Military Consumer Enforcement Act

Mr. President, today, along with Senators Brown, Tester, Blumenthal, Kaine, Duckworth, Warren, Baldwin, Franken, Klobuchar, Cortez Masto, Van Hollen, and Menendez, I am reintroducing the Military Consumer Enforcement Act to further strengthen consumer protections for service members.

Our Nation has a strong tradition of working to protect our service members while they sacrifice to keep our Nation, safe. Building on these efforts, Congress passed the Soldiers' and Sailor's Civil Relief Act in 1940 to provide essential financial protections for service members to ``enable such persons to devote their entire energy to the defense needs of the Nation.'' Now called the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA), this law provides such protections as prohibiting the eviction of service members and their dependents from rental or mortgaged properties and capping the interest at 6% on debts incurred prior to an individual entering active duty military service.

Despite the importance of the SCRA's protections to our service members, enforcement of this critical law has been inconsistent and subject to the discretion of our financial regulators. For example, according to a July 2012 report from the Government Accountability Office, the estimated percentage of depository institutions that serviced mortgages that were examined for SCRA compliance varied by year between 2007 through 2011 at a rate of 4% in 2007, 17% in 2008, 18% in 2009, 26% in 2010, and 15% in 2011. Without a change in the law, SCRA enforcement will continue to be subject to the changing priorities of the financial regulators, which can also change with each newly elected President. Simply put, prioritizing the consumer protection of our service members should not be discretionary; it should be mandatory. Our legislation ensures that SCRA enforcement will be a permanent priority for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, CFPB, which Congress created to enforce Federal consumer financial protection laws.

In 2010, as we debated the authorizing legislation for the CFPB, I led the bipartisan effort to ensure the CFPB would play a key role in protecting service members through the establishment of an Office of Servicemember Affairs, OSA. Since that time, the CFPB, through its enforcement actions, has helped service members recover approximately $130 million in relief from unscrupulous actors in the financial marketplace and through the OSA's monitoring of complaints, the CFPB has helped other regulators provide more than $60 million in relief for more than 78,000 service members harmed by SCRA violations. Imagine how much more the CFPB could do for our service members if it could do more than just refer potential SCRA violations to other regulators and educate service members about their SCRA rights. With this demonstrated record of success in protecting our service members, the CFPB should be empowered, as it would be under this legislation, to enforce certain key SCRA provisions, such as the protections against default judgments and being charged no more than the maximum rate of interest on debts incurred before military service.

We should do all we can to make sure there is a strong watchdog on the beat that can enforce the protections we have put in place. When it comes to the SCRA, that strong watchdog should be the CFPB. Our legislation is supported by more than thirty groups, including the National Military Family Association, the Military Officers Association of America, Veterans Education Success, Student Veterans of America, Consumer Federation of America, Americans for Financial Reform, Public Citizen, the Sargent Shriver National Center on Poverty Law, U.S. PIRG, Consumers Union, National Association of Consumer Advocates, National Consumer Law Center (on behalf of its low income clients), National Community Reinvestment Coalition, Center for Popular Democracy, Alliance for Justice, American Association for Justice, and the Center for Responsible Lending. I urge our colleagues to help honor our commitment to our Nation's service members by joining us in this effort to improve the supervision and enforcement of the SCRA.

Mr. President, today, along with Senators Brown, Tester, Blumenthal, Kaine, Duckworth, Warren, Baldwin, Franken, Klobuchar, Cortez Masto, Van Hollen, and Menendez, I am reintroducing the Military Consumer Enforcement Act to further strengthen consumer protections for service members.

Our Nation has a strong tradition of working to protect our service members while they sacrifice to keep our Nation, safe. Building on these efforts, Congress passed the Soldiers' and Sailor's Civil Relief Act in 1940 to provide essential financial protections for service members to ``enable such persons to devote their entire energy to the defense needs of the Nation.'' Now called the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA), this law provides such protections as prohibiting the eviction of service members and their dependents from rental or mortgaged properties and capping the interest at 6% on debts incurred prior to an individual entering active duty military service.

Despite the importance of the SCRA's protections to our service members, enforcement of this critical law has been inconsistent and subject to the discretion of our financial regulators. For example, according to a July 2012 report from the Government Accountability Office, the estimated percentage of depository institutions that serviced mortgages that were examined for SCRA compliance varied by year between 2007 through 2011 at a rate of 4% in 2007, 17% in 2008, 18% in 2009, 26% in 2010, and 15% in 2011. Without a change in the law, SCRA enforcement will continue to be subject to the changing priorities of the financial regulators, which can also change with each newly elected President. Simply put, prioritizing the consumer protection of our service members should not be discretionary; it should be mandatory. Our legislation ensures that SCRA enforcement will be a permanent priority for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, CFPB, which Congress created to enforce Federal consumer financial protection laws.

In 2010, as we debated the authorizing legislation for the CFPB, I led the bipartisan effort to ensure the CFPB would play a key role in protecting service members through the establishment of an Office of Servicemember Affairs, OSA. Since that time, the CFPB, through its enforcement actions, has helped service members recover approximately $130 million in relief from unscrupulous actors in the financial marketplace and through the OSA's monitoring of complaints, the CFPB has helped other regulators provide more than $60 million in relief for more than 78,000 service members harmed by SCRA violations. Imagine how much more the CFPB could do for our service members if it could do more than just refer potential SCRA violations to other regulators and educate service members about their SCRA rights. With this demonstrated record of success in protecting our service members, the CFPB should be empowered, as it would be under this legislation, to enforce certain key SCRA provisions, such as the protections against default judgments and being charged no more than the maximum rate of interest on debts incurred before military service.

We should do all we can to make sure there is a strong watchdog on the beat that can enforce the protections we have put in place. When it comes to the SCRA, that strong watchdog should be the CFPB. Our legislation is supported by more than thirty groups, including the National Military Family Association, the Military Officers Association of America, Veterans Education Success, Student Veterans of America, Consumer Federation of America, Americans for Financial Reform, Public Citizen, the Sargent Shriver National Center on Poverty Law, U.S. PIRG, Consumers Union, National Association of Consumer Advocates, National Consumer Law Center (on behalf of its low income clients), National Community Reinvestment Coalition, Center for Popular Democracy, Alliance for Justice, American Association for Justice, and the Center for Responsible Lending. I urge our colleagues to help honor our commitment to our Nation's service members by joining us in this effort to improve the supervision and enforcement of the SCRA.

Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleague from North Dakota, Senator Heitkamp, in sponsoring the School Food Modernization Act to assist schools in providing healthier meals to students throughout the country.

School meals play a vital role in the lives of our young people. More than 30 million children participate in the National School Lunch Program every school day and more than 14 million eat school breakfasts, with participation rising steadily in Maine and nationwide. In Maine, 48 percent of children qualify for free or reduced-price meals based on household income.

Moreover, the food served at schools affects children's health and well-being. Many children consume up to half their daily caloric intake at school and some get their most nutritious meal of the day at school instead of at home. At the same time, too many of our children are at risk of serious disease, which may have a lifelong effect on their health as they grow to adulthood.

In response to these health concerns, our schools have stepped up. For example, in the New Sweden Consolidated School in Aroostook County, Maine, food service manager Melanie Lagasse prepares meals from scratch instead of opening cans or pushing a defrost button. The school's 64 students, aged preschool to 8th grade, have grown to relish the chicken stew, baked fish, and meatloaf that she makes fresh.

Many schools, however, lack the right tools for preparing meals rich in fresh ingredients. Schools built decades ago often lack the equipment and infrastructure necessary to do more than reheat and serve one or two meal options each day.

To serve healthier meals, 99 percent of Maine school districts need to acquire at least one piece of equipment and almost 50 percent of districts need kitchen infrastructure upgrades. The median equipment need per school alone is $45,000. Making the required changes to infrastructure is even more costly, with 41 percent of schools needing more physical space, 22 percent more electrical capacity, 21 percent more plumbing capacity, and 19 percent more ventilation.

It is estimated that $58.8 million would be necessary just in Maine for the equipment and infrastructure upgrades needed to serve healthy meals to all of our students. That far exceeds the $89,000 in grants that the U.S. Department of Agriculture awarded Maine last fiscal year. Maine is not alone. In a recent survey of school nutrition directors, the most frequently cited financial concern was equipment costs, ranking higher than even labor and food costs.

The School Food Modernization Act seeks to help food service personnel offer a wide variety of nutritious and appealing meals and snacks to all students. First, the bill would establish a loan guarantee assistance program within USDA to help schools acquire new equipment to prepare and serve healthier meals. Second, it would provide targeted grant assistance to provide the seed funding needed to upgrade kitchen infrastructure or to purchase high-quality equipment such as commercial ovens, steamers, and stoves. Finally, to aid school food service personnel in running successful, healthy programs, the legislation would authorize USDA to provide support on a competitive basis to highly qualified third-party trainers to develop and administer training and technical assistance, including online programs

Senator Heitkamp and I appreciate that provisions of this legislation were incorporated into the Child Nutrition Reauthorization legislation that was passed out of the Agriculture Committee last Congress. We encourage our colleagues to continue to support school kitchen equipment needs as the reauthorization process continues.

Mr. President, if our school children are going to be able to learn and compete, they need to be healthy and their minds and bodies fully nourished. This bill would help us achieve that goal.

Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation to adjust the boundary of the Coastal Barrier Resources Act, CBRA, map unit for North Bethany Beach, Delaware. I am pleased to be working in this effort with the junior Senator from Delaware, Mr. Coons, who joins me as an original cosponsor.

This map change implements a recommendation made by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The Service discovered during its recent digital mapping pilot project that a portion of the North Bethany Beach unit encompassing the South Shore Marina development was included by mistake when the map was created in 1990. The Fish and Wildlife released a report to Congress in November of 2016 on the results of the mapping pilot project required by the 2006 Coastal Barrier Resources Reauthorization Act (PL 109-226). Delaware was part of the pilot project, and the report contains the recommendation for this map change.

This map change can occur only through an act of Congress.

CBRA is a map-based law enacted in 1982 recognizing that certain actions and programs of the Federal Government subsidize and encourage development on coastal barriers. This coastal building contributes to the loss of natural resources and threatens human life, health and property. The CBRA system currently contains 859 geographic units in 23 States and territories along the Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico, Great Lakes, U.S. Virgin Islands, and Puerto Rico coasts. The CBRA units are depicted on a set of maps that is maintained by the Secretary of the Interior through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

While CBRA does not prohibit or regulate development, it removes the Federal incentives to build on these undeveloped, unstable and environmentally sensitive areas. CBRA seeks to save taxpayers' money, keep people out of harm's way, and conserve natural resources by restricting most new Federal expenditures and financial assistance (e.g., beach nourishment, disaster assistance, and flood insurance) in areas designated within the CBRA system. That is why Mr. President, it is important to make sure these maps are accurate and that they do not include previously developed property. This bill will achieve that objective for the North Bethany Beach area.

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

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