[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 22 (Friday, February 23, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1295-S1297]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. BURNS:
  S. 1571. A bill to provide for the exchange of certain lands within 
the 

[[Page S1296]]
State or Montana, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy 
and Natural Resources.


                  The Lost Creek Exchange Act of 1996

 Mr. BURNS. Madam President, today I am introducing the Lost 
Creek Land Exchange Act of 1996.
  This bill would accomplish two important things. It authorizes the 
acquisition of the Lost Creek area for the public, and it may help 
prevent the closure of the Brand-S mill in Livingston MT.
  I want to emphasize that this bill is a starting point. I fully 
anticipate major changes will need to be made. Yet, the process needs 
to move forward.
  Under this bill, 14,500 acres of blue-ribbon bighorn sheep habitat 
known as Lost Creek would become a part of the Deerlodge National 
Forest. For the past few years, local sportsman and conservation 
groups, the Forest Service, and many others have been interested in the 
public acquiring this prime habitat. I, too, believe this is a 
worthwhile endeavor.
  The bill I am introducing today would transfer the Lost Creek area, 
and 3,000 additional acres currently owned by R-Y Timber, to the Forest 
Service. In return R-Y Timber will acquire the deed to 3,600 acres and 
46 million board feet of timber.
  As most people in Park County know, R-Y Timber has an option to 
purchase the Brand-S mill in Livingston. If R-Y Timber decides to not 
purchase this mill by the middle of March, it is my understanding that 
the chances for the mill to remain open will be very slim. While R-Y 
Timber already has a mill in Townsend, this land exchange could allow 
R-Y Timber to keep both mills operating, and therefore, prevent the 
loss of 130 much-needed jobs in the Livingston area.
  As I stated earlier, R-Y Timber will receive the deed to 46 million 
board feet of timber in the Deerlodge, Helena, and Lewis and Clark 
National Forests. However, the areas for harvesting have not been 
identified.
  In addition, this timber will be harvested according to the Montana 
Forestry best management practice, Montana streamside zone management 
law, and other State laws. Between 20 and 30 percent of the timber will 
be available each year, and R-Y Timber will have 5 years to complete 
the harvest.
  Language has also been included to assure that designation of the 
timber will not slow down the present limitations on the numbers of 
trained Forest Service personnel. Under this bill, the Forest Service 
would be required to use outside contractors to perform whatever field 
work is necessary for the designation.
  The Lost Creek area has been valued at about $8 million. And the days 
of the Federal Government simply paying the price tag are over. This 
bill provides a way for the public to purchase this prime bighorn sheep 
habitat while providing some timber jobs in our communities.
  Madame President, as I stated earlier the bill I am introducing today 
is a starting point. We have much work ahead of us. Over the next 
couple months, I hope that the parties involved will continue to work 
together so this win-win bill can make it to the President's 
desk.
                                 ______

      By Mr. DeWINE (for himself and Mr. Lugar):
  S. 1572. A bill to amend title 23, United States Code, to provide 
funds and incentives for closures of rail-highway crossings, and for 
other purposes; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.


                the railroad crossing safety act of 1996

 Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, today I introduce legislation that 
would make America's railroad crossings a lot safer.
  According to the National Safety Council, over the past 4 years an 
average of 522 people have been killed each year in train-vehicle 
collisions. Last year, 37 of these deaths occurred in my own State of 
Ohio.
  Almost 50 percent of these accidents occur at crossings that are 
already equipped with active warning devices. Simply adding more 
warning devices, therefore, is not a complete solution to this problem.
  Some of these railroad crossings are just too dangerous. They are 
life threatening. They are not needed, and they ought to be closed.
  We all know, however, that people get accustomed to taking certain 
routes. And communities get used to certain traffic patterns. That's 
why it's sometimes difficult for localities to close these crossings, 
even when it's clear on safety grounds that a particular crossing must 
be closed.
  Clearly, the local communities need some help. That's the purpose of 
my legislation.
  Currently, the Federal Government pays 90 percent of the cost of 
closing a rail-highway grade crossing. But other grade crossing safety 
projects--such as traffic signs, guardrails, and traffic lights--are 
eligible for 100 percent Federal funding.
  The bill I am introducing today will make grade crossing closure 
projects eligible for that same 100-percent Federal funding. This will 
remove the current incentive against closure projects.
  If the safest thing to do is close a crossing, localities should have 
an incentive to do that.
  This bill does not involve new Federal money. The money for this bill 
is already allocated for crossing safety purposes--and all we are 
trying to do is deploy that money in the most rational and effective 
way.
  My bill will also provide up to $7,500 to a local highway authority 
for each crossing closed. Furthermore, the railroad that is operating 
the crossing will match this money.
  That means up to $15,000 for a local community--just to close a 
crossing.
  Obviously, this is just the beginning of a many-pronged assault on a 
major safety problem. We can't close every single crossing that might 
be dangerous. So we want to make certain that the remaining railroad 
crossings are as safe as possible.
  Last summer, I brought together Federal and State officials to see 
whether changes could be made to speed the process for dealing with 
unsafe railroad crossings.
  Previously, the installation of safety lights and gates followed a 
linear process--one step had to be completed before another was allowed 
to begin. we created a new, streamlined process that allows officials 
to identify hazardous crossings and to implement expedited safety 
measures.
  We eliminated the waiting periods between design, funding, and 
construction. The safety installation process used to take up to 2 
years--but with this new, streamlined process, we are hoping it will 
only take about 12 months. This new process is being tried on 31 
different sites throughout the State of Ohio.
  It is a very promising approach, and if it works in Ohio, it deserves 
to be extended all over America.
  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. 1572

       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 ``Railroad Crossing Safety Act 
     of 1996''.

     SEC. 2. FUNDS AND INCENTIVES FOR CLOSURES OF RAIL-HIGHWAY 
                   CROSSINGS.

       (a) Increase in Federal Share of Crossing Closures.--
     Section 120(c) of title 23, United States Code, is amended by 
     inserting ``rail-highway crossing closure,'' after 
     ``carpooling and vanpooling,''.
       (b) Incentive Payments for At-Grade Crossing Closures.--
     Section 130 of such title is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(i) Incentive Payments for At-Grade Crossing Closures.--
       ``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     this section and subject to paragraphs (2) and (3), a State 
     may, from sums available to the State under this section, 
     make incentive payments to local governments in the State 
     upon the permanent closure by such governments of public at-
     grade railway-highway crossings under the jurisdiction of 
     such governments.
       ``(2) Incentive payments by railroads.--A State may not 
     make an incentive payment under paragraph (1) to a local 
     government with respect to the closure of a crossing unless 
     the railroad owning the tracks on which the crossing is 
     located makes an incentive payment to the government with 
     respect to the closure.
       ``(3) Amount of state payment.--The amount of the incentive 
     payment payable to a local government by a State under 
     paragraph (1) with respect to a crossing may not exceed the 
     lesser of--
       ``(A) the amount of the incentive payment paid to the 
     government with respect to the crossing by the railroad 
     concerned under paragraph (2); or 
     
[[Page S1297]]

       ``(B) $7,500.
       ``(4) Use of state payments.--A local government receiving 
     an incentive payment from a State under paragraph (1) shall 
     use the amount of the incentive payment for transportation 
     safety improvements.''.

     SEC. 3. GUIDELINES FOR ANALYSIS OF COSTS AND BENEFITS OF NEW 
                   RAILWAY-HIGHWAY CROSSINGS.

       Not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, the Secretary of Transportation shall prescribe 
     guidelines to assist the States in analyzing the costs and 
     benefits to the public of new railway-highway grade 
     crossings. The purpose of the guidelines is to encourage 
     uniformity in the analysis of such costs and benefits by the 
     States.
                                 ______


                            By Mr. D'AMATO:

  S. 1573. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to 
establish and provide a checkoff for a Breast and Prostate Cancer 
Research Fund, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.


           the taxpayers' cancer research funding act of 1996

 Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, breast and prostate cancer have 
taken a horrible toll on women and men throughout the world and we must 
make every effort to eradicate these pervasive diseases. Breast cancer 
is a deadly epidemic that strikes over 180,000 women each year. It will 
kill more than 44,000 women this year alone. Similarly, prostate cancer 
will strike an estimated 317,000 men, and will kill roughly 41,000 men 
this year. We cannot allow these appalling rates to continue unabated. 
We need to do something now. We need a cure and finding a cure takes 
money--a tremendous amount of money.
  I rise today to introduce legislation to add another weapon to our 
arsenal in the fight against breast and prostate cancer. My bill will 
provide vital resources for the fight to eradicate this dire threat to 
the lives of women and men across our Nation. In addition, my bill will 
support our efforts to combat one of the leading cancer killers of men: 
prostate cancer. This is a very straightforward bill. This bill will 
augment existing Federal research funding by easily allowing taxpayers 
to get directly involved by contributing to a newly established fund 
expressly earmarked for breast and prostate cancer research.
  On the Federal income tax return there currently exists a box that 
can be selected for Federal campaign contributions. My bill will amend 
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 by establishing a similar box for a 
Federal breast and prostate cancer research fund. This will allow our 
citizens to cross swords with this dual scourge by simply placing a 
check in a box on their income tax return, as with the campaign 
contribution fund. One point needs to be made very clear--this is not 
an additional tax. This is a purely voluntary means by which concerned 
citizens may earmark a minor but vital portion of their Federal income 
tax payments expressly for breast and prostate cancer research.
  Breast cancer is a truly horrible disease. Its incidence is rising at 
an alarming rate. In 1960, 1 out of every 14 women developed breast 
cancer in her lifetime. A few years ago it was 1 in 10. Now the figure 
is one in eight. We cannot allow this trend to continue. According to 
the National Cancer Institute's calculations, breast cancer comprises 
about 30 percent of all female cancers and it is estimated that the 
cost to the nation in the form of direct and indirect health care costs 
will exceed $16 billion annually. The NCI also says that reductions in 
breast cancer mortality will have a significant influence on these 
costs to the Nation.
  Like breast cancer among women, prostate cancer is a leading killer 
of American men. According to the American Cancer Society, this dreaded 
disease is the second leading cause of cancer death in men. It is 
projected to take the lives of approximately 41,000 men in 1996 alone.
  Congress has just begun to pay more attention to these terrible 
diseases by devoting increased funding for breast and prostate cancer 
research at the Federal level. We have made tremendous progress, but 
much more remains to be done. Given current budget constraints we need 
a mechanism to increase breast and prostate cancer funding every year 
from here on out.
  Our current method of breast cancer treatment is not a cure. Today's 
treatments for breast cancer are very crude. We treat women with 
poison, radiation, and radical surgery with the hope that we will kill 
the cancer and not the woman. This is similar to dropping a tiny atom 
bomb. What we need is a smart bomb for breast cancer. Something which 
will specifically kill the breast cancer cells without causing 
destruction to the rest of the women's body and immune system. This can 
only be accomplished with an additional infusion of breast cancer 
research dollars. We also need to recruit more scientists and new ideas 
and innovations into this field. More money will jumpstart research but 
it must also cover the funding needs of research scientist and their 
programs.
  I am personally determined to do everything I can to fight for the 
eradication of breast and prostate cancer. I hope to enlist the aid of 
my colleagues in the establishment of this Federal breast and prostate 
cancer research fund. Breast and prostate cancer can only be 
understood, and eventually conquered, through increased research We 
need a cure and we need one now. It is therefore critical that we all 
join together in this effort to help speed the discovery of a cure for 
these dreaded diseases.
  Mr. President, I urge the adoption of this critical bill.

                          ____________________