takes a back seat to that of neighboring Philadelphia and New York.

These pre-determined media markets often stifle our ability to hear about what's happening back home. We hear more about Philadelphia and New York City than we do about Morristown, Montclair, Camden and Jersey City.

To be sure, broadcast TV plays an important role in communities. It is particularly essential during emergencies and extreme weather events--for instance during Hurricane Sandy in 2012. Even while technology continues to grow and change the way we receive information, still 74 percent of adults get their news from their local broadcast stations, or from their broadcasters' websites.

Because of the existing digital divide, the number of people who rely on broadcast television is even higher when we look at low income communities. We owe them quality coverage of the local news and information they care about.

It is my hope that with further study and recommendations from the Federal Communications Commission we can continue the dialogue on how stations can best serve local communities, especially those who find themselves in media markets that cross state lines. I urge my colleagues to support the LOCAL TV ACT so that we can obtain more data and information on these markets.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Let Our Communities Access Local TV Act, or the LOCAL TV Act.

I am pleased that I've had the opportunity to collaborate with my friend and colleague, Senator Fischer, and I know we both look forward to working with our fellow colleagues on the Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee to see that this legislation is enacted.

The LOCAL TV Act directs the Federal Communications Commission to study the impact of media market areas and to assess their impact on the ability of individuals to receive relevant, local news and information.

The current structure of media markets is one in which market areas can sprawl across State lines, creating situations in which you can live in one State, but be exclusively saddled in the media market of another.

My state of New Jersey is particularly affected by this situation because

it is one of only two States in the entire Nation that is served exclusively by out-of-state media markets. We are served by New York and Pennsylvania--both great places but not New Jersey.

Why does this matter? When someone in Patterson, Freehold, or Cape May, New Jersey turns on their local broadcast station--they are lucky when they find stories about their community's latest news, schools, and our local governments. This kind of New Jersey news, unfortunately, takes a back seat to that of neighboring Philadelphia and New York.

These pre-determined media markets often stifle our ability to hear about what's happening back home. We hear more about Philadelphia and New York City than we do about Morristown, Montclair, Camden and Jersey City.

To be sure, broadcast TV plays an important role in communities. It is particularly essential during emergencies and extreme weather events--for instance during Hurricane Sandy in 2012. Even while technology continues to grow and change the way we receive information, still 74 percent of adults get their news from their local broadcast stations, or from their broadcasters' websites.

Because of the existing digital divide, the number of people who rely on broadcast television is even higher when we look at low income communities. We owe them quality coverage of the local news and information they care about.

It is my hope that with further study and recommendations from the Federal Communications Commission we can continue the dialogue on how stations can best serve local communities, especially those who find themselves in media markets that cross state lines. I urge my colleagues to support the LOCAL TV ACT so that we can obtain more data and information on these markets.