National Consumer Credit Reporting System Improvement Act of 2003 - Continued

NATIONAL CONSUMER CREDIT REPORTING SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 2003-CONTINUED

HONORING AND PROTECTING OUR ARMED FORCES

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, America's burden in Iraq grew heavier over the last 7 days. In that period of time, 27 American servicemen were killed and 35 wounded. We were awakened to newspaper headlines on Monday morning of: "U.S. Copter Hit, With 16 Dead."

On Sunday, I received the sad news that the National Guard helicopter which was downed was attached to the 82nd Airborne Division and piloted by 1LT Brian Slavenas from Genoa, IL. It was shot down by a surface-to-air missile near Falluja in Iraq.

Press accounts report that the missile was likely a heat-seeking missile because it hit the engine, but, thankfully, it did not explode. The helicopter went out of control, and First Lieutenant Slavenas clearly did the best he could at crash-landing the crippled aircraft. Quite possibly he saved the lives of those who survived. Sadly, he did not.

This morning, I called the Slavenas family expressing my sympathy for the loss of their son. I have read the press accounts about his short but eventful and full life and the love which his family and so many others had for him.

This morning I heard interviews on National Public Radio of his friends talking about a great young man-this 30-year-old helicopter pilot. He had just graduated from college a few months ago. He enlisted in the Army right after high school and, having completed that stint, he enlisted in the National Guard and went to officer training school and he became a helicopter pilot. He earned a degree in engineering from the University of Illinois. Although Brian stood 6 feet 5 inches tall, he was a gentle giant. He was an accomplished pianist. His brother Marcus said, "He was very generous, very patient with people. I just loved being with him. He was my favorite person in the whole world."

I ask unanimous consent that these articles of tribute to Brian Slavenas be printed in the RECORD.

There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:

[From the Chicago Sun-Times]

(By Dave McKinney)

His brothers and his father served in the military, but when 1st Lt. Brian Slavenas was called to active duty earlier this year, his family tried to discourage him from shipping out. He could have resigned his commission in the Illinois Army National Guard and skipped the deployment that carried his aviation unit to Iraq, Despite his family's concerns, the 30-year-old helicopter pilot who had graduated from college a few months earlier decided it was his duty to go overseas with his outfit. On Monday, relatives gathered at the family home in the tiny farm town of Genoa to mourn his death spoke with pride-and some regret-about his decision to continue a family tradition of military service.
Brian Slavenas died Sunday when his CH-47 Chinook helicopter was shot down by shoulder-fired missiles in a attack that killed 16 U.S. soldiers. "We know he didn't have to be there. But he chose to go and to serve his country," said his oldest brother, Eric Slavenas, 39 a U.S. Army veteran who participated in the invasion of Grenada in 1983. "I miss him. I wish he were still here," Eric added. "But I'm not going to go against his decision. I back him 100 percent."

Brian wasn't eager to go to Iraq when he left in April, other family members said. He had completed study at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign in December with an engineering degree and was eager to get on with his career. Still, he felt obligated to go overseas with his unit. "He wasn't keen on the idea but he said, 'Once you're in, you can't cop out,' " said his dad, Ronald Slavenas, a former Army paratrooper who later served for a time with Brian in the same Illinois National Guard unit.

DRAWN BY HISTORY, ADVENTURE

During his time overseas, Brian's letters, calls and e-mails home were usually upbeat and often funny, his family said. Brian liked the adventure of being overseas in such an exotic location, Eric said, recalling that in one letter Brian described how he sipped a glass of Tang as he flew over the ancient ruins of Babylon. "He enjoyed the sights he saw, being in such a historic part of the world," Eric said. "He knew it was dangerous, but it was more of an adventure for him." At times, Brian talked of possibly staying in the military as a career, in part because he loved flying. "I think during the war, he got gung-ho about what he was doing," said his brother, Marcus Slavenas, a 33-year-old former U.S. Marine who served in Operation Desert Storm.

Brian had already served a stint in the Army, joining after he graduated from DeKalb High School, where he played drums and threw the discus. After finishing active duty, he joined the National Guard, then went to officer school and became a helicopter pilot. Along the way, he also obtained a private pilot's license and earned his degree from the U. of I. Although he stood a towering 6 foot 5 inches tall, Brian was a "gentle giant," according to his father. He was an accomplished pianist and dedicated weight lifter who could get along with just about anyone, his brother said. "He was very generous, very patient with people," Marcus said, adding, "I just loved being with him. He was my favorite person in the whole world."

Besides his two brothers and father, he is survived by his mother, a stepmother, a stepbrother and stepsister.

MAY HAVE SAVED LIVES

Brian, a member of the Peoria-based 106th Aviation Unit, was activated in February and had been serving in Iraq since April, said Brig. Gen. Randal Thomas, adjutant general of the Illinois National Guard. He had been certified to fly the CH-47 Chinook helicopter since 2002 and was flying at 150 mph at about 200 feet off the ground when it was shot down near Fallujah, Iraq. Thomas told reporters in Springfield.

"We're thankful that a number of individuals survived that crash. It would be speculative to say the pilot did his job and got that aircraft down and saved lives, but I'd sure like to believe that," Thomas said.

The Slavenas brothers say they're upset the Army wasn't taking more precautions to protect the slow-moving Chinook helicopters from missile attacks like the one that killed Brian. Since the attack, the military has banned Chinook flights during the day because the choppers are too vulnerable. "I support our military. The only thing I question is the tactics that were used in this situation," Eric said. "Someone should have had enough foresight to see ahead that a lumbering aircraft that only flies 180 miles an hour makes a good target."

Saying he "just didn't believe this was our war," Marcus isn't sure the conflict was worth his younger brother's life. "Personally, I wish these people in Iraq well, but I don't care about them like I do about my brother," he said. "I think maybe I would like to see American military used to defend America and not police the entire world."

And he regrets not trying harder to keep his brother from going to Iraq.

"We all very strongly encouraged him not to go," Marcus said. "In retrospect, I'm going to kick myself-I wish I would have tried harder.

[From American Morning (CNN), Nov. 4, 2003]

INTERVIEW WITH FAMILY OF DOWNED HELICOPTER PILOT

Soledad O'Brien, (CNN Anchor). There was more violence in Iraq this morning. Another soldier was killed, the second in as many days. The soldier was killed after an improvised explosive device, or an IED, exploded in Baghdad. Another U.S. soldier was wounded in that blast.

The attacks followed Sunday's downing of a U.S. helicopter near Fallujah, the deadliest single attack on U.S. forces since the invasion. According to eyewitnesses, the second of two shoulder-launched missiles hit the CH-47 Chinook, as it flew just a few hundred feet above the ground. The missile struck the rear engine and started a chain reaction that caused the helicopter to crash.

Most of the soldiers were heading out to begin a two-week leave when the chopper was shot down. Sixteen soldiers were killed, and among them was the pilot, First Lieutenant Brian Slavenas, a member of the National Guard from Peoria, Illinois.

A little earlier today, I spoke to his family about their loss.

Mr. Slavenas, if I can begin with you. Brian actually could have avoided deployment, but he chose not to. Tell me why.

Ronald Slavenas (Father of Chinook Pilot). Well, that's the kind of person he is. He's a responsible person, and he took on something and he brought it to completion. That's the nature of Brian. He may not like the idea, but he followed it through, and I've got to do it, and he did it.

O'Brien. I read that he felt obliged to serve his country. He was a helicopter pilot in the National Guard.

Marcus, why don't you tell me a little bit about your brother, the person, not necessarily the military man?

Marcus Slavenas, (Brother of Chinook Pilot). Not just because he was my brother, but he was really one of the best people I've ever known. Very clean living, very dedicated to what he did. If he decided to do something he did it. He focused on it and did it until he was excellent at it. He was very kind to people. He was a good person. It was not based on some rules. It wasn't based on religion. It's just the way he was. He cared about those around him and tried hard always to do his best.

O'Brien. Tell me-I know that he recently finished school. He'd gone to school for engineering. Give me a sense of what his plans were and his dreams were further down the road.

Unidentified Male. Well, we felt that Brian was probably going to get out of the military and pursue a career in engineering. He had a very promising career ahead of him. He did well in his field. I know there were a lot of companies that wanted to interview him. So, we were hoping and we all felt that he was going to continue on with the engineering.

O'Brien. Mr. Slavenas, when you first saw the reports-I have to imagine you saw the reports before you heard the news that it was Brian who was actually piloting this chopper. What was your reaction to this? And I've got to ask you, did you think after a certain amount of time that it was indeed your son who was among the lost?

R. Slavenas. Well, it crossed my mind. I thought he was further west of the area of where it happened, but he's been flying around all over Iraq, I guess, to Kuwait and back and forth. The Chinook is like a shuttle service for different units. He was flying support for different outfits. The last one for the 3rd Armored Calvary, and I thought he was further west. So, that was my kind of hope that maybe that wasn't Brian, but then later on we found the news that it was Brian, actually.

O'Brien. You served in the military, sir, and your three sons all served in the military as well. What are your thoughts about the U.S. involvement in Iraq and the occupation of Iraq right now?

R. Slavenas. Well, now that we're in, we have to stay the course. We just can't pull out. If we pull out, we'll have pandemonium. They have so many different factions in Iraq-the Sunnis, the Shiites, the Kurds, and what have you. And if we pull out now without stabilizing the situation, we'll have, as I said before, pandemonium. It would be a revolution. That's my feeling.

So, we have to keep a stabilizing cap over it and hopefully getting more help from other nations and other sources.

O'Brien. Marcus, you served in the military as well, and I know you have strong opinions on this.

M. Slavens. Yes.

O'Brien. What's your take on U.S. involvement in Iraq right now?

M. Slavenas. I don't believe we need to be there. I wish the Iraqis well, and I hope they can figure out their problems, but I don't want this to happen at the expense of our boys. I would like to see them come home. And as far as the troops go, while they're still there, I'm fully behind them. Fight as hard as you can. Destroy the enemy and keep yourselves alive and come back home. But as far as the government is concerned, please try to get out of that business and bring them back home as soon as possible.

[From the Chicago Tribune, Nov. 4, 2003]

FOR FAMILIES, SAD NEWS HITS HOME

(By Russell Working and Angela Rozas)

One soldier was going to visit his wife and three children, the youngest of whom he had never met. Another was on his way home to attend his mother's funeral. A third wanted to surprise her family in California with a two-week visit.

On Monday, the Department of Defense began releasing the names of the 16 soldiers killed when a transport helicopter was shot down in Iraq, marking the single largest loss of service members in that country since major combat ended in the spring. Another 20 soldiers were injured. Many of the dead had been heading home for vacation or emergency leave. Around the country, families that had been anticipating happy reunions instead were stunned by unexpected loss. As of Monday evening, 377 U.S. service members had died since military action began in Iraq. In that time, more than 1,836 have been injured as a result of hostile action.

Among those killed Sunday in the crash was 1st Lt. Brian Slavenas, 30, an Illinois Air National Guard pilot from Genoa who was one of two pilots on the twin-rotor CH-46 Chinook that was shot down Sunday. Four crewmembers, also National Guardsmen, were from Iowa. They were injured, but survived the crash, said Illinois National Guard spokeswoman Lt. Col. Alicia Tate-Nadeau. One of the Iowans was the senior pilot of the aircraft, but it was unclear whether he or Slavenas was flying the Chinook when it crashed, she said. Some 120 members of Slavenas' unit, the Peoria-based F Company of the 106th Aviation Battalion, are now deployed in Central Iraq. Another 85 Guard soldiers are deployed from an aviation unit housed in Davenport, Iowa.

Slavenas was a dedicated student who followed his father and two older brothers into the military. He was so unassuming it took him a week to tell his family he had recently been promoted to first lieutenant, said his father, Ronald Slavenas. His unit arrived in the Persian Gulf in mid-April, and had been based in Balad, Iraq, since July 22, said Chief Warrant Officer Ty Simmons, operations officer for the company. On Monday, they were grieving Slavenas' death and hoping for the recovery of the helicopter's crew, he said.

The crews spend their days flying over central Iraq, a dusty desert region better known as the Sunni triangle, where they move everything from Humvees and generators to drinking water and soldiers on leave. During missions, they fly fast and low, seeking to make themselves a more difficult target as they navigate dust clouds, high-tension electric lines and tan-colored towers that blend into the background of the desert, Simmons said.

Brian Salvenas deployed with the unit to the Middle East in March. Four months earlier, he had received a bachelor's degree in industrial engineering from the University of Illinois, said his mother, Rosemarie Dietz Slavenas, who lives in Rockford. He studied piano in high school and "played beautiful, beautiful Chopin nocturnes," his mother said.

On Sunday, Ronald Slavenas thought of his son as he listened to reports of a helicopter crash in Iraq, and watched through the front curtain as a uniformed man arrived on the doorstep of his two-story brick home in Genoa. "My heart sank," he said. "I opened the door and said 'He's dead, right?' "

On Monday, an American flag hung in the rain from the second floor of his house. "Brian was just a real perfectionist," said Slavenas' brother Eric, 39. "He wasn't a gung-ho, go-to-war kind of guy."

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, there is another very important issue that is associated with this story. I have learned within the last 24 hours that all of the Chinook helicopters in the 106th unit, of which Mr. Slavenas was a part, consist of seven helicopters from the Illinois National Guard and seven from the Iowa National Guard. All of these helicopters do not have the aircraft survivability equipment required to protect them from the very threat that brought down this helicopter on Sunday.

This is a recurring and troublesome issue. We have heard time and again about National Guard forces which are activated and then shortchanged when it comes to the best equipment. We expect the most updated equipment to be given to the units that are in the fight. We understand that Active Duty troops must receive what they need. But consider where we are in the war in Iraq. It is supposedly a complete and seamless integration of National Guard, Reserves, and Active Duty forces. We expect the National Guard, under these circumstances, to receive the necessary upgrades in the war theater.

These Chinook helicopters are supposed to be equipped with one or more protective systems, such as the ALQ-156 system, to detect surface-to-air missiles, along with an automatic flare dispenser as a countermeasure. They are also supposed to be equipped with seat armor to protect the pilot and crew.

What I have learned within the last 24 hours, from reliable military sources familiar with the situation on the ground in Iraq, is many of the Illinois and Iowa National Guard helicopters have flown for almost 6 months in the theater without the necessary aircraft survivability systems. Some of them have received systems, some partial systems, but only within the last week or two, many of the systems have been scavenged from departing Guard units from other States that are leaving Iraq. Many of the helicopters don't have seat armor. There are reports that the radios don't function properly. Reliable military sources have told me and my office about the level of protection for our helicopters in Iraq and what they tell me is unacceptable. They tell me of helicopters ill equipped to deal with the threat of shoulder-fired missiles; units scavenging equipment from helicopters leaving the theater to secure the protective gear they need. They report on helicopters flying without seat armor to protect the pilot and crew, and of helicopters flying without equipment designed to protect them from known infrared missile threats; Guard units scrambling to find the parts necessary to equip their craft with protective gear. Is this how we equip our men and women who are called to active duty?

Today I am asking Secretary Rumsfeld to see to it the helicopters in the theater are provided with the aircraft survivability equipment necessary to meet the expected threat. If that equipment is not available, I believe Secretary Rumsfeld should protect those units until they are properly equipped or reassess when and where they will fly.

I ask unanimous consent that this letter I am sending to Secretary Rumsfeld be printed in the RECORD.

There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:

DEAR MR. SECRETARY: We are concerned about reports that the CH-47 National Guard helicopters attached to the 82nd Airborne Division, the unit which included the helicopter shot down by a surface-to-air missile in Iraq on Sunday, may not have had necessary or fully complete aircraft survivability equipment. As you know, 16 military personnel died in that attack, including the pilot, First Lieutenant Brian D. Slavenas, from Genoa, Illinois. The helicopter was from the Iowa National Guard.

We understand that, while Guard units that are activated may leave the United States without all the necessary equipment, they are to be upgraded in theater. Sources tell us that a number of the helicopters in the unit in question were flying in Iraq for almost six months without necessary equipment, and were only recently provided aircraft survivability equipment, some of which was not complete. Some may still be lacking this equipment.

First, we ask that you immediately ensure that the helicopters in theater are provided with the aircraft survivability equipment necessary to meet the expected threat. If that equipment is not available, you should protect those units until they are properly equipped, or re-assess when and where they will fly.

We ask that you investigate, and respond as soon as possible, whether the helicopter that was shot down on Sunday had on board a fully-operational ALQ-156 system with an automatic flare dispenser and whether it had seat armor; whether all of the helicopters in this unit are fully equipped at this time and the precautions being taken to protect the crews and passengers of those not properly equipped. The same questions need to be asked regarding all activated Guard and Reserve helicopter and fixed-wing units.

We understand that the ALQ-156 is intended to protect against the expected threat from some surface-to-air missiles, but may not be as effective against other missiles. Is the ALQ-156 adequate for the expected threat in Iraq? If not, we would like to know when the helicopters will receive the upgraded equipment and your assessment of the risk to military personnel of flying without such upgraded equipment.

I appreciate your prompt response to this inquiry.

Yours truly,

RICHARD J. DURBIN

U.S. Senator.

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I am also calling on Secretary Rumsfeld to investigate and respond as quickly as possible on whether the helicopter that was shot down on Sunday had on board a fully operational ALQ-156 system with an automatic flare dispenser and whether it had seat armor. I also believe we need to know the status of the other helicopters in this unit in reference to protective equipment, and what steps are being taken to protect the crews and passengers in those that are not properly equipped. I understand the ALQ-156 system is intended to protect against the expected threat from surface-to-air missiles, but may not be effective against other missiles in the theater.

I am also asking the Secretary if that ALQ-156 is adequate for the expected threat in Iraq. If not, I would like to know when the helicopters will receive the upgraded equipment and his assessment of the risk to military personnel of flying without such upgraded equipment.

I find the reports I am receiving from military sources about the lack of protective equipment on these helicopters to be alarming and unacceptable. We know what a dangerous environment Iraq is. The threats from surface-to-air missiles were well known even before this tragic crash. The helicopter that was shot down was not on a mission directed against regime remnants or terrorists. It was transporting soldiers to the airport in Baghdad so they could leave for R&R.

We will not know for sure how it was shot down or how it was equipped until the investigation is completed. This tragedy highlights the fact that protective equipment cannot only be reserved for missions in the fight. Every mission is in the fight in Iraq today.

The Senate passed the Iraq supplemental appropriations conference report yesterday with more than $87 billion for equipment for our troops in Iraq. If the funds are not adequate to protect our troops and aircraft, the Congress must be advised immediately. If there is a shortage of equipment, we must act immediately to secure it.

The dangers of war are well documented. Every soldier, sailor, marine, and airman should know this Government has done everything in its power to protect them, keep them safe, and give them everything they need so they can complete their mission and come home safely.

We have given this administration every dollar for which they have asked. Now they must give our soldiers what they need to be safe and successful-the protective gear and body armor they need-as they work on the ground among dangerous situations. Armor is needed for the Humvees to protect them from rocket-propelled grenades, and they need state-of-the-art equipment to protect our helicopters from shoulder-fired missiles.

I call upon the Secretary to address these shortages immediately and to investigate fully whether the helicopter that was shot down and all of the helicopters in Iraq are adequately protected. We owe this to our men and women in uniform and to their families who pray for their safe return.

I yield the floor.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I rise to speak in support of the Feinstein-Boxer amendment to S. 1753 on the sharing of information among affiliates. This amendment would give consumers the choice to opt out of having their personal "transaction and experience" information shared among affiliates. The privacy provision in the California law represented by this amendment was the result of long negotiations among consumer groups and banks, and in the end the banks in California called this provision "reasonable and workable." Reasonable and workable. I am a cosponsor of this amendment because, in a reasonable and workable way, it simply gives consumers some control over their personal information.

Let me emphasize just a few key points about this amendment. The amendment is still about an opt out, not a blanket restriction. It just gives consumers the option of keeping their personal information personal. Now the underlying bill also has an opt out, but that opt out is minimal: it is just for marketing, just for new customers, and would expire 5 years after the consumer requested it. The Feinstein-Boxer opt out, by comparison, is for the exchange of transaction and experience information; it is for uses other than marketing; it is for current and new customers; and it has no expiration. It, therefore, provides more protection for consumers who are concerned about protecting their privacy.

Another thing to remember about this amendment: the amendment does not alter preemption. With this provision States would still be deprived, permanently, of the opportunity of enacting their own legislation relating to affiliate sharing. If we are going to have a national law, we need a reasonable national standard.

Mr. President, a lot has been said about this amendment and how it would create all kinds of problems, so let me be clear about what this amendment would not do.

The amendment would not prevent the extension of affordable credit. Affiliates could still request credit reports and scores, as always.

The amendment would not prevent affiliates working under the same name in the same line of business from working together: it contains an exception for sharing among such close affiliates. It would not impede the investigation for fraud or identity theft. It would not impede transactions or the servicing of a product requested by the consumer. It would not impede institutional risk control. It would not impede the resolution of customer disputes or debt collection. It would not impede efforts to locate missing and abducted children.

Mr. President, I say again: If we are going to have a national law, we need a reasonable national standard. This amendment is just such a standard. I urge my colleagues to support it.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

AMENDMENT NO. 2062

Mr. DURBIN. I send an amendment to the desk.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.

The assistant legislative clerk read as follow:

The Senator from Illinois [Mr. DURBIN] proposes an amendment numbered 2062.

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To require reporting to national consumer reporting agencies regarding Federal student loans in order to promote the responsible repayment of such loans and ensure the completeness of information contained in consumer credit reports and scores)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I announced my intention to offer this amendment at an earlier date. Since the announcement of that intention, we have been negotiating with Sallie Mae, the Government-sponsored enterprise which is the largest provider of student loans in the country. The reason for this amendment was a new policy of Sallie Mae, as of a few months ago. In fact, about a year ago Sallie Mae decided to stop reporting repayment information to two of the three major credit bureaus in the United States. It turns out that the Higher Education Act, which governs Sallie Mae, required that defaults on student loans be reported to all three national credit bureaus but, by regulation, positive repayment information only went to one.

As a consequence, many responsible students who had paid off their student loans were not provided the credit information on their own backgrounds so that it was clear that they paid off their loans. So these students who had turned to a credit bureau for a mortgage or a loan on a car would have an outstanding student loan. It worked to their disadvantage. This decision by Sallie Mae worked a terrible disadvantage to students who had done the right thing.

I made it clear to the chairman, Mr. Shelby, as well as Senator Sarbanes, that I thought this was an injustice that needed to be corrected. Fortunately for me and for the students involved, Sallie Mae has sent a letter. I understand Chairman Shelby, if I am not mistaken, has received a copy of this letter from Sallie Mae; is that correct?

Mr. SHELBY. If the Senator will yield, we do have a copy of the letter from Sallie Mae.

Mr. DURBIN. I ask unanimous consent this letter be printed in the RECORD.

There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:

SALLIE MAE, INC.,

Washington, DC, November 4, 2003.

Hon. RICHARD C. SHELBY,

U.S. Senate, Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs, Washington, DC.

Hon. PAUL S. SARBANES,

U.S. Senate, Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs, Washington, DC.

DEAR SENATORS SHELBY AND SARBANES: I am writing to update you on how Sallie Mae reports the credit performances of our customers to the national credit bureaus.

Our goal is to ensure that our customers get the credit they have earned. To that end, we have been reporting to one of the national credit bureaus all along, as required by law. When we learned recently that one of our borrowers has not had full access to his credit history, we began negotiating again with the other two credit bureaus so that we could resume reporting to them.

I am pleased to let you know that following extensive discussions with the other two credit bureaus, Sallie Mae has agreed to resume reporting to them and will provide each with credit information for our customers. We will keep you and your staffs apprised as we move forward in implementing this decision.

We are pleased that the credit bureaus are being responsive to our concerns and we look forward to working with them. Thank you for your interest in this important issue. Please feel free to contact me if you have questions or need additional information.

Sincerely,

ROSE DINAPOLI,

VICE PRESIDENT, GOVERNMENT & INDUSTRY

Relations, Sallie Mae.

Mr. DURBIN. The letter makes it clear that Sallie Mae is reversing its position; that from this point forward they will report repayment of student loans to all three major credit bureaus. This is what my amendment sought to achieve, so I am going to withdraw this amendment and thank both Senator Shelby and Senator Sarbanes for their cooperation and urge them to join me in offering an amendment to the Higher Education Act which codifies in law this new policy that the Sallie Mae agency has now decided to implement.

There is no reason responsible college students, having paid off their loans, should be penalized because Sallie Mae refuses to notify all three major credit bureaus in America. I am glad with this letter they have decided to change their policy. I hope at a later time to offer this amendment to the Higher Education Act and thank the members of the committee for their cooperation in this regard.

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, Section 312 of the bill before us is entitled "Procedures to enhance the accuracy and completeness of information furnished to consumer reporting agencies." My Responsible Student Amendment addresses exactly that: the completeness of information furnished to consumer reporting agencies. My amendment is designed to ensure that young Americans who have positive credit histories established by responsibly repaying their student loans will be able to take a clean shot at the American dream when they try to buy their first home. It does so simply by requiring what until recently was standard practice for student loan providers; regular reporting on all loan repayments to each of the three major credit bureaus.

Until recently, responsible repayment of student loans was rewarded as would be expected, with a positive credit history. Responsible repayment was responsibly reported by student loan providers, in the typical fashion, to all three major credit bureaus. One of those providers, the biggest, is Sallie Mae. Sallie Mae was founded in 1972 as a government-sponsored enterprise, GSE. In 1997, the company initiated the privatization process. Sallie Mae, in other words, was born and raised on the taxpayers dime. One might hope that it would therefore feel some responsibility to keep taxpayers' interest in mind.

About a year ago, however, Sallie Mae, by far the largest provider of Federally guaranteed student loans, suddenly stopped reporting repayment information to two of the three major credit bureaus. It turns out that The Higher Education Act, which established the Federal student loan program, requires that defaults on student loans be reported to all three national credit bureaus, while positive repayment information only has to go to one. Is this the way we want to reward responsible repayment of student loans? Don't we want a system that rewards responsible repayment, rather than one that shrugs and says that that information doesn't matter?

What is the result of Sallie Mae not reporting to two of the three major credit bureaus? Thousands of young people-whose main or only use of credit has been their student loans from Sallie Mae-suddenly have major gaps in their credit histories. Stories in the Washington Post and the American Banker have described the case of one typical 31 year old, named Eric Borgeson. Mr. Borgeson is an architect who lives in Edwards, CO. Mr. Borgeson, who graduated from college 10 years ago, had a perfect credit repayment record on his three Sallie Mae loans. Then, midway through the home-buying process, his credit score dropped by 40 points. Sallie Mae had pulled his perfect repayment records from his credit reports with two of the three major credit bureaus. As a result, he ended up with a lower credit score and a significantly higher interest rate on his mortgage, that he estimates will cost him nearly $200 more per month in interest payments.

Why has Sallie Mae stopped reporting to two of the three major credit bureaus? The answer is simple: pre-screened lists. Credit bureaus typically sell lists of their customers, pre-screened to meet certain criteria based on the information in their credit reports. Sallie Mae's competitors were using such lists to offer Sallie Mae's customers better deals.
Rather than meet the competition, Sallie Mae simply decided to pull its customers' information from bureaus that wouldn't agree to stop selling pre-screened lists.

Sallie Mae claims that it is simply protecting its customers from unwanted solicitations. Sallie Mae knows, however, that there is a toll free phone number people can call to keep their name off of such pre-screened lists. If it really was concerned about protecting its customers from unwanted credit card solicitations, it could simply publicize that number: 888-567-8688.

The group of consumers in question here is a unique group of consumers. Just starting their careers, still paying off their loans: if there is any group of consumers that benefits from competition among loan providers and consolidators, this group is it. This is a group that often wants to hear from Sallie Mae's competitors. Those still repaying their student loans may get offers from consolidators who will combine all their loans and charge a lower overall interest rate. Those who have finished repaying their student loans are often establishing homes, careers, and families and therefore using credit cards more than average users. They, therefore, may benefit from being able to compare the credit card package they have with the offerings of competitors.

By trying to shield its customers from competing offers, Sallie Mae does them a disservice twice: it punches a big hole in their credit histories, resulting in higher rates on mortgages and other new loans, and it prevents them from learning of better deals for other financial services. Each of these alone could cost consumers thousands of dollars.

My amendment prevents that from happening. It amends the Higher Education Act by adding the word "each," requiring reporting to each of the major "consumer reporting agencies"-credit bureaus-and making clear that both positive and negative information should be accurately reported.

Responsible repayment of student loans should be rewarded by inclusion in accurate and complete credit histories. This amendment will ensure that result.

AMENDMENT NO. 2062 WITHDRAWN

I need no further time. I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn.

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, I commend the able Senator from Illinois because he saw a problem and fastened on it and as a consequence, we at least have a solution, at least at the regulatory level. I understand the Senator may well pursue it statutorily, although Sallie Mae is not under the jurisdiction of our committee, as he understands.

I share his concern. I think this was an unacceptable situation which existed. Because of the actions of the Senator from Illinois and also the Senator from Wisconsin, Mr. Kohl-who also took a keen interest in this issue-I think we have the resolution of it. I appreciate the Senator's action.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama.

Mr. SHELBY. I take a minute to commend Mr. Durbin, the Senator from Illinois, for his good work in this area. He has recognized this as a very important issue and has done something about it. Whether it is Sallie Mae or anybody else, what we are interested in is all the reporting we can get that would affect someone's credit. I again commend Senator Durbin for the work he has done. I am sure he will follow up and make sure this is part of the law.

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I thank my colleagues. My colleague, Senator HERB KOHL, shares my feeling on this issue and introduced a similar amendment and joins with me in saluting this change and making it clear we are going to move forward.