[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 110 (Monday, July 10, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9638-S9641]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. HELMS:
S. 1015. A bill to provide for the liquidation or reliquidation of
certain entries of pharmaceutical grade phospholipids; to the Committee
on Finance.
legislation correcting the reclassification of phospholipids
Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, today I once again offer legislation to
correct an obviously unintended and mistaken reclassification of
pharmaceutical-grade, FDA-approved egg yolk phospholipid by HTS, the
Harmonized Tariff Classification System. Another provision of this
legislation has been accomplished in the Uruguay round GATT agreement.
Kabi Pharmacia is a U.S. company in Clayton, NC. Kabi has become a
leading employer in rural Johnston County; it has 175 employees engaged
in high-technology manufacturing and research work. The main product
manufactured by Kabi Pharmacia in Clayton is intralipid, a unique
intravenous feeding solution. Kabi must import a key, unique intralipid
ingredient--pharmaceutical-grade, FDA-approved egg yolk phospholipid,
because it is made only by Kabi's parent company in Sweden.
The duty on Kabi's phospholipid was set at 1.5 percent in the 1970's
when Kabi began operations in Clayton. Beginning in March 1991, the
unintentional HTS reclassification of the phospholipid more than
tripled this duty, a situation that could not be corrected in the GATT
agreement because it is a matter of U.S. law--which, of course, only
Congress can change.
Mr. President, my legislation would return the rate on the
phospholipid to 1.5 percent for the period from March 29, 1991, until
January 1, 1995, when the duty for Kabi's phospholipid and other
pharmaceutical components and products became zero under the GATT
agreement, and refund the unintended duty increase. The amount of the
unintended duty increase is $396,779.16.
Mr. President, there has been no disagreement that the duty increase
on Kabi's phospholipid was unintended and unwarranted. Simple fairness
emphasizes the need for the legislation I offer today. The correction
of the erroneous HTS reclassification must be retroactive in order that
there can be an equitable redress. It is a matter of simple fairness
and equity.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of this legislation (S. 1015)
be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 1015
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. PHARMACEUTICAL GRADE PHOSPHOLIPIDS.
Notwithstanding section 514 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19
U.S.C. 1514) or any other provision of law, upon proper
request filed with the Customs Service not later than 90 days
after the date of the enactment of this Act, any entry, or
withdrawal from warehouse for consumption, of pharmaceutical
grade phospholipids that--
(1) was made under subheading 2923.20.00 of the Harmonized
Tariff Schedule of the United States;
(2) with respect to which a lower rate of duty would have
applied if such entry or withdrawal had been made under
subheading 2923.20.10 or 2923.20.20 of such Schedule; and
(3) was made after March 29, 1991, and before January 1,
1995;
shall be liquidated or reliquidated as if such lower rate of
duty applied to such entry or withdrawal.
______
By Mr. KERRY (for himself and Mr. Kennedy):
S. 1016. A bill to authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue
a certificate of documentation with the appropriate endorsement for
employment in the coastwise trade for the vessel Magic Carpet; to the
Committee on
[[Page S 9639]]
Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
jones act waiver legislation
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleague, the
distinguished senior Senator from Massachusetts, in introducing a bill
to allow the vessel Magic Carpet to be employed in coastwise trade of
the United States. This boat has a relatively small passenger capacity,
carrying up to 6 passengers on a charter business based out of Martha's
Vineyard, MA. The purpose of this bill is to waive those sections of
the Jones Act which prohibit foreign-made vessels from operating in
coastwise trade. The waiver is necessary because, under the law, a
vessel is considered foreign-made unless all major components of its
hull and superstructure are fabricated in the United States and the
vessel is assembled entirely in the United States. This vessel was
originally built in a foreign shipyard in 1959, but since then has been
owned and operated by American citizens. The owners of Magic Carpet
have invested substantially more than the cost of building the boat in
making repairs to it and maintaining it--in American shipyards with
American products. This particular vessel is also of some historical
value--Magic Carpet is a classic wooden yawl--few of these vessels
still exist today and very few operate along the east coast. The owners
wish to start a small business, a charter boat operation, seasonally
taking people out of Martha's Vineyard.
After reviewing the facts in the case of the Magic Carpet, I find
that this waiver does not compromise our national readiness in times of
national emergency, which is the fundamental purpose of the Jones Act
requirement. While I generally support the provisions of the Jones Act,
I believe the specific facts in this case warrant a waiver to permit
the Magic Carpet to engage in coastwise trade. I hope and trust the
Senate will agree and will speedily approve the bill being introduced
today.
______
By Mr. KERRY (for himself and Mr. Kennedy):
S. 1017. A bill to authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue
a certificate of documentation with the appropriate endorsement for
employment in the coastwise trade for the vessel Chrissy; to the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
jones act waiver legislation
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleague, the
distinguished senior Senator from Massachusetts, in introducing a bill
to allow the vessel Chrissy to be employed in coastwise trade of the
United States. This boat has a relatively small passenger capacity,
carrying up to 6 passengers on a charter business based out of
Gloucester, Massachusetts. Chrissy is a historical vessel, built in
1912 in Friendship, Maine and is one of the last remaining Friendship
sloops. The purpose of this bill is to waive those sections of the
Jones Act which prohibit vessels from operating in coastwise trade
without proper documentation of its chain of ownership. The vessel was
built 83 years ago in Maine, but along the way the documentation has
been lost. It is my hope that a document will be issued which will
allow the owner to start a small business, a charter boat operation,
seasonally taking people out of Gloucester.
I hope and trust the Senate will agree and will speedily approve the
bill being introduced today.
______
By Mr. HELMS:
S. 1018. A bill for the relief of Clarence P. Stewart; to the
Committee on Governmental Affairs.
the clarence p. stewart relief act
Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, today I offer a private bill to direct the
Secretary of Agriculture to right a wrong committed against a dedicated
public servant.
Clarence P. Stewart of Lillington, NC, served 23 years with the
Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service [ASCS] at the
Department of Agriculture. In April 1981, Mr. Stewart was North
Carolina State Executive Director when, during the transition to a new
administration, the ASCS decided to remove all State Executive
Directors as part of an what the Department described as a reduction-
in-force [RIF].
Mr. Stewart considered appealing the ASCS decision but was told by
his superior at the ASCS not to bother, that he had no right to appeal
the dismissal action. Unfortunately, Mr. Stewart accepted this
information at face value and did not appeal the ASCS decision.
Mr. President, years later, Mr. Stewart learned that, as a veteran,
he did in fact have a right to appeal his dismissal from the ASCS. He
also learned that 24 other State Executive Directors who had been
dismissed at the same time as Stewart had appealed their dismissals to
the Merit Systems Protections Board and they had won. In this appeal,
known as the Blalock case, the Merit
Systems Protection Board found that the State Directors had in fact
been removed for cause rather than separated pursuant to RIF and as a
result could be removed only if they were given advance notice and an
opportunity to reply. The Merit Systems Protection Board ordered the
Department of Agriculture to reinstate, retroactively, the appellants
to their positions.
Although none of the appellants actually returned to work, the
Department of Agriculture, as part of a settlement agreement, gave each
appellant 1 year and 10 months salary and recomputed retirement
benefits based on this increased salary.
Once Mr. Stewart learned of the Blalock decision he filed an appeal
with the Merit Systems Protection Board. Because his appeal was filed
late, the MSPB dismissed Mr. Stewart's appeal. He then filed a petition
for review with the MSPB, but that too was denied. Mr. Stewart,
therefore, has exhausted all possible avenues of administrative review.
Mr. Stewart is a North Carolina citizen who gave years of faithful
service to his State and country. He was wrongfully removed from his
job as North Carolina State Director of the Agricultural Stabilization
and Conservation Service. At the time, he was told he had no right to
appeal the dismissal when, as a decorated veteran who served his
country valiantly in World War II, he had a very real right to appeal.
Mr. President, I doubt that any of our colleagues believe that this
good man should be punished for having taken the word of his superior.
But for his superior's mistake, Mr. Stewart would have filed a timely
appeal and would have prevailed just as the other 24 appellants did in
the Blalock case. Mr. President, I do hope that in the interest of
equity Mr. Stewart will receive the same benefits that were afforded
the other State Directors.
______
By Mr. BAUCUS:
S. 1019. A bill to direct the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to
examine the impacts of whirling disease, and other parasites and
pathogens, on trout in the Madison River, MT, and similar natural
habitats, and for other purposes.
whirling disease response act of 1995
Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, in ``A River Runs Through It,'' Norman
Maclean wrote, ``in our family, there was no clear line between
religion and flyfishing.''
These words sum up the way we Montanans feel about our blue ribbon
trout streams. Great flyfishermen--men like Bud Lily and Dan Bailey--
are legends in Montana. And Montana rivers--the Madison, Yellowstone,
Missouri, Bighorn, and Bighole--are the heart and soul of our State. We
mark our calendars and plan our weekends around caddis and stone fly
hatches or peak grasshopper season. These outstanding trout streams are
in large part what makes Montana ``the last best place.''
But these rivers hold more that recreational value for Montanans.
Fishing is big business. It is the engine that drives the economies of
many communities throughout Montana. In fact, the net economic value of
fishing in Montana is estimated to be nearly $300 million a year.
The discovery of whirling disease on the Madison River in late 1994
puts Montana's wild trout fishery at great risk. Whirling disease is a
parasite that attacks the cartilage of young trout, particularly
rainbow trout. Its impact has been devastating to rainbow trout
populations on the Madison River, where whirling disease has caused a
90-percent decline in the last 3 years.
Whirling disease has also been detected in four other Montana river
drainages as well as in Nevada, Oregon, Idaho, California, Colorado,
Wyoming, and Utah.
[[Page S 9640]]
Montana has taken the challenge of fighting whirling disease head on.
Flyfishermen, scientists, State and Federal officials have joined
together to learn more about this disease and find solutions. Today, I
am introducing legislation that will better equip concerned Montanans
to effectively deal with whirling disease and minimize its impacts to
our world class wild trout fisheries.
The Whirling Disease Response Act of 1995 focuses on three
objectives: coordination, containment, and research.
First, the Whirling Disease Response Act coordinates all existing
data and research conducted to date on whirling disease. The act
requires the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to compile, within 180
days, a report that summarizes all efforts to date with respect to
whirling disease, to identify gaps in the available scientific
information, and to make recommendations as to how the Federal
Government can be a more effective partner to States confronted with
whirling disease.
Second, the act requires the U.S. Fish and Wildlife to modify the
Ennis Fish Hatchery so that it is a complete containment facility. This
hatchery is critically important to wild trout research as well as to
maintaining healthy trout fisheries throughout the United States. The
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service must make sure that this hatchery is not
infected with whirling disease or any other water borne parasite.
Third, and most important, this act requires the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service to significantly increase its role in whirling disease
research. As debilitating as this disease is, relatively little is
known about how to stop its spread. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
must make the fight against whirling disease a top priority. They must
work with affected States, universities, and sportsmen toward a
solution on whirling disease. This act makes whirling disease research
a priority for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
While Montana has a significant stake in fighting whirling disease,
it is not alone--19 other States are impacted by whirling disease. It
is in America's best interest that we work aggressively to minimize the
impact whirling disease has on our trout fisheries. I look forward to
working with my colleagues from other affected States to see that we
make headway in minimizing the impact whirling disease has on America's
blue ribbon trout streams.
______
By Mr. FEINGOLD:
S.J. Res. 37. A joint resolution disapproving the extension of
nondiscriminatory treatment--most-favored-nation treatment--to the
products of the People's Republic of China; to the Committee on
Finance.
disapproval of most-favored-nation status for china
Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President in 1974 Congress passed the Jackson-Vanik
amendment to the 1974 Omnibus Trade Act establishing a linkage between
human rights and most-favored-nation [MFN] trade status for nonmarket
economies. The legislation was largely responsible, in my view, for the
fantastic success of United States efforts to secure the freedom of
movement for over 1 million Jews and other persecuted minorities from
the Soviet Union.
Since 1989, when the Chinese military brutally gunned down hundreds
of protectors in Tianmen Square and cracked down on the blossoming
dissident movement in China, there have been efforts to link Chinese
MFN to human rights improvements.
In 1991, legislation to set conditions for the extension of MFN to
China was passed by overwhelming majorities in both the House and the
Senate, only to be vetoed by President Bush. The House overrode the
veto, but the Senate sustained it by a mere one vote. In 1992 Congress
again passed bills to revoke MFN status for products manufactured by
Chinese state-owned companies. President Bush vetoed that as well, and
once again the Senate sustained the veto.
When President Clinton came to office in 1993, he issued an Executive
order specifying seven areas in which the Chinese would need to make
``significant progress'' if MFN were to be extended in 1994. I was one
of those who strongly condemned the action of the administration when
it abandoned this position in 1994, because I believe it undermined the
President's own credibility on human rights, and relegated U.S. human
rights advocacy from a policy with teeth to one of rhetoric and
symbolism. For the same reasons, I am disappointed that despite a year
in which freedoms further diminished in China, President Clinton
announced on June 2 that he would seek to extend MFN status to China
again this year.
I am most outraged, though, Mr. President, that the United States
would even consider extending MFN to China at precisely the moment that
the Chinese have arrested a prominent human rights activist and
American citizen, Mr. Henry Wu, and threatened to try him for espionage
and subject him to the death penalty. This is yet another disgraceful
mark on China's human rights record, and will hopefully compel us to
respond finally with the toughest human rights policy possible.
Mr. President, that is why I am introducing today a joint resolution
of disapproval, consistent with the Jackson-Vanik amendment of 1974, of
the extension of nondiscriminatory treatment to products of the
People's Republic of China.
There is no evidence, Mr. President, that the granting of
unconditional MFN status to China--an element of a so-called policy of
``constructive engagement''--has improved China's human rights behavior
at all. Both Assistant Secretary of State for Asia and Pacific Affairs
Winston Lord and Assistant Secretary of State for Human Rights and
Humanitarian Affairs John Shattuck have said publicly that the human
rights situation has not improved in China. The State Department's own
1994 report acknowledges that ``In 1994, there continued to be
widespread and well-documented human rights abuses in China.'' From the
events of the last 6 months, in fact, one can only conclude that the
situation has worsened--even with MFN and robust trade.
The Chinese Government continues to exercise significant control on
opposition and dissent; to abuse systematically is prisoners, including
the use of slave labor and the alleged organ transplant of executed
prisoners; and to impose harsh regulations in Tibet, while refusing to
engage in any dialog with Nobel Peace prize laureate the Dalai Lama.
In the last 2 months alone, several prominent intellectuals have been
detained while their homes have been searched simply for signing
petitions in support of more political openness. More have been taken
into custody and interrogated about their activities. Some have been
questioned, released, and then sent away from Beijing, while others
have just disappeared, including China's most prominent dissident, Wei
Jeisheing, whose whereabouts since February are unknown, except to the
extent that he is confirmed to be in police custody. Two weeks ago,
Chen Ziming, another well-known prodemocracy activist, was suddenly
reimprisoned after being released on a medical parole last year.
Stricter security laws have been adopted by the Politburo, and
Beijing seems intent on limiting access of Chinese citizens to the tens
of thousands of international nongovernmental organizations that will
be in China this September for the U.N. Fourth World Conference on
Women.
As the leader of the free world, the United States has the
responsibility to work to protect human rights worldwide. The most
recent action of the Chinese Government against an American citizen
makes it a personal issue for many us.
On June 19 Mr. Harry Wu entered northwest China, with a legal Chinese
visa and with a valid United States passport, and was immediately
detained by Chinese officials. For several days, China refused to
confirm that it was in fact holding an American citizen, and in effect
denied United States officials the access to our citizens that is
supposedly protected under a United States-China Consular Convention. A
U.S. diplomat was even sent on a wild goose chase throughout the
northwest provinces earlier this month in search of Mr. Wu.
The announcement this weekend that Mr. Wu is going to be tried as a
spy and potentially subject to the death penalty is the one of
the most egregious
[[Page S 9641]]
violations I can think of. After spending 19 years in Chinese prison
camps, and then seeking refuge in the United States, Mr. Wu has been
actively researching the abuse of Chinese prisoners, including the
trade of human body parts from executed prisoners to party officials.
He has produced a film which was aired on the British Broadcasting
Corp., published articles on the subject, and testified before
congressional committees. He has publicized what can happen when the
State has the will and instruments to take these actions, and has
fought to halt this gruesome practice in China.
Mr. President, no one can possibly be deceived into thinking that Mr.
Wu was arrested by Chinese officials for any other reason except to
silence him. He is being threatened with death for uncovering horrid
human rights abuses in China. The U.S. and international reactions must
be anything but muted or conciliatory.
Earlier this year, the administration was willing to play hardball
with trade when it came to Chinese piracy of software, and threatened
to impose $1 billion worth of sanctions against products of specific
state-owned industries. The threat worked, and the United States
achieved its goals. I would entreat the administration to address the
plight of a human being just as seriously.
My joint resolution is intended to send the message that we cannot
have business as usual with China when human rights advocates, such as
Harry Wu, are under the threat of death. In my view, MFN should not
have been extended to China this year at all given its human rights
record, but now, especially, we cannot offer conciliations of this
kind.
China's human rights record is deteriorating, despite MFN, and there
is little, if no, evidence that economic engagement is improving the
human rights situation in China, as was earlier promised. Though
China's economy is expanding brilliantly, political change is not
coming: in fact, the Chinese Government appears to be doing everything
within its power to ensure that economic development does not bring
political liberalization. If anything, the Chinese need MFN to continue
the trade and investment on which its economic development depends. For
this reason, we must use MFN as a lever to protect human rights in
China, and an American human rights crusader who is facing death.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of resolution be printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the joint resolution ordered to be printed
in the Record, as follows:
S.J. Res. 37
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled, That the
Congress does not approve the extension of the authority
contained in section 402(c) of the Trade Act of 1974
recommended by the President to the Congress on June 2, 1995,
with respect to the People's Republic of China.
____________________