[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 24 (Tuesday, February 7, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2268-S2273]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. SMITH (for himself, Mr. Grassley, Mr. Inhofe, and Mr.
Kempthorne):
S. 360. A bill to amend title 23, United States Code, to eliminate
the penalties imposed on States for noncompliance with motorcycle
helmet and automobile safety belt requirements, and for other purposes;
to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
motorcycle helmet and safety belt penalty elimination
Mr. SMITH. Mr. President, section 153 of the Intermodal
Surface Transportation Efficiency Act [ISTEA] of 1991 (Public Law 102-
240) penalizes States that do not institute mandatory motorcycle helmet
and seatbelt laws. Today, I will introduce a measure to repeal this
patently unfair provision that forces States to transfer scarce
construction funds to other programs.
The November elections have shown that the American people want more
decisionmaking authority with their State and local governments as
opposed to heavy handed Federal mandates. Furthermore, outlining how a
State spends its own money, which is collected through the consumer gas
tax, infringes on States' ability to control their own budgets.
Dangling essential highway construction money in front of States to
coerce them into adopting helmet and seatbelt laws is fiscal blackmail.
State governments are aware of the need for safety programs and I do
not support Washington's micromanagement of issues that should clearly
be left up to the States.
Mr. President, I am a strong supporter of highway safety. However,
mandatory motorcycle and seatbelt laws do not guarantee safety. In
fact, of the 10 safest States in which to ride
[[Page S2269]] a motorcycle, 7 do not require mandatory helmet use for
adults. Furthermore, New Hampshire, which does not have mandatory
helmet and seatbelt laws, has been ranked as one of the five States
with the best highway safety record in the Nation, as far as fatalities
per million miles traveled.
Mr. President, highway safety education programs are the key to
highway safety and I believe that States have the expertise and know-
how to develop their own programs without Federal intimidation. I
invite my colleagues to join me in supporting their States' highway
departments and highway users by repealing helmet and seatbelt
mandates.
______
By Mr. D'AMATO (for himself and Mr. Moynihan):
S. 361. A bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to provide that
the monthly amounts paid by a State to blind disabled veterans shall be
excluded from the determination of annual income for purposes of
payment of pension by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs; to the
Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
legislation to assist blind veterans
Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, since the mid-1930's, New York
State has paid blind disabled veterans a monthly annuity. Qualified
veterans--of which there are less than 2,000--receive monthly payments
of $41.66, the same amount as has been paid since the program's
inception.
The blind annuity has not been adjusted upward, because should a
State decide to increase its blind annuity, the U.S. Department of
Veterans Affairs would respond by reducing Federal pensions paid to
these individuals by the same amount. Thus, there would be no net
benefit for veterans receiving the annuity.
The legislation that I and my distinguished colleague from New York,
Senator Moynihan, are reintroducing today will prevent the VA from
penalizing blind veterans, should any State undertake or increase a
blind annuity. Charity begins at home. My legislation will allow States
to compensate those who have paid a very high price in defense of our
country, at no cost to the Federal Government.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 361
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. EXCLUSION OF CERTAIN AMOUNTS FROM INCOME
DETERMINATION FOR PENSION PURPOSES.
Section 1503 of title 38, United States Code, is amended--
(1) by striking out ``and'' at the end of paragraph (9);
(2) by striking out the period at the end of paragraph (10)
and inserting in lieu thereof ``; and''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(11) amounts equal to amounts paid to a veteran by a
State under a program of such State to make monthly payments
to qualifying veterans who are blind and totally
disabled.''.
______
By Ms. MIKULSKI:
S. 362. A bill to amend the Metropolitan Washington Airports Act of
1986 to provide for the reorganization of the Metropolitan Washington
Airports Authority and for local review of proposed actions of the
Airports Authority affecting aircraft noise; to the Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
washington airport act amendments
Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, today I introduce S. 362, the
Metropolitan Washington Airports Act Amendment of 1995.
In light of the Supreme Court's decision last month which compels
congressional action, I am sponsoring this legislation which finally
eliminates congressional oversight over the Airports Authority Board of
Directors, and makes this Board more accountable to the communities it
serves. Similar legislation was introduced in the House of
Representatives by my colleague, Mrs. Morella of Maryland.
This legislation will amend the Metropolitan Washington Airport Act
of 1986 by reorganizing the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority
and providing for greater local involvement in the management of Dulles
and Washington National Airports.
I believe in strong local involvement in the management of our
airports. The Airports Authority Board structure which was struck down
recently by the Supreme Court did not adequately incorporate
representation of local communities. The legislation will restore the
involvement of communities in this region into the management of the
Washington area airports by reorganizing the Airports Authority Board
of Directors into 11 members who reside in the Washington, DC, region.
These board members will be appointed by the chief executives of
Virginia, Maryland, and the District of Columbia, the Virginia State
legislature, or by the local council of governments.
The legislation also ensures local involvement in any decision by the
Washington Metropolitan Airports Authority Board of Directors which
could result in a change in aircraft noise in the vicinity our local
airports. The legislation mandates that a local group of citizens, the
committee on noise abatement, be notified by the Board of any decision
affecting noise abatement so that they have the opportunity to review
the proposed action. In the interest of the citizens most affected by
aircraft noise, I feel that local oversight is important in any airport
authority decision involving the serious issue of noise abatement.
I hope my colleagues will agree with me that airports should be
accountable to the communities they serve, and I hope we will see
enactment of this legislation during the 104th Congress. I ask
unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 362
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1 SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Metropolitan Washington
Airports Act Amendments of 1995''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Section 6002(7) of the Metropolitan Washington Airports Act
of 1986 (49 U.S.C. App. 2451(7)) is amended--
(1) by inserting ``declining'' after ``perceived''; and
(2) by striking ``the growing local interest,'' and
inserting ``the increasing need for local planning and
management on a metropolitan statistical area basis,''.
SEC. 3. AIRPORTS AUTHORITY.
(a) Board of Directors.--Section 6007 of the Metropolitan
Washington Airports Act of 1986 (49 U.S.C. App. 2456) is
amended by striking subsections (e), (f), (g), and (h) and
inserting the following:
``(e) Board of Directors.--
``(1) Appointment.--The Airports Authority shall be
governed by a board of directors of 11 members as follows:
``(A) 1 member shall be appointed by the Governor of
Virginia.
``(B) 1 member shall be appointed by the Mayor of the
District of Columbia.
``(C) 1 member shall be appointed by the Governor of
Maryland.
``(D) 2 members shall be appointed by the Virginia State
legislature.
``(E) 2 members shall be appointed by those representatives
from Virginia local governments who are on the Board of
Directors of the Metropolitan Washington Council of
Governments.
``(F) 2 members shall be appointed by those representatives
from the District of Columbia government who are on the Board
of Directors of the Metropolitan Washington Council of
Governments.
``(G) 2 members shall be appointed by those representatives
from Maryland local governments who are on the Board of
Directors of the Metropolitan Washington Council of
Governments.
The Chairman shall be appointed from among the members by a
majority vote of the members and shall serve until replaced
by a majority vote of the members.
``(2) Restrictions.--Members (A) shall serve without
compensation other than reasonable expenses incident to board
functions, and (B) must reside within the Washington Standard
Metropolitan Statistical Area.
``(3) Terms.--Member shall be appointed for terms of 4
years.
``(4) Required number of votes.--7 votes shall be required
to approve bond issues and the annual budget.
``(f) Airport Noise.--
``(1) Balanced environmental protection.--In order to
protect the public from the impact of aircraft noise and at
the same time provide for suitable air transportation service
to the Washington Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area, a
proposed action of the board of directors which could result
in a change in the impact of aircraft noise in the vicinity
of a Metropolitan Washington Airport may not take unless, at
least 60 days before the action is to take effect, the board
of directors--
[[Page S2270]] ``(A) notifies, in writing, the Committee on
Noise Abatement at National and Dulles Airports of the
Washington Council of Governments of the action for the
purpose of allowing such committee the opportunity to review,
and submit comments on, the action; and
``(B) submits, in writing, to such committee a response to
any comment of such committee with respect to the action
within 30 days after the date of receipt of such comment.''.
SEC. 4. EFFECTIVE DATE.
(a) In General.--Except as provided in subsections (b) and
(c), the amendments made by sections 2 and 3 shall take
effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.
(b) Limitation on Applicability.--Persons appointed as
members of the board of directors of the Metropolitan
Washington Airports Authority on the date of the enactment of
this Act shall continue to serve on such board until their
respective terms expire under former section 6007(e).
(c) Initial Appointments.--
(1) Virginia appointments.--The Governor of Virginia shall
appoint under new section 6007(e)(1)(A) a person to fill the
vacancy of the first member appointed by the Governor of
Virginia under former pectin 6007(e)(1)(A) whose term expires
after the date of the enactment of this Act. The Virginia
State legislature shall appoint under new section
6007(e)(1)(D) persons to fill the vacancies of the second and
third members appointed by the Governor under former section
6007(e)(1)(A) whose terms expire after such date of
enactment. Representatives from Virginia local governments
shall appoint under new section 6007(e)(1)(E) persons to fill
the vacancies of the fourth and fifth members appointed by
the Governor under former section 6007(e)(1)(A) whose terms
expire after such date of enactment.
(2) District of columbia appointments.-- The Mayor of the
District of Columbia shall appoint under new section
6007(e)(1)(B) a person to fill the vacancy of the first
member appointed by the Mayor of District of Columbia under
former section 6007(e)(1)(B) whose term expires after the
date of the enactment of this Act. Representatives from the
District of Columbia government shall appoint under new
section 6007(e)(1)(F) persons to fill the vacancies of the
second and third such members appointed by the Mayor under
former section 6007(e)(1)(B) whose terms expire after such
date of enactment.
``(3) Maryland appointments.--The Governor of Maryland
shall appoint under new section 6007(e)(1)(C) a person to
fill the vacancy of the first member appointed by the
Governor of Maryland under former section 6007(e)(1)(C) whose
term expires after the date of the enactment of this Act.
Representatives from Maryland local governments shall appoint
under new section 6007(e)(1)(G)--
(A) a person to fill the vacancy of the second member
appointed by the Governor under former section 6007(e)(1)(C)
whose term expires after such date of enactment; and
(B) a person to fill the vacancy of the member appointed by
the President under former section 6007(e)(1)(D) when the
term of such member expires after such date of enactment.
(d) Definitions.--In this section, the following
definitions apply:
(1) Former section 6007(e).--The term ``former section
6007(e)'' means section 6007(e) of the Metropolitan
Washington Airports Act of 1986 as in effect on the day
before the date of the enactment of this Act.
(2) New section 6007(e).--The term ``new section 6007(e)''
means section 6007(e) of the Metropolitan Washington Airport
Act of 1986, as amended by section 3 of this Act.
______
By Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself and Mr. Domenici):
S. 363. A bill to improve water quality within the Rio Puerco
Watershed, New Mexico, and to help restore the ecological health of the
Rio Grande through the cooperative identification and implementation of
best management practices that are consistent with the ecological,
geological, cultural, sociological, and economic conditions in the
region, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources.
rio puerco watershed act
Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, today I am introducing
legislation that will authorize a coordinated approach for restoration
of the Rio Puerco Watershed, which at 7,000 square miles is the largest
tributary to the Rio Grande in terms of area and sediment. The Rio
Puerco was once known as New Mexico's breadbasket, with water supply
and soil tilth to support that reputation.
Over time, extensive ecological changes have occurred in the Rio
Puerco Watershed, some of which have resulted in damage to the
watershed that has seriously affected the economic and cultural well-
being of its inhabitants. This has resulted in the loss of existing
communities that were based on the land and were self-sustaining. Mr.
President, a healthy and sustainable ecosystem is essential to the
long-term economic and cultural viability of the region.
According to the Bureau of Land Management, the Rio Puerco
contributes only 6 percent of the total water but over 50 percent of
the sediments which enter the Rio Grande. Accelerated, progressive soil
erosion within the basin threatens not only the sustained productivity
of the rangeland watershed, but also the middle Rio Grande aquatic
system, irrigators dependent on those waters, and the economic
foundation of the Mesilla Valley dependent on Elephant Butte Reservoir.
A substantial proportion of the rural population is concerned about
its ability to maintain a traditional lifestyle with an economy which
is natural resource based and dependent upon the productivity of land
with multiple ownership. The vast Rio Puerco drainage system is a
mosaic of land ownership and agency management. No single agency has
watershed-wide expertise and management responsibility. It is
imperative that the numerous agencies and individuals with resource
management responsibility--Indian pueblos, Federal and State agencies,
and private citizens--work
together to develop a plan for and implement an effective Rio Puerco
Watershed management program.
This legislation directs the Secretary of the Interior to lead and
coordinate a management program in the Rio Puerco Watershed with the
advice and input of a Rio Puerco Management Committee composed of the
various landowners, affected Indian pueblos, local, regional, State,
and Federal governments, and other interested citizens.
The committee will prepare a management plan to identify reasonable
and appropriate goals and objectives for land owners and managers in
the Rio Puerco Watershed; to describe potential alternative actions to
meet the goals and objectives; to recommend voluntary implementation of
appropriate best management practices on both public and private lands;
to provide for cooperative development of management guidelines for
maintaining and improving the ecological, cultural, and economic
conditions on both public and private lands; and other activities that
will promote cooperation and information sharing among those that own
and manage land in the Rio Puerco Watershed.
Mr. President, I am pleased that Senator Domenici is a cosponsor of
this legislation. It is our hope that this legislation will advance the
restoration of and maintenance of a healthy Rio Puerco Watershed that
will serve New Mexico and its citizens in the future as well as it has
served us in the past. We have a lot of work ahead of us. A clear path
must be outlined and a base of authorization, from which this program
can be funded, established. Most importantly, this legislation
authorizes an approach that brings all of the stakeholders together.
The Federal Government cannot, and should not, undertake this effort
alone. The support and contributions of local citizens, tribes,
governmental entities, and others is crucial. I urge my colleagues to
support this legislation, and I ask unanimous consent that the full
text of my remarks and this legislation be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 363
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Rio Puerco Watershed Act of
1995''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds that--
(1) over time, extensive ecological changes have occurred
in the Rio Puerco watershed, including--
(A) erosion of agricultural and range lands;
(B) impairment of waters due to heavy sedimentation;
(C) reduced productivity of renewable resources;
(D) loss of biological diversity;
(E) loss of functioning riparian areas; and
(F) loss of available surface water;
(2) damage to the watershed has seriously affected the
economic and cultural well-being of its inhabitants,
including--
[[Page S2271]] (A) loss of communities that were based on
the land and were self-sustaining; and
(B) adverse effects on the traditions, customs, and
cultures of the affected communities;
(3) a healthy and sustainable ecosystem is essential to the
long-term economic and cultural viability of the region;
(4) the impairment of the Rio Puerco watershed has caused
damage to the ecological and economic well-being of the area
below the junction of the Rio Puerco with the Rio Grande,
including--
(A) disruption of ecological processes;
(B) water quality impairment;
(C) significant reduction in the water storage capacity and
life expectancy of the Elephant Butte Dam and Reservoir
system due to sedimentation;
(D) chronic problems of irrigation system channel
maintenance; and
(E) increased risk of flooding caused by sediment
accumulation;
(5) the Rio Puerco is a major tributary of the Rio Grande,
and the coordinated implementation of ecosystem-based best
management practices for the Rio Puerco system could benefit
the larger Rio Grande system;
(6) the Rio Puerco watershed has been stressed from the
loss of native vegetation, introduction of exotic species,
and alteration of riparian habitat which have disrupted the
original dynamics of the river and disrupted natural
ecological processes;
(7) the Rio Puerco watershed is a mosaic of private,
Federal, tribal trust, and State land ownership with diverse,
sometimes differing management objectives;
(8) development, implementation, and monitoring of an
effective watershed management program for the Rio Puerco
watershed is best achieved through cooperation among affected
Federal, State, local, and tribal entities;
(9) the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the
Director of the Bureau of Land Management, in consultation
with Federal, State, local, and tribal entities and in
cooperation with the Rio Puerco Watershed Committee, is best
suited to coordinate management efforts in the Rio Puerco
watershed; and
(10) accelerating the pace of improvement in the Rio Puerco
watershed on a coordinated, cooperative basis will benefit
persons living in the watershed as well as downstream users
on the Rio Grande.
SEC. 3. MANAGEMENT PROGRAM.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of the Interior, acting
through the Director of the Bureau of Land Management shall--
(1) in consultation with the Rio Puerco Management
Committee established by section 4--
(A) establish a clearinghouse for research and information
on management within the area identified as the Rio Puerco
Drainage Basin, as depicted on the map entitled ``The Rio
Puerco Watershed'' dated June 1994, including--
(i) current and historical natural resource conditions; and
(ii) data concerning the extent and causes of watershed
impairment; and
(B) establish an inventory of best management practices and
related monitoring activities that have been or may be
implemented within the area identified as the Rio Puerco
Watershed Project, as depicted on the map entitled ``The Rio
Puerco Watershed'' dated June 1994; and
(2) provide support to the Rio Puerco Management Committee
to identify objectives, monitor results of ongoing projects,
and develop alternative watershed management plans for the
Rio Puerco Drainage Basin, based on best management
practices.
(b) Rio Puerco Management Report.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 2 years after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior, in
consultation with the Rio Puerco Management Committee, shall
prepare a report for the improvement of watershed conditions
in the Rio Puerco Drainage Basin described in subsection
(a)(1).
(2) Contents.--The report under paragraph (1) shall--
(A) identify reasonable and appropriate goals and
objectives for landowners and managers in the Rio Puerco
watershed;
(B) describe potential alternative actions to meet the
goals and objectives, including proven best management
practices and costs associated with implementing the actions;
(C) recommend voluntary implementation of appropriate best
management practices on public and private lands;
(D) provide for cooperative development of management
guidelines for maintaining and improving the ecological,
cultural, and economic conditions on public and private
lands;
(E) provide for the development of public participation and
community outreach programs that would include proposals
for--
(i) cooperative efforts with private landowners to
encourage implementation of best management practices within
the watershed; and
(ii) involvement of private citizens in restoring the
watershed;
(F) provide for the development of proposals for voluntary
cooperative programs among the members of the Rio Puerco
Management Committee to implement best management practices
in a coordinated, consistent, and cost-effective manner;
(G) provide for the encouragement of, and support
implementation of, best management practices on private
lands; and
(H) provide for the development of proposals for a
monitoring system that--
(i) builds on existing data available from private,
Federal, and State sources;
(ii) provides for the coordinated collection, evaluation,
and interpretation of additional data as needed or collected;
and
(iii) will provide information to--
(I) assess existing resource and socioeconomic conditions;
(II) identify priority implementation actions; and
(III) assess the effectiveness of actions taken.
SEC. 4. RIO PUERCO MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE.
(a) Establishment.--There is established the Rio Puerco
Management Committee (referred to in this section as the
``Committee'').
(b) Membership.--The Committee shall be convened by a
representative of the Bureau of Land Management and shall
include representatives from--
(1) the Rio Puerco Watershed Committee;
(2) affected tribes and pueblos;
(3) the National Forest Service of the Department of
Agriculture;
(4) the Bureau of Reclamation;
(5) the United States Geological Survey;
(6) the Bureau of Indian Affairs;
(7) the United States Fish and Wildlife Service;
(8) the Army Corps of Engineers;
(9) the Natural Resources Conservation Service of the
Department of Agriculture;
(10) the State of New Mexico, including the New Mexico
Environment Department and the State Engineer;
(11) affected local soil and water conservation districts;
(12) the Elephant Butte Irrigation District;
(13) private landowners; and
(14) other interested citizens.
(c) Duties.--The Rio Puerco Management Committee shall--
(1) advise the Secretary of the Interior, acting through
the Director of the Bureau of Land Management, on the
development and implementation of the Rio Puerco Management
Program described in section 3; and
(2) serve as a forum for information about activities that
may affect or further the development and implementation of
the best management practices described in section 3.
(d) Termination.--The Committee shall terminate on the date
that is 10 years after the date of enactment of this Act.
SEC. 5. REPORT.
Not later than the date that is 2 years after the date of
enactment of this Act, and biennially thereafter, the
Secretary of the Interior, in consultation with the Rio
Puerco Management Committee, shall transmit to the Committee
on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate and to the
Committee on Resources of the House of Representatives a
report containing--
(1) a summary of activities of the management program under
section 3; and
(2) proposals for joint implementation efforts, including
funding recommendations.
SEC. 6. LOWER RIO GRANDE HABITAT STUDY.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of the Interior, in
cooperation with appropriate State agencies, shall conduct a
study of the Rio Grande that--
(1) shall cover the distance from Caballo Lake to Sunland
Park, New Mexico; and
(2) may cover a greater distance.
(b) Contents.--The study under subsection (a) shall
include--
(1) a survey of the current habitat conditions of the river
and its riparian environment;
(2) identification of the changes in vegetation and habitat
over the past 400 years and the affect of the changes on the
river and riparian area; and
(3) an assessment of the feasibility, benefits, and
problems associated with activities to prevent further
habitat loss and to restore habitat through reintroduction or
establishment of appropriate native plant species.
(c) Transmittal.--Not later than 3 years after the date on
which funds are made available to carry out this Act, the
Secretary of the Interior shall transmit the study under
subsection (a) to the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources of the Senate and to the Committee on Resources of
the House of Representatives.
SEC. 7. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out
sections 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 a total of $7,500,000 for the 10
fiscal years beginning after the date of enactment of this
Act.
______
By Mr. FEINGOLD:
S. 366. A bill to amend certain Federal civil rights statutes to
prevent the involuntary application of arbitration to claims that arise
from unlawful employment discrimination based on race, color, religion,
sex, national origin, age, or disability, and for other purposes; to
the Committee on Labor and Human Resources.
civil rights procedures protection act
Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, today I am introducing a bill
that I also introduced in the 103d Congress. This bill mirrors a House
bill introduced last year by Representatives Patricia Schroeder, Edward
Markey, and Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky as companion legislation to my
original bill, S. 2012, the Protection From Coercive Employment
Agreements Act of 1994.
[[Page S2272]] This bill addresses a rapidly growing practice in
employment relations--the practice of requiring employees to submit
claims of discrimination or harassment to arbitration as a term or
condition of employment or advancement, and prohibiting the employee
from resolving their claim in a court of law.
This bill amends seven specific civil rights statutes to make clear
that the powers and procedures provided under those laws are the
exclusive ones that apply when a claim arises. The legislation would
invalidate existing agreements between employers and employees that
require the employment discrimination claims to be submitted to
mandatory arbitration.
The statutes this will would amend are title VII of the Civil Rights
Act of 1964, section 505 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the
Americans With Disabilities Act, section 1977 of the Revised Statutes,
the Equal Pay Act, the Family and Medical Leave Act, and the Federal
Arbitration Act [FAA]. The amendment to the FAA extends the protections
of the bill to claims of unlawful discrimination that arise under State
or local law, and other Federal laws that prohibit job discrimination.
Mr. President, I want to reiterate that this legislation, as in the
case of S. 2012, is in no way intended to bar the use of voluntary
arbitration, conciliation, mediation or other informal quasi-judicial
methods of dispute resolution. In fact, I strongly support the use of
voluntary alternative dispute resolution methods as a way of reducing
the caseloads of civil and criminal courts where appropriate.
This bill closes a widening loophole in the enforcement of civil
rights laws in our Nation. An entire industry--Wall Street--and a
growing number of companies and firms in many other industries have
been able to circumvent formal legal challenges to their unlawful
employment practices in court--a right intended to be protected by the
statutes this bill amends. Employers can tell current and prospective
employees, ``if you want to work for us, you'll have to check your
rights as an American citizen at the door.''
Mr. President, this practice should be stopped now. It is simply
unfair to require an employee to waive, in advance, his or her
statutory right to seek remedy in a court of law, in exchange for
employment or a promotion. This bill will restore integrity in the
relations between employees and employers.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of the legislation be printed
in the Record at the conclusion of my remarks.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 366
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Civil Rights Procedures
Protection Act of 1995''.
SEC. 2. AMENDMENT TO TITLE VII OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF
1964.
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000e
et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following new
section:
``exclusivity of powers and procedures
``Sec. 719. Notwithstanding any Federal statute of general
applicability that would modify any of the powers and
procedures expressly applicable to a claim arising under this
title, such powers and procedures shall be the exclusive
powers and procedures applicable to such claim unless after
such claim arises the claimant voluntarily enters into an
agreement to resolve such claim through arbitration or
another procedure.''.
SEC. 3. AMENDMENT TO THE AGE DISCRIMINATION IN EMPLOYMENT ACT
OF 1967.
The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (29 U.S.C.
621 et seq.) is amended--
(1) by redesignating sections 16 and 17 as sections 17 and
18, respectively; and
(2) by inserting after section 15 the following new section
16:
``exclusivity of powers and procedures
``Sec. 16. Notwithstanding any Federal statute of general
applicability that would modify any of the powers and
procedures expressly applicable to a right or claim arising
under this Act, such powers and procedures shall be the
exclusive powers and procedures applicable to such right or
such claim unless after such right or such claim arises the
claimant voluntarily enters into an agreement to resolve such
right or such claim through arbitration or another
procedure.''.
SEC. 4. AMENDMENT TO THE REHABILITATION ACT OF 1973.
Section 505 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C.
795) is amended by adding at the end the following new
subsection:
``(c) Notwithstanding any Federal statute of general
applicability that would modify any of the procedures
expressly applicable to a claim based on right under section
501, such procedures shall be the exclusive procedures
applicable to such claim unless after such claim arises the
claimant voluntarily enters into an agreement to resolve such
claim through arbitration or another procedure.''.
SEC. 5. AMENDMENT TO THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT OF
1990.
Section 107 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
(42 U.S.C. 12117) is amended by adding at the end the
following new subsection:
``(c) Notwithstanding any Federal statute of general
applicability that would modify any of the powers and
procedures expressly applicable to a claim based on a
violation described in subsection (a), such powers and
procedures shall be the exclusive powers and procedures
applicable to such claim unless after such claim arises the
claimant voluntarily enters into an agreement to resolve such
claim through arbitration or another procedure.''.
SEC. 6. AMENDMENT TO SECTION 1977 OF THE REVISED STATUTES OF
THE UNITED STATES.
Section 1977 of the Revised Statutes (42 U.S.C. 1981) is
amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(d) Notwithstanding any Federal statute of general
applicability that would modify any of the procedures
expressly applicable to a right to make and enforce a
contract of employment under this section, such procedures
shall be the exclusive procedures applicable to a claim based
on such right unless after such claim arises the claimant
voluntarily enters into an agreement to resolve such claim
through arbitration or another procedure.''.
SEC. 7. AMENDMENT TO THE EQUAL PAY REQUIREMENT UNDER THE FAIR
LABOR STANDARDS ACT OF 1938.
Section 6(d) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29
U.S.C. 206(d)) is amended by adding at the end the following
new paragraph:
``(5) Notwithstanding any Federal statute of general
applicability that would modify any of the powers or
procedures expressly applicable to a claim based on violation
of this subsection, such powers and procedures shall be the
exclusive procedures applicable to such claim unless after
such claim arises the claimant voluntarily enters into an
agreement to resolve such claim through arbitration or
another procedure.''.
SEC. 8. AMENDMENT TO THE FAMILY AND MEDICAL LEAVE ACT OF
1993.
Title IV of the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (29
U.S.C. 2601 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the
following new section:
``SEC. 406. EXCLUSIVITY OF REMEDIES.
``Notwithstanding any Federal statute of general
applicability that would modify any of the procedures
expressly applicable to a claim based on a right provided
under this Act or under an amendment made by this Act, such
procedures shall be the exclusive procedures applicable to
such claim unless after such claim arises the claimant
voluntarily enters into an agreement to resolve such claim
through arbitration or another procedure.''.
SEC. 9. AMENDMENT TO TITLE 9 OF THE UNITED STATES CODE.
Section 14 of title 9, United States Code, is amended--
(1) by inserting ``(a)'' before ``This''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(b) This chapter shall not apply with respect to a claim
of unlawful discrimination in employment if such claim arises
from discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex,
national origin, age, or disability.''.
SEC. 10. APPLICATION OF AMENDMENTS.
The amendments made by this Act shall apply with respect to
claims arising on and after the date of the enactment of this
Act.
______
By Mr. DORGAN:
S. 367. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase
and make permanent the deduction for health insurance costs of self-
employed individuals; to the Committee on Finance.
health insurance deduction for the self-employed
Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, today I rise to urge my colleagues in
Congress to work quickly to pass legislation to correct a serious
problem affecting our Nation's farmers, ranchers, and small businesses.
As you know, the 25-percent tax deduction for the health insurance
costs of self-employed individuals expired on December 31, 1993. This
provision is absolutely critical to the health care concerns of small
business owners and farmers who conduct their businesses as sole
proprietors. While the 25-percent health costs tax deduction enjoys
broad bipartisan support, it was not restored last year when the
prospects for broader health care reform collapsed.
We should expect the outcry from small businesses to be deafening
this
[[Page S2273]] April unless we move quickly to extend this provision
beyond its December 31, 1993 expiration date. Further, it is
indefensible that our tax laws tell some businesses that they can
deduct 100 percent of their health costs, while others, mostly smaller
businesses, are told they can deduct none of their health care costs.
The health of a farm family or small business owner is no less
important than the health of the president of a large corporation, and
the Internal Revenue Code should reflect this simple fact.
That's way I am reintroducing legislation to restore tax fairness for
sole proprietors who acquire health insurance coverage for themselves
and their families. My bill would renew the 25-percent health insurance
tax deduction as if it had not expired in December 1993. It also
expands the current 25-percent deduction to 100 percent over the next
several years. As a result, sole proprietors would receive the exact
same tax treatment that large corporations now enjoy.
Almost no one disagrees that the tax code unfairly discriminates
against self-employed business owners with respect to health care
costs. Yet, Congress has always scrambled to simply retain the current
25-percent health tax deduction.
We can no longer afford to allow this provision to be held hostage to
sunset provisions or politics. So long as we turn a blind eye to this
problem, millions of Americans are prevented from purchasing adequate
and affordable health care for themselves and their families.
We ought to move to correct this matter without further delay. This
matter needs immediate attention.
______
By Mr. DORGAN:
S. 368. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide
that installment sales of certain farmers not be treated as a
preference item for purposes of the alternative minimum tax; to the
Committee on Finance.
tax treatment of installment sales legislation
Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, today I rise to introduce legislation to
rectify a serious tax problem confronting our family farmers.
The Internal Revenue Service [IRS] has, in my opinion, mistakenly
taken a position that may preclude our farmers from using deferred
payment grain contracts, which have been routinely used in their
businesses for decades. In my judgment, the IRS' position imposes an
unintended and unacceptable financial hardship on the farming industry.
Let me briefly explain. For years, family farmers have used deferred
payment grain contracts to sell their commodities to grain elevators to
help manage the business income. A typical grain contract between a
farmer and grain elevator calls upon a farmer to sell and deliver grain
to a grain elevator--often because the farmer does not have adequate
storage--for a fixed amount. In many cases, one or more payments paid
by the elevator to the farmer under the contract occur after the close
of the farmer's taxable year.
For regular tax purposes, farmers are allowed to defer income from
the deferred payments under the grain contracts in computing their
regular tax liability. But because the IRS apparently views all
deferred payment grain contracts as installment sales, it now requires
them to add back this income in computing the Alternative Minimum Tax
[AMT] in the tax year preceding the year of payment. As a result,
thousands of family farmers are facing hefty tax bills because they are
being whip-sawed by an AMT provision which effectively repeals their
ability to use such contracts.
To make matters worse, many farmers were advised by tax experts that
some kinds of traditional deferred payment grain contracts do not
amount to an installment sale that would required and AMT calculation.
For this reason, they did not make an AMT adjustment on their income
tax returns. Now they are being told by the IRS that they owe large tax
bills on income that they will not receive until later.
That is why I am introducing legislation to ensure that our family
farmers are allowed to engage in deferred payment transactions and get
the same kind of tax treatment they have always received.
I do not believe that Congress intended this kind of tax treatment
for farmers using deferred payment grain contracts for legitimate
business purposes. It seems to me that the IRS position is based upon
an incorrect interpretation which ignores the fact that our family
farmers are, by law, permitted to manage their business operations on a
cash basis.
My bill would simply make clear the original intent of Congress in
the Tax Acts of 1986 and 1987, which was to allow farmers to continue
to receive the tax benefit provided from the use of cash method
accounting and from installment sales for their deferred payment grain
transactions.
I urge my colleagues to include this much-needed legislation in any
revenue measure considered by the Senate this year.
____________________