Soo Locks Modernization Act

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Affordable Health Insurance for the Middle Class Act, a common sense fix to improve affordability of health insurance on the individual market. I am pleased that Senators Hassan, Warren, Harris, Baldwin, and Leahy have joined this bill as original cosponsors, and I appreciate their support.

Since its implementation, the Affordable Care Act has helped to expand health care and control out-of-pocket costs for millions of Americans. Over 20 million people who were previously uninsured now have coverage, there are no yearly or lifetime limits on coverage, and no one can be denied coverage or charged more based on their gender or because of a pre-existing health condition. The Affordable Care Act also expanded the individual marketplace, through which 18 million people currently get their coverage. Individuals who make between 100 and 400 percent of the federal poverty level, and who do not have affordable employer coverage available to them, can receive a tax credit subsidy to help pay for insurance on the individual market. This credit limits the cost of insurance at 9.69 percent of an individual's income.

However, someone who makes just one dollar above the income threshold immediately loses all federal assistance. This `cliff' unfairly impacts middle-income Americans who are by no means wealthy, but who make just barely too much to qualify for the tax credit. I am particularly concerned about my constituents between the ages of 50 to 64, who are facing higher premiums as they age and who need access to health services but are not yet eligible for Medicare.

To address this issue, the Affordable Health Insurance for the Middle Class Act would eliminate the current cliff, and instead gradually phase out federal assistance based on income. Nobody would pay more than 9.69 percent of their income for insurance, and once someone's premium fell below this threshold, they would no longer receive federal assistance.

For example, in my hometown of San Francisco, a 60-year-old making $50,000 currently pays $946 per month for the second-lowest cost Silver plan and does not receive federal assistance. Under this bill, their premium would be capped at $404, or 9.69 percent of their income, and the tax credit subsidy would cover the rest. This bill would create a fairer and more predictable system, ensuring that consumers on the individual market know just how much their insurance will cost and will have affordable options available. The Affordable Care Act has reduced costs and expanded benefits for many Americans, and it is critical that we build on this progress to further improve the law--not destroy it.

The bill is supported by a number of organizations, including the American Association of Neurological Surgeons, AANS, Child Welfare League of America, Congress of Neurological Surgeons, CNS, Families USA, Lung Cancer Alliance, and National Farmers Union.

This legislation is a simple fix that provides relief for middle- income

Americans and strengthens affordability protections for coverage through the individual market. I urge all of my colleagues to cosponsor the Affordable Health Insurance for the Middle Class Act. Thank you Mr. President and I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I am pleased to join Senator Grassley in introducing the Trafficking Victims' Protection Act of 2017.

Last week, I met with a remarkable group of anti-trafficking stakeholders in Fresno, California, who reinforced what I have long held to be true: stamping out the horrific crime of human trafficking must be among our top priorities as lawmakers. At our meeting, Central Valley law enforcement, service providers and, most importantly, survivors of human trafficking educated me about the nature and prevalence of sex and labor trafficking in the Central Valley. I learned that counties like Fresno and Tulare serve as key stops along major California trafficking circuits, with victims as young as 10- years-old being shipped to Los Angeles, Las Vegas and beyond. I also learned that in 2016 alone, Fresno Police arrested more than 140 sex buyers and traffickers. This tells me that the demand for trafficking is far too high. Central Valley law enforcement and service providers are working together to reduce this demand, crack down on traffickers, and better serve victims, through a unique, highly-coordinated and victim-centered approach that I believe ought to be emulated nationwide.

Over the past seven years they have teamed up to identify and critically to provide comprehensive services to nearly 500 trafficking victims. When Central Valley law enforcement took down a trafficking ring last year, the ring leader and two of his associates were arrested and prosecuted, and approximately 50 victims were rescued, including 23 children. These victims were all provided with wraparound services, and the ring leader was sentenced to 40 years in prison. This is the kind of coordinated, victim centered work we need to support and replicate nationwide. The Trafficking Victims' Protection Act of 2017 aims to do that.

I have now met with law enforcement, service providers and survivors representing Southern, Central and Northern California. All have made one thing abundantly clear: lawmakers at all levels of government must commit whatever time and resources are needed to thwart this horrendous crime.

Over the past two decades, Congress has taken action to combat human trafficking. We passed the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 and, 8 years later, passed the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act. And two years ago, Congress passed the Justice for Victims of Human Trafficking Act--a landmark piece of legislation. The law focuses on reducing demand, rescuing victims, educating law enforcement and judges, and making sure that trafficking enterprises are put out of business. But it is clear that our work is far from done. The human trafficking industry continues to be one of the biggest criminal enterprises in the world and it is constantly evolving. The use of the internet to sell children for sex has escalated dramatically over the past several years.

In my home State, District Attorney Nancy O'Malley and her pioneering anti-trafficking team identified 47,719 internet users looking to purchase sex in Alameda County alone during a single month. Many of the victims posted on these sites are underage. In one survivor study, a staggering 75% of minor sex trafficking victims reported being bought or sold online. And last year, the Washington Post reported devastating accounts about human trafficking is also committed by Islamic State fighters, who sell young girls over platforms such as Facebook.

The bill that Senator Grassley and I have introduced includes a provision that would give to law enforcement an additional tool to prevent human traffickers from accessing the internet and other tech platforms to sell minors for commercial sex. Under current current law, it is a criminal offense to advertise commercial sex acts with a minor. This legislation would add civil injunction authority to the criminal provision, providing the Department of Justice with a more readily accessible tool to deny human traffickers access to tech platforms to commit trafficking crimes. The bill also supports and strengthens efforts to prevent, detect, and respond to human trafficking crimes.

It allows school resource officers at schools to train school personnel to recognize and respond to signs of child sex trafficking. This is important because kids are often recruited at schools. In one heartbreaking case in Oakland, California, a 12-year-old student with top grades suddenly changed her normal behavior. She stopped completing her assignments, became withdrawn, and began wearing provocative clothing. Eventually, she stopped going to school altogether. Her parents contacted the school looking for her, but no one was able to locate her. She was discovered 24 hours later on an online sex advertisement based out of Los Angeles. This 12-year-old girl had been groomed by a trafficker--but no one was able to recognize the signs of exploitation. Teachers and school personnel interact with these kids every day. They are critical in recognizing which kids are at risk or are about to become exploited. We need to be sure that they are familiar with the patterns and practices of human traffickers, and know how to identify and respond to suspected victims.

In addition to working with Chairman Grassley on the reauthorization

bill, I am also pleased to cosponsor Senator Cornyn and Senator Klobuchar's Abolish Human Trafficking Act of 2017. One of the most important provisions of this bill is the mandatory designation of at least one Human Trafficking Justice Coordinator in each United States Attorney's Office. This is critical to ensure that our judicial system treats human trafficking offenses with the seriousness they deserve. Among other responsibilities, this Coordinator will be responsible for assisting in the prosecution of human trafficking cases. This includes the prosecution of those who solicit minors for commercial sex, a change in the law that was enacted in the Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act.

In 2015, former United States Attorney Eileen Decker conducted one of the first federal prosecutions of a buyer under this new statute. The buyer, a 59-year-old man from Torrance, admitted to lying to federal prosecutors about his conduct with a 16-year-old girl he met online and hired for commercial sex acts. He was sentenced to 57 months in prison. Former United States Attorney Decker remarked that this case should serve as a warning to adults who engage in this type of criminal conduct.

It is critical that such prosecutions continue. Stemming the abuse and exploitation of trafficking requires confronting not only the predatory suppliers, but also those who solicit young girls for commercial sex. The designation of a Human Trafficking Justice Coordinator would ensure that those who violate human trafficking offenses, both buyers and sellers, are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. The Human Justice Trafficking Coordinator would also be responsible for ensuring the collection of restitution for victims.

Restitution for trafficking victims is mandatory under federal law. Moreover, the Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act requires the Justice Department to train prosecutors to seek restitution for trafficking victims, regardless of whether the victim requests restitution. Yet, we continue to see our judicial system failing to do right by victims. In a 2015 law review article, the Human Trafficking Pro Bono Legal Center reported on the appallingly low rates of restitution orders in human trafficking prosecutions. In a study of federal human trafficking cases brought over a four period, federal courts failed to order restitution in nearly two-thirds of cases involving sex trafficking offenses. And shockingly, they found that the victims least likely to obtain restitution orders were children trafficked in the sex industry. Less than one in three defendants who commit sex trafficking offenses against children were ordered to pay restitution to their victims. This is unacceptable.

Furthermore, even if restitution is ordered against a trafficker, restitution itself is not being effectively collected. In response the requests from the Judiciary Committee, the Attorney General included restitution order and collection data in the Department of Justice's report on trafficking for fiscal year 2015. Of the $4,268,358 ordered in restitution in 2015, only $987 was collected.

While we may not expect to see full restitution collected in the year it is ordered, it is shocking that the total restitution collected is less than 1% of what was ordered.

That is why we have tried to include additional restitution provisions in the bill to better support victims. For example, there is an additional provision in the bill to update the Combat Human Trafficking Act of 2015, a bill that I authored with Senator Portman. That bill mandated extensive training on restitution for prosecutors and judges. It is our hope that with these updates--and with the recent enactment of the Justice for All Reauthorization Act of 2016 to make sure that prosecutors are held accountable in seeking restitution-- victims will be better supported going forward. I am hopeful that we will be able to pass these bipartisan bills this Congress. I urge my colleagues in this body to support the passage of this important, comprehensive legislation to protect trafficking victims.

Mr. President, I thank my colleague from New York for yielding, as well as for the tremendous work she and our staffs have done together on the Flood Insurance Affordability and Sustainability Act of 2017.

There is a capriciousness of flooding which makes the National Flood Insurance Program so important. You can have a mountaintop village next to a dry gulch. If there is a sudden flash flood, folks who have lived there 100 years suddenly find their 100-year-old homes destroyed. The NFIP helps rebuild the lives of those who are so affected.

The Flood Insurance Program is critical, not just to that mountaintop village but, by extension, our entire country. The economic impact of flooding extends far beyond real estate transactions to the fundamental vitality of communities and the workforce that operates our ports, develops and refines our domestic energy, and produces our seafood and agriculture for global consumption. It just makes sense.

Most towns started on the coast and on riverways because that is how goods were transported, and the history of these waterside communities is what makes them, one, economically vital, but, two, also makes them susceptible to flooding. I will note that the Presiding Officer's State of Pennsylvania, I believe, has among the most incidents of flooding in our country--principally because there are so many riverine systems. There is a valley with a river. If the water rises quickly, that riverside community is flooded. Look at my State of Louisiana. It relies on an accessible and affordable flood insurance program, but that benefits the country.

Louisiana is the No. 1 producer of offshore oil and gas, producing over 15 percent of our Nation's domestic energy supply. That is 15 percent of our Nation's domestic energy supply. It is home to the second largest refining capacity in petrochemical industry. The Gulf of Mexico is home to 11 of the top 20 U.S. ports by cargo volume, and we have one of the largest seafood industries in the world. After Hurricane Katrina, when our port facilities were affected and the farmers in the Upper Missouri suddenly could not get their crop to international markets, it shows the importance of our ports for our entire economy.

The National Flood Insurance Program allows folks in my State to participate in a working coast that gets that energy inland and gets those products in the international market, and this is what provides the value-added contribution to our domestic economy. Since the creation of the National Flood Insurance Program, people in Louisiana paid over $5 billion in flood insurance premiums, but, unfortunately, we have suffered some of the greatest losses after Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, Gustov, Isaac, and the flooding of the great Louisiana floods of last March and August.

While the NFIP has a deficit of $24 billion--according to FEMA's premium and payout data--the NFIP would have had a surplus if we remove the 2005 loss year, including the losses incurred after Superstorm Sandy. I will also note that New Orleans flooded because federally built floodwalls designed to protect those businesses and families were constructed in a faulty way. This has been recognized, and their failure is what led to the expense. I am not here to say that NFIP doesn't need reforms--it needs reforms--but to underscore the fact that the program has worked for many years despite its failings. We need to reauthorize the NFIP and use the opportunity to improve the program, make it more affordable, transferring more risk to the private sector at a lower cost, increase investment mitigation, modernizing flood mapping to produce greater accuracy, and improve the transparency and accountability of all the participants that operate and administer the program.

There are a number of constituencies interested in long-term reauthorization of NFIP. Senator Gillibrand and I know that the issue of flooding crosses party and geographical lines. We wanted to set the right bipartisan tone as Congress begins to debate the issue by introducing our bill, the Flood Insurance Affordability and Sustainability Act. We hope the legislation will contribute to the ongoing discussion and work the committees of jurisdiction are conducting as we move toward reauthorization of the NFIP and with the needed reforms that enhance affordability and sustainability of the program.

Senator Gillibrand and her staff are passionate advocates for an affordable and sustainable flood insurance program. I am glad to work with her on this issue. We have listened to many stakeholders: bankers, realtors, homebuilders, flood plain managers, insurers, reinsurers, mapping experts, local government officials, financial experts and, most importantly, homeowners who work on our working coast and who have so much invested in making sure they can live and raise their families in a way which has protection from the capriciousness of flooding.

I thank my colleague from New York, as well as Senator Capito, for her contribution to this legislation and process.

Mr. President, I rise to speak in support of the Customs and Border Protection Hiring and Retention Act, or CBP HiRe Act.

In recent years, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, or CBP, has had a lot of trouble recruiting, hiring, and retaining personnel to adequately staff the border and our ports of entry. Today, CBP is nearly 1,000 officers below the mandated staffing levels. The Border Patrol, whose duty it is to secure 6,000 miles of borderlands, suffers from a shortage of more than 1,800 agents. These shortages persist, despite ample backing and funding from Congress and the threat they pose to both national security and trade-reliant communities and economies, particularly in my State of Arizona. This has been frustrating for border communities across the country, but it is especially problematic for Arizona, a State that depends on both border security and a lot of cross-border trade.

For example, the Nogales port of entry in Southern Arizona is one of the busiest ports in the United States. It processes approximately $2.5 billion worth of produce each year. Arizona alone does about $15 billion in trade with Mexico alone, every year. Mexican shoppers spend about $8 million in stores in Arizona every day.

However, the port currently is suffering from a 23-percent shortage of CBP officers. Our ports cannot effectively and efficiently facilitate the flow of commerce across the border without adequate staffing.

One of the biggest challenges in both retaining and hiring new officers and agents for frontline positions has been the remoteness of CBP installations. CBP officers and border agents are often stationed in geographically remote and isolated locations. This likely contributes to the fact that, of those leaving the agency, nearly 30 percent of Border Patrol agents and over 10 percent of CBP officers are lost to other agencies.

Massive staffing shortages aside, CBP is barely able to hire fast enough to fill the jobs left by departing agents and officers. So we have great needs that are not being filled, but we also have attrition we simply can't replace. In fact, CBP hires only 1 out of every 64 applicants for officer positions, and 1 out of every 113 applicants for Border Patrol agent positions. This means that less than 2 percent of applicants manage to get through CBP's hiring process. The situation at CBP today is simply unsustainable.

Congress can't sit idly by as slow hiring rates and accelerating attrition threaten the security of our borders and the underpinnings of our economy. To that end, I am pleased to introduce my CBP HiRe Act with Senator

Heitkamp from North Dakota. This legislation would streamline the hiring process and allow the CBP to finally bring more agents and officers into frontline positions.

Importantly, this bill gives CBP new tools to recruit and retain personnel in remote and hard-to-fill locations. This includes special salary rates and recruitment, relocation, and retention incentives.

In addition, the bill will eliminate bureaucratic redtape by giving CBP the authority to use direct-hire authority and to expedite the hiring of qualified applicants. Right now, the situation is that they have to deal with other Federal agencies and get virtually every incentive and program they want to approve and need to approve to hire more officers. They have to run it up the flagpole so many times with Federal agencies that it simply takes too long.

Lastly, the bill prevents CBP from disclosing an applicant's polygraph results with another Federal agency or non-Federal employer. Challenges relating to the administering of the polygraph have resulted in approximately 65 percent of the individuals failing the test.

Think about that. People who are in another law enforcement position, even those who have taken a polygraph before just a year or two prior-- many of them fear that a false positive on a polygraph exam might impact their ability to move to another Federal agency if that is disclosed. If you have a polygraph, which can't be used in courts of law because it is not perfect or nowhere near perfect, then Federal agencies shouldn't be able to forward that to other Federal agencies. It acts as a big disincentive for people to apply for these positions because a false positive on a polygraph exam might imperil their chances to work for another Federal agency or to work in law enforcement later in their career. This also creates a disincentive, as I mentioned, for individuals to want to be hired by CBP.

In Arizona, safety and prosperity are inextricably linked to CBP's ability to secure the border and facilitate trade. The CBP HiRe Act will give CBP the tools and flexibility necessary to accomplish these missions.

I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan solution, and I look forward to seeing it move through the Senate without delay.

Mr. President, I rise to speak about legislation I am introducing with my colleague from Michigan Senator Stabenow to authorize funding for a new Soo Lock.

Since 1855, locks at the St. Mary's River have allowed ships to pass between Lake Superior and Lake Huron. In modern times, this waterway has allowed large freighters to move coal, iron ore, and agricultural products throughout the Great Lakes. The Soo Locks are the most important link in a critical supply chain that connects iron ore mines in Minnesota and Michigan's Upper Peninsula with steel mills and manufacturing facilities all across the country.

During World War II, Congress authorized funding for a new lock because it was clear the country's ability to move iron ore to steel plants in Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania was absolutely critical for the war effort. It took less than 2 years to complete that project after Congress authorized the funding in 1942.

President Roosevelt signed an Executive order establishing the military district of Sault Saint Marie, and the Army stationed 10,000 troops there to defend the Soo Locks by land, air, and sea--so great was the fear that a German attack would instantly cripple Allied efforts to produce steel and weapons.

Today, there is only one Soo Lock--the Poe Lock--that is large enough to accommodate modern freighters, especially the 1,000-foot-long vessels that move millions of tons of iron ore each and every year. Over 80 percent of the commodities that flow through the Soo Locks must pass through the Poe Lock, and each one of those 1,000-foot freighters carries the equivalent of 3,000 truckloads of commodities. It is not possible to move that amount of iron ore in these 1,000-foot freighters by rail or by road, and on top of that, the steel mills are only equipped to handle the iron ore supply by water.

A study conducted by the Department of Homeland Security in 2015 confirmed that it is the Achilles' heel of our economy. Key findings from the Department say: ``A disruption of the Poe Lock likely will cause an almost complete shutdown of Great Lake steel production.''

The report goes on to say: ``A shutdown of Great Lakes steel production likely will cause almost all North American appliances, automobiles, construction equipment, farm equipment, mining equipment, and railcar production to cease within weeks.''

Within weeks. The Homeland Security report estimates that 11 million Americans would lose their jobs if this were to happen.

Consider the fact that the jobs of millions of American workers depend on the ability of large ships to pass, as depicted, from here to here on the St. Mary's Falls Canal. Currently, there is only one lock that can accommodate this task. If this lock shuts down, steel plants in Ohio and Indiana and Kentucky shut down. Auto plants in Texas, Tennessee, California, and Michigan shut down. The American economy shuts down. The losses would be felt throughout the United States, wherever steel is used in the manufacturing process.

We are taking an unacceptable risk if we do not act swiftly to ensure that there is a backup in the case of a lock failure. That is why I am joining Senator Stabenow and members of the Michigan congressional delegation from both parties to introduce a bill that would authorize the funding for constructing another larger Poe-sized lock. The current authorization for the project is far below projected cost estimates. Our bill, which was introduced today, if enacted, will allow the Army Corps to move directly into the design and construction phase. We do not have a moment to lose.

Just last week, I traveled to the Soo Locks for a tour with members of the Michigan congressional delegation, and we saw firsthand how the dedicated men and women of the Army Corps are working to keep the locks functioning. They go to work each and every day with a full understanding of how the safety and security of the Nation rests with their ability to maintain this critical infrastructure. It is a credit to the skill of the Army Corps of Engineers that freighters have been able to pass through the St. Mary's on their journeys around the Great Lakes almost without interruption. But they are working with equipment that has been maintained well beyond its life cycle and in some cases beyond two life cycles. When I was there last week, I saw 100-year-old water pumps still in use.

We cannot continue to rely on the infrastructure investments made by our grandparents and great-grandparents. It is time to invest in our country and the well-being of our economy for future generations and pass the Soo Locks Modernization Act.

Mr. President, I rise to speak about legislation I am introducing with my colleague from Michigan Senator Stabenow to authorize funding for a new Soo Lock.

Since 1855, locks at the St. Mary's River have allowed ships to pass between Lake Superior and Lake Huron. In modern times, this waterway has allowed large freighters to move coal, iron ore, and agricultural products throughout the Great Lakes. The Soo Locks are the most important link in a critical supply chain that connects iron ore mines in Minnesota and Michigan's Upper Peninsula with steel mills and manufacturing facilities all across the country.

During World War II, Congress authorized funding for a new lock because it was clear the country's ability to move iron ore to steel plants in Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania was absolutely critical for the war effort. It took less than 2 years to complete that project after Congress authorized the funding in 1942.

President Roosevelt signed an Executive order establishing the military district of Sault Saint Marie, and the Army stationed 10,000 troops there to defend the Soo Locks by land, air, and sea--so great was the fear that a German attack would instantly cripple Allied efforts to produce steel and weapons.

Today, there is only one Soo Lock--the Poe Lock--that is large enough to accommodate modern freighters, especially the 1,000-foot-long vessels that move millions of tons of iron ore each and every year. Over 80 percent of the commodities that flow through the Soo Locks must pass through the Poe Lock, and each one of those 1,000-foot freighters carries the equivalent of 3,000 truckloads of commodities. It is not possible to move that amount of iron ore in these 1,000-foot freighters by rail or by road, and on top of that, the steel mills are only equipped to handle the iron ore supply by water.

A study conducted by the Department of Homeland Security in 2015 confirmed that it is the Achilles' heel of our economy. Key findings from the Department say: ``A disruption of the Poe Lock likely will cause an almost complete shutdown of Great Lake steel production.''

The report goes on to say: ``A shutdown of Great Lakes steel production likely will cause almost all North American appliances, automobiles, construction equipment, farm equipment, mining equipment, and railcar production to cease within weeks.''

Within weeks. The Homeland Security report estimates that 11 million Americans would lose their jobs if this were to happen.

Consider the fact that the jobs of millions of American workers depend on the ability of large ships to pass, as depicted, from here to here on the St. Mary's Falls Canal. Currently, there is only one lock that can accommodate this task. If this lock shuts down, steel plants in Ohio and Indiana and Kentucky shut down. Auto plants in Texas, Tennessee, California, and Michigan shut down. The American economy shuts down. The losses would be felt throughout the United States, wherever steel is used in the manufacturing process.

We are taking an unacceptable risk if we do not act swiftly to ensure that there is a backup in the case of a lock failure. That is why I am joining Senator Stabenow and members of the Michigan congressional delegation from both parties to introduce a bill that would authorize the funding for constructing another larger Poe-sized lock. The current authorization for the project is far below projected cost estimates. Our bill, which was introduced today, if enacted, will allow the Army Corps to move directly into the design and construction phase. We do not have a moment to lose.

Just last week, I traveled to the Soo Locks for a tour with members of the Michigan congressional delegation, and we saw firsthand how the dedicated men and women of the Army Corps are working to keep the locks functioning. They go to work each and every day with a full understanding of how the safety and security of the Nation rests with their ability to maintain this critical infrastructure. It is a credit to the skill of the Army Corps of Engineers that freighters have been able to pass through the St. Mary's on their journeys around the Great Lakes almost without interruption. But they are working with equipment that has been maintained well beyond its life cycle and in some cases beyond two life cycles. When I was there last week, I saw 100-year-old water pumps still in use.

We cannot continue to rely on the infrastructure investments made by our grandparents and great-grandparents. It is time to invest in our country and the well-being of our economy for future generations and pass the Soo Locks Modernization Act.