[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 114 (Tuesday, July 30, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9159-S9161]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. COATS (for himself, Mr. Stevens, Mr. Nickles, Mr. Abraham, 
        Mr. DeWine, Mr. Coverdell and Mr. Faircloth):
  S. 2000. A bill to make certain laws applicable to the Executive 
Office of the President, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Governmental Affairs.


        The Presidential and Executive Office Accountability Act

  Mr. COATS. All Members of this body remember early in this Congress 
we introduced and passed into law the Congressional Accountability Act 
which applied the various civil rights and labor laws that are 
currently applicable to employers and employees throughout America's 
workplaces, and applied this same restrictions to Members of Congress.
  For too long we had exempted ourselves from the laws and regulations 
that we had imposed on virtually every other business operation in 
America. There were only a couple of workplaces that were exempted: The 
Labor Standards Act, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Americans With 
Disability Act, and the other items that we discussed. Those 
institutions were the U.S. Congress and the executive branch, in 
particular, the White House. We remedied that, partially, for the 
Congress with the adoption of the Congressional Accountability Act.
  Now, these 11 specific items apply to Members of Congress as well as 
to the private sector. I think what we are learning is that some of 
these laws are good, some of these laws are applicable to what we do, 
but some of them are overly burdensome and overly restrictive and 
therefore need to be examined. Because they apply to us as they apply 
to everyone else, we feel that burden, and perhaps we can be reasonable 
when we examine these to determine whether or not reforms are needed.
  This act would apply these same provisions that now apply to Congress 
and virtually every other workplace in the country, to the White House. 
This legislation, which I send to the desk for referral, was originally 
cosponsored by Senator Stevens, as well as other Members including 
Senators Nickles, Abraham, DeWine, Coverdell, and Faircloth.
  Mr. President, today I send to the desk a bill designed to eliminate 
a dubious double standard that remains in the application of our civil 
rights and labor protection laws.
  Last year, this Congress passed the Congressional Accountability Act, 
requiring Congress to live under the laws it passes--and oftentimes 
imposes--on the rest of the Nation. Now that the Congressional 
Accountability Act is

[[Page S9160]]

the law of the land, only one workplace in America remains exempt from 
our Nation's laws and regulations. In just one place of employment, 
workers do not enjoy the rights and protections afforded to all other 
Americans. That one place is the White House, and it's time for the 
White House to join the rest of the United States in living under the 
civil rights and labor laws governing the rest of the Nation.
  For decades, Congress callously exempted itself from rules and 
regulations it was passing for the rest of the country. Many of us had 
supported the Congressional Accountability Act for years, but were 
thwarted in our efforts. Finally, when--for the first time in 40 
years--Republicans gained control of Congress, we wasted little time 
and passed the Congressional Accountability Act into law.
  I remain in strong support of the principle that Congress should not 
be exempt from the laws that apply to all other Americans, and because 
of the Congressional Accountability Act, Congress now is living under 
11 different labor and civil rights laws from which it had previously 
exempted itself. I continue to believe that this is a simple issue of 
fundamentlal fairness. Congress should live under the laws it passes 
for everyone else. In doing so, lawmakers will learn first hand which 
laws work, and perhaps more often than not, which laws are overly 
intrusive and burdensome.
  These lessons also would be appropriate for the White House, since 
under President Clinton the Federal Register of Government regulations 
now totals about 65,000 pages, the largest number in more than 15 
years. Despite President Clinton's stated concerns for the working men 
and women of this country, the White House continues to exempt itself 
from the laws and regulations covering the rest of the country, 
including Congress and all private businesses.
  For example, because of this privileged loophole, the White House 
does not have to abide by the minimum wage or the Family Medical Leave 
Act or the overtime requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act or 
several of the other civil rights and labor laws that apply to all 
other Americans. I think America's labor leaders will agree with me 
when I say that employees of the White House should be protected by the 
same laws that the President approves for the rest of the country. 
Employees should have the same rights and protections regardless of 
where they work--whether the individual labors in the private sector, 
the Congress, and yes, even in the White House.

  There are some in the White House who argue that this legislation is 
unnecessary because the White House voluntarily complies with the 
spirit of many of these laws. Mr. President, I argue that voluntary 
compliance is not good enough. How many private sector companies are 
allowed to voluntarily comply with the laws of the land? The answer is 
zero, and the White House should not be an exception.
  The Congressional Accountability Act, and the proposed White House 
Accountability Act, give employees of these two branches of Government 
the same rights as any other citizen to go into a court of law and have 
their case heard by a jury of their peers. White House employees should 
not have to depend on the benevolence or arbitrary good will of a 
supervisor to ensure that they are not taken advantage of, sexually 
harassed, or otherwise dealt with in an inappropriate and possibly 
illegal manner. They deserve the right to be free from discrimination, 
the right to work in a safe and healthy work environment, the right not 
to be fired simply because of race, sex, disability, or age. White 
House workers deserve the same rights and protections that every other 
American enjoys in the private sector, and now in the U.S. Congress.
  The White House Accountability Act also would be good policy for 
senior management and administrators. White House policy makers and 
their staffs would gain a first-hand understanding of the laws they 
propose and enact. Perhaps the White House will find, as many in 
Congress have been forced to learn, that some of the laws we pass are 
good, some do not go far enough and need to be strengthened, or--and 
this is too often the case--that many of the regulations imposed on the 
Nation by the Federal bureaucracy in Washington are onerous and in 
serious need of reform.
  Writing in the Federalist Papers, James Madison instructed us that no 
branch of Government is above the law. Madison wrote, ``Congress can 
make no law which will not have its full operation on themselves and 
their friends, as well as on the great mass of society.''
  Because of the Congressional Accountability Act, Federal laws and 
regulations now apply from our Nation's assembly lines to our Nation's 
general assembly. When President Clinton was inaugurated, he called the 
White House, ``the people's house.'' It's time he backed up that 
statement by letting his workers in the White House enjoy the same 
civil rights and labor protections enjoyed by the rest of the people in 
whose house they serve.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. PELL:
  S. 2001. A bill to amend the Job Training Partnership Act to improve 
the definition relating to eligible dislocated workers, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Labor and Human Resources.


                the fishermen as dislocated workers act

  Mr. PELL. Mr. President, I am introducing legislation today that 
amends the Job Training Partnership Act [JTPA] to improve the 
definition of eligible dislocated workers. The legislation defines 
``dislocated worker'' as any employee who ``has become unemployed as a 
result of a Federal action that limits the use of, or restricts access 
to, a marine natural resource.''
  This language is directed at fishermen. In Rhode Island, as well as 
many other coastal States, customarily the crew members of fishing 
boats are not paid but are given a share of the day's catch. 
Unfortunately, this means they are neither employees of the boat nor 
self-employed.
  Fishing has always been a difficult occupation. But now, with a 
declining supply, Government efforts to restore the population of 
various species of fish by limiting or closing access to fishing 
grounds, and the need to close large portions of our coastal waters 
after oil spills and other environmental disasters, fishermen are 
leaving port less and, when they do, catching less.
  Some months ago, I received a letter from a Rhode Island fisherman 
who realized that fishing would no longer be able to support the 
demands of his growing family. He had, therefore, selected a new 
occupation--he wants to be a cabinetmaker--and on his own, he had 
located and been accepted into a training program. His only problem? 
Financial assistance.
  Because he is technically not unemployed, the present system is of no 
help to him. My legislation would correct that unfortunate inequity.
  I originally offered and had accepted a similar version of this 
legislation in the Labor and Human Resources Committee as an amendment 
to S. 143, the Workforce Development Act. Regrettably, the House-Senate 
work force development conference committee has only just finished its 
work under a cloud of partisanship and disagreement and I very much 
doubt any further action will take place during this Congress.
  I do not believe the commercial fishermen in Galilee, RI, should 
suffer because of the failure of a conference committee in Washington, 
DC. I have, therefore, drafted this legislation.
  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. 2001

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. DEFINITION.

       Section 301(a)(1) of the Job Training Partnership Act (29 
     U.S.C. 1651(a)(1)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``; or'' and inserting 
     a semicolon;
       (2) in subparagraph (D), by striking the period and 
     inserting ``; or''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(E) have become unemployed as a result of a Federal 
     action that limits the use of, or restricts access to, a 
     marine natural resource.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. SNOWE:
  S. 2002. A bill to amend title 18, United States Code, to prohibit 
taking a child hostage in order to evade arrest; to the Committee on 
the Judiciary.

[[Page S9161]]

                           crime legislation

 Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, over the past few years, America has 
witnessed an unfortunate trend involving standoffs between the U.S. 
Government and parties who reject its authority to enforce the laws of 
this land--specifically, the incidents in Waco, TX; Ruby Ridge, ID; and 
Garfield County, MT. Thankfully, the most recent episode involving the 
Freemen did not escalate to violence or bloodshed. Regrettably, this 
does not hold true for Waco or Ruby Ridge, where there was a tragic 
loss of life to civilians and Government agents alike.

  Each of these situations jeopardized children's lives--innocent 
children who had no choice in the role they played in these standoffs. 
In Waco, 25 young children under the age of 15 died in the blaze that 
spread throughout the compound. These deaths occurred despite the 
repeated efforts by Federal agents to encourage Branch Davidians 
leaders to allow children to leave the compound.
  At Ruby Ridge, a 14-year-old died after being caught in gunfire. And 
during the Freemen standoff, Americans across the Nation held their 
breath--praying that violence would not erupt. Once again, the lives of 
children were placed in jeopardy. But thankfully, this time, the 
children--and adults--emerged unharmed.
  As we have seen, tragedy can occur in these very tense situations. 
Above all else, we need to ensure that children are kept out of these 
situations in the future. People who arm themselves after failing to 
comply with warrants or because they seek to avoid arrest must realize 
that, whether or not it is intended, children are implicated in these 
standoffs. We cannot allow this to continue any longer. We cannot allow 
another child's life to be endangered in this manner.
  Today, I am introducing a bill which seeks to protect children from 
harm in these standoff situations. My bill would make it a crime to 
detain a child when two conditions are met: if a person is trying to 
evade arrest or avoid complying with a warrant, and that person uses 
force, or threatens to use force, against a Federal agent. Any person 
convicted of violating this act would be imprisoned for 10-25 years. If 
a child is injured, the penalty would be increased to 20-35 years. If a 
child is killed, the penalty would be life imprisonment.
  No law can ever assure that children will be kept free from harm. But 
this legislation will help assure that children do not become 
inadvertent, innocent pawns when violent situations arise. It will 
provide a deterrent to involving a child in any standoff--and severe 
penalties for those who ignore the law.
  Tense standoffs between Federal law enforcement officers and hostile 
fugitives are no place for children. This bill will help encourage the 
removal of innocent children from such dangerous situations. As a 
nation, we should not tolerate the use of children as pawns or human 
shields when people choose to evade the laws of this land. I hope my 
colleagues support this important piece of legislation.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. EXON:
  S. 2003. A bill to amend the Armored Car Industry Reciprocity Act of 
1993 to clarify certain requirements and to improve the flow of 
interstate commerce; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
Transportation.


          The armored car industry reciprocity improvement act

  Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I introduce legislation known as the Armored 
Car Industry Reciprocity Improvement Act. This legislation is a 
companion measure to H.R. 3431 which has unanimously passed in the 
House of Representatives. It is my hope that this bill which makes a 
slight modification to its companion can be taken up and swiftly passed 
this year to safely expand the benefits of the Armored Car Reciprocity 
Act of 1993 which I introduced in the U.S. Senate. The 1993 law which 
had support from law enforcement, public safety and armored car 
industry advocates replaced a patch work of State laws with a common 
sense, pro-safety, pro-interstate commerce approach to weapons 
registration, background checks and training for armored car crew 
members.
  The amendments to the 1993 law build on what was learned since 1993 
and will make the reciprocal benefits of the law available to more 
States. The net result will be better screened, better qualified and 
better trained armored car crews.
  The armored car is one of the most overlooked instrumentalities of 
interstate commerce. Without the ability to safely and securely move 
currency, securities, food stamps, gold and other valuables, interstate 
commerce would be impossible.
  I am pleased to introduce this legislation which I encourage the U.S. 
Senate to overwhelmingly endorse. It is a tribute to the success of the 
1993 law.

                          ____________________