[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 125 (Thursday, September 12, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10379-S10382]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                        GUNS AND DOMESTIC ABUSE

  Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I rise to speak in favor of the 
Lautenberg amendment to the Treasury-postal appropriations bill, taking 
guns away from individuals convicted of domestic violence. I am a 
cosponsor of his original bill, and want to congratulate Senator 
Lautenberg on offering this important legislation in the form of an 
amendment today.
  Just getting the gun out of the home would make the difference in so 
many of these horrible stories we hear about domestic violence, in the 
news, or from people on the street. I don't know how many people on the 
floor of the Senate have heard the cries of a family in crisis; I don't 
know if you have ever had to dial 911 out of worry for a neighbor. But, 
I have.
  If this amendment makes a difference for one victim of domestic 
violence, it will have done its job.
  One woman I know told me the story of her abusive ex-husband. He was 
physically abusive, and had been convicted of misdemeanors. What is 
more, he knew he was prone to violence against his family, and did not 
trust himself. He purposely separated the gun and the bullets at two 
different ends of their house, so he would not be able to shoot her in 
the heat of the moment.
  But the measures he took were not quite enough, when he came home one 
night, drunk, and yelling that the house wasn't clean enough for him. 
Because he was able to find the bullets, find the gun, load it, and 
point it at his wife. That she is alive today is a miracle.
  This man was not the sort of law-abiding citizen we so frequently 
hear about from the NRA. He had a record. He did not even trust 
himself. This man should not have had a gun.
  If he did not have a gun, the man in the story may have used some 
other weapon. But we know from the research that nearly 65 percent of 
all murder victims known to have been killed by intimates were shot to 
death. We have seen that firearms-associated family and intimate 
assaults are 12 times more likely to be fatal than those not associated 
with firearms. A California study showed when a domestic violence 
incident is fatal, 68 percent of the time the homicide was done with a 
firearm.
  Again, the gun is the key ingredient most likely to turn a domestic 
violence incident into a homicide. But the people this amendment would 
take guns away from--these people have already broken the law, and in a 
very relevant way. In the face of the reality of domestic violence and 
the role guns play in homicides in such situations, the Senate cannot 
allow convicted abusers to have guns.
  Unfortunately, this amendment will not make life better for many 
women who are abused, even when guns are present in the home. We know 
that most domestic violence is not even reported, and of the cases that 
are reported, many do not lead to a conviction. This is a problem 
associated with the horrible effects of victimization, and has a 
different set of solutions.
  But, for thousands of women and men in this country, this amendment 
would mean immediate results. To get the gun out of the home will mean 
the difference between life and death. I urge the Senate to pass the 
Lautenberg amendment.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise in support of the Lautenberg

[[Page S10380]]

amendment, because I believe it offer women a vital protection against 
those who might do them harm.
  Every year, an estimated 2 million women are victimized by domestic 
violence.
  Of these 2 million, nearly 6,000 die.
  And 70 percent of the time, the perpetrators of the deadly violence 
use a gun.
  Mr. President, we already prohibit convicted felons from possessing a 
firearm. But is an unfortunate fact that many domestic violence 
offenders are never convicted of a felony. Outdated or ineffective laws 
often treat domestic violence as a lesser offense.
  Sometimes, victims are reluctant to cooperate for fear of more 
violence.
  And sometimes victims just don't want to pull themselves through the 
ordeal of a trial.
  And finally, plea bargains often result in misdemeanor convictions 
for what are really felony crimes.
  As a result, Mr. President, many perpetrators of severe and recurring 
domestic violence are still permitted to posses a gun. Mr. President, 
these people are like ticking time bombs. It is only a matter of time 
before the violence get out of hand, and the gun results in tragedy.
  Something must be done to close this dangerous loophole.
  This amendment looks to the type of crime, rather than the 
classification of the conviction. Anyone convicted of a domestic 
violence offense would be prohibited from possessing a firearm. Fewer 
abusers will have guns, and fewer of the abused will wake up each 
morning wondering whether they will live through the day. I thank the 
Senator from New Jersey for his efforts, and I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question occurs an amendment No. 5241. The 
yeas and nays have been ordered.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Oregon [Mr. Hatfield] 
is necessarily absent.
  I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from 
Oregon [Mr. Hatfield] would vote ``yea.''
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Smith). Are there any other Senators in 
the Chamber who desire to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 97, nays 2, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 289 Leg.]

                                YEAS--97

     Abraham
     Akaka
     Ashcroft
     Baucus
     Bennett
     Biden
     Bond
     Boxer
     Bradley
     Breaux
     Brown
     Bryan
     Bumpers
     Burns
     Byrd
     Campbell
     Chafee
     Coats
     Cochran
     Cohen
     Conrad
     Coverdell
     Craig
     D'Amato
     Daschle
     DeWine
     Dodd
     Domenici
     Dorgan
     Exon
     Faircloth
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Ford
     Frahm
     Frist
     Glenn
     Gorton
     Graham
     Gramm
     Grams
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Harkin
     Hatch
     Helms
     Hollings
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Johnston
     Kassebaum
     Kempthorne
     Kennedy
     Kerrey
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Kyl
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lott
     Lugar
     Mack
     McCain
     McConnell
     Mikulski
     Moseley-Braun
     Moynihan
     Murkowski
     Murray
     Nickles
     Nunn
     Pell
     Pressler
     Pryor
     Reid
     Robb
     Rockefeller
     Roth
     Santorum
     Sarbanes
     Shelby
     Simon
     Simpson
     Smith
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stevens
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thurmond
     Warner
     Wellstone
     Wyden

                                NAYS--2

     Bingaman
     Heflin
       

                             NOT VOTING--1

       
     Hatfield
       
  The amendment (No. 5241) was agreed to.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. SHELBY. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
  Mr. LOTT. Senator Daschle and I have continued to confer, and a 
number of Senators have started asking about the plans for the night. I 
am looking at the list of amendments here. We still have a good number, 
somewhere between 25 and 30 first-degree amendments, but only 2 or 3 of 
them are relevant to this underlying bill.
  Our intent is to keep working. The managers have been working, trying 
to get things agreed to. We have a couple of pending amendments we are 
trying to get to an understanding on how to vote on them. We are acting 
in good faith.
  As I look at this list, so many of these amendments, really, should 
not be offered. We should go ahead and get this work done. We are in 
agreement now, the leadership on both sides of the aisle, that we are 
going to get it done tonight. We are going to keep working and dealing 
with these amendments. We are going to keep voting until we get this 
bill completed. Then we will be able to advise Members when we get it 
done tonight, we will have debate tomorrow but no votes.
  We are now coming close to getting an understanding on what we can do 
on Monday, with votes early Tuesday morning. Members can do what needs 
to be done, fulfill commitments and religious holidays, but to get that 
done we must finish this bill tonight.
  So, please, we should not offer these amendments that are not 
serious. We should the job done. Our intent is to keep going tonight.
  We are honoring my colleague, Sonny Montgomery, after 30 years of 
service in Congress. I will be there for 3 minutes to introduce him. 
Other than that, I would love to be here the rest of the night.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. KERREY. Mr. President, I echo what the majority leader said. 
There are many evenings where we arrive here at 2 or 3 o'clock in the 
morning, and then we start to do the sorts of things that we could have 
done at 5 o'clock in the evening.
  We know what needs to be done. We have put out contacts to offices. 
There are many amendments that we are prepared to accept, but we need 
Members to come to the floor and offer the amendments up or notify us 
if they are willing to take the amendments down. Otherwise we will be 
here until 2, 3, or 4 o'clock in the morning. We could wrap this thing 
up quickly.
  The substantive disagreements, at least on the bill itself, have all 
been taken care of. We have some disagreements on some amendments we 
are working on right now that we think we can work out, as well as 
getting a managers' amendment to wrap this up.
  I hope those who would like to get out of here at a relatively nice 
hour tonight, or those who desire not to have votes tomorrow, will get 
down here as quickly as they can. Both Senator Shelby and I are willing 
to work with Members to see whatever reasonable differences there are 
and we will work them out.


                 Amendments Nos. 5313 and 5314, En Bloc

  Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I have several managers' amendments. I 
send two amendments to the desk which have been cleared on each side. I 
ask unanimous consent these amendments be considered and approved en 
bloc and that any statements be placed at the appropriate place in the 
Record.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The clerk will report.
  The bill clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alabama [Mr. Shelby] proposes amendments 
     en bloc numbered 5313 and 5314.

  The amendments are as follows:


                           amendment no. 5313

      (Purpose: To provide funding for the review of trade issues)

       On page 19, line 2, before the period add the following new 
     provision: ``:Provided further, That of the funds 
     appropriated $2,500,000 may be made available for the review 
     of trade issues authorized by Public Law 103-182''.
                                                                    ____



                           amendment no. 5314

       Insert at the appropriate place: ``Provided further, That 
     from funds made available for Basic Repairs and Alterations, 
     $2,000,000 may be transferred to the Policy and Operations 
     appropriation''.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendments.
  The amendments (Nos. 5313 and 5314) were agreed to.
  Mr. KERREY. I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. SHELBY. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. SHELBY. The clerk will call the roll.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.

[[Page S10381]]

  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to lay aside the 
pending amendments so that I may call up an amendment at this time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                           Amendment No. 5234

   (Purpose: To remove inequities between congressional and contract 
            employees regarding access to health insurance)

  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask 
for its immediate consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The bill clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from South Dakota [Mr. Daschle], for himself, 
     Mr. Dorgan, and Mr. Simon, proposes an amendment numbered 
     5234.

  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of 
the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

       At the appropriate place in the bill, insert the following:
   TITLE____--HEALTH INSURANCE EQUITY FOR CONGRESSIONAL AND CONTRACT 
                               EMPLOYEES

     SEC.   01. SHORT TITLE OF TITLE.

       This title may be cited as the ``Congressional Contractor 
     Health Insurance Equity Act''.

     SEC.   02. DEFINITIONS.

       For purposes of this title:
       (1) Contract.--The term ``contract'' means any contract for 
     items or services or any lease of Government property 
     (including any subcontract of such contract or any sublease 
     of such lease)--
       (A) the consideration with respect to which is greater than 
     $75,000 per year,
       ``(B) with respect to a contract for services, requires at 
     least 1000 hours of services, and
       (B) entered into between any entity or instrumentality of 
     the legislative branch of the Federal Government and any 
     individual or entity employing at least 15 full-time 
     employees.
       (2) Employee.--The term ``employee'' has the meaning given 
     such term under section 3(6) of the Employee Retirement 
     Income Security Act of 1974 (29 U.S.C. 1002(6)).
       (3) Entity of the legislative branch.--The term ``entity of 
     the legislative branch'' includes the following:
       (A) The House of Representatives.
       (B) The Senate.
       (C) The Capitol Guide Service.
       (D) The Capitol Police.
       (E) The Congressional Budget Office.
       (F) The Office of the Architect of the Capitol.
       (G) The Office of the Attending Physician.
       (H) The Office of Compliance.
       (4) Group health plan.--The term ``group health plan'' 
     means any plan or arrangement which provides, or pays the 
     cost of, health benefits that are actuarially equivalent to 
     the benefits provided under the standard option service 
     benefit plan offered under chapter 89 of title 5, United 
     States Code.
       (5) Instrumentality of the legislative branch.--The term 
     ``instrumentality of the legislative branch'' means the 
     following:
       (A) The General Accounting Office.
       (B) The Government Printing Office.
       (C) The Library of Congress.

     SEC.   03. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS CONCERNING CONTRACTS COVERED 
                   UNDER THIS ACT.

       (a) In General.--Any contract made or entered into by any 
     entity or instrumentality of the legislative branch of the 
     Federal Government shall contain provisions that require 
     that--
       (1) all persons employed by the contractor in the 
     performance of the contract or at the location of the 
     leasehold be offered health insurance coverage under a 
     group health plan; and
       (2) with respect to the premiums for such plan with respect 
     to each employee--
       (A) the contractor pay a percentage equal to the average 
     Government contribution required under section 8906 of title 
     5, United States Code, for health insurance coverage provided 
     under chapter 89 of such title; and
       (B) the employee pay the remainder of such premiums.
       (b) Option to Purchase.--
       (1) In general.--Notwithstanding section 8914 of title 5, 
     United States Code, a contractor to which subsection (a) 
     applies that does not offer health insurance coverage under a 
     group health plan to its employees on the date on which the 
     contract is to take effect, may obtain any health benefits 
     plan offered under chapter 89 of title 5, United States Code, 
     for all persons employed by the contractor in the performance 
     of the contract or at the location of the leasehold. Any 
     contractor that exercises the option to purchase such 
     coverage shall make any Government contributions required for 
     such coverage under section 8906 of title 5, United States 
     Code, with the employee paying the contribution required for 
     such coverage for Federal employees.
       (2) Calculation of amount of premiums.--Subject to 
     paragraph (3)(B), the Director of the Office of Personnel 
     Management shall calculate the amount of premiums for health 
     benefits plans made available to contractor employees under 
     paragraph (1) separately from Federal employees and 
     annuitants enrolled in such plans.
       (3) Review by office of personnel management.--
       (A) Annual review.--The Director of the Office of Personnel 
     Management shall review at the end of each calendar year 
     whether the nonapplication of paragraph (2) would result in 
     higher adverse selection, risk segmentation in, or a 
     substantial increase in premiums for such health benefits 
     plans. Such review shall include a study by the Director of 
     the health care utilization and risks of contractor 
     employees. The Director shall submit a report to the 
     President, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and 
     the President pro tempore of the Senate which shall contain 
     the results of such review.
       (B) Nonapplication of paragraph (2).--Beginning in the 
     calendar year following a certification by the Director of 
     the Office of Personnel Management under subparagraph (A) 
     that the nonapplication of paragraph (2) will not result in 
     higher adverse selection, risk segmentation in, or a 
     substantial increase in premiums for such health benefits 
     plans, paragraph (2) shall not apply.
       (4) Requirement of opm.--The Director of the Office of 
     Personnel Management shall take such actions as are 
     appropriate to enable a contractor described in paragraph (1) 
     to obtain the health insurance described in such paragraph.
       (c) Administrative Functions.--
       (1) In general.--The office within the entity or 
     instrumentality of the legislative branch of the Federal 
     Government which administers the health benefits plans for 
     Federal employees of such entity or instrumentality shall 
     perform such tasks with respect to plan coverage purchased 
     under subsection (b) by contractors with contracts with such 
     entity or instrumentality.
       (2) Waiver authority.--Waiver of the requirements of this 
     title may be made by such office upon application.

     SEC.  04. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       (a) In General.--This title shall apply with respect to 
     contracts executed, modified, or renewed on or after January 
     1, 1997.
       (b) Termination.--
       (1) In general.--This title shall not apply on and after 
     October 1, 2001.
       (2) Transition rule.--In the case of any contract under 
     which, pursuant to this title, health insurance coverage is 
     provided for calendar year 2001, the contractor and the 
     employees shall, notwithstanding section  03(a)(2), pay 1\1/
     3\ of the otherwise required monthly premium for such 
     coverage in monthly installments during the period beginning 
     on January 1, 2001, and ending before October 1, 2001.

  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, every Member of Congress and every 
permanent Federal worker has access to comprehensive health insurance. 
This is true from the Senate cleaning crew, to the staff director of a 
committee, to Members of Congress and their families. We get insurance 
the way most working Americans do--through our employer, with a shared 
contribution between employer and employee. Our coverage is secure, 
comprehensive, and affordable.
  This is not true, however, for employees of firms contracting with 
Congress. Many of these individuals, who work side by side with Federal 
workers, have no such guarantee. In fact, about 1,900 employees of 
companies that contract with the Congress have no insurance. Current 
efforts to privatize services previously performed by Federal 
Government workers exacerbate this situation. Who are these 
contractors? They include House restaurant and mailroom staff, 
electronics technicians, day care providers, accountants, data 
processors, and construction and maintenance workers.
  They work hard, pay taxes, and play by the rules; yet, they don't 
have the same kind of health security that we take for granted. I know 
such people here in the Congress. One in particular is a person whom I 
go to every so often to have my hair cut. She has worked in the House 
Beauty Shop for 14 years. For 12 of those 14 years, she was a Federal 
Government employee and had health insurance. When the House privatized 
the House haircut facilities in 1995, this particular individual lost 
her insurance. She purchased a private health plan, but had to drop it 
3 months ago because she could not afford the $187 per month premium. 
She asked the company who runs the shop--a large firm in San Francisco 
that operates hundreds of shops--if they would pay 50 percent of the 
premium. Her employer, so far, has refused, and she is now without 
coverage.

[[Page S10382]]

 She recently had a serious case of food poisoning but, because of her 
lack of coverage, could not afford to go to the doctor for treatment.
  This kind of situation cannot and should not be tolerated. As we 
devise new ways to extend health coverage to the uninsured, it just 
doesn't seem fair to me that we in Congress could allow these 
contractors, working side-by-side with Federal Government employees who 
we call upon every day to do the work of the Congress, to go without 
any coverage at all.
  How can we enjoy subsidized comprehensive insurance while people who 
fix our computers, maintain our buildings, or cut our hair have no 
coverage at all? It seems to me that, in fairness, we just can't do 
that.
  That is why I have introduced this amendment, which would require 
firms that contract with Congress--and only Congress--to offer health 
insurance to their employees. This requirement would apply to firms 
that employ 15 or more workers and that have Federal contracts worth at 
least $75,000. These contractors could buy a private health plan or 
could select a plan from the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program 
that currently is available to all permanent Federal employees. In 
either case, they would be required to contribute to their employees' 
premiums, just as the Federal Government contributes to its workers' 
coverage. This would ensure that everyone working full time for 
Congress has access at least to the comprehensive coverage that is now 
available to congressional employees.
  This kind of action is certainly not without precedent. Several years 
ago, concern over high turnover among Senate day care employees led the 
Senate to give these contract workers the Federal health benefits 
coverage that we now enjoy. And Congress has a long-established history 
of taking action to guarantee fair working conditions for its contract 
workers. For 65 years, Davis-Bacon and other similar measures have 
guaranteed competitive wages to Federal contract workers. This bill 
complements these efforts.

  The introduction of this amendment is not just a humanitarian 
gesture. It is, frankly, a very practical one. Health costs for 
uninsured workers who become ill are simply shifted onto others; 
shifted onto public programs like Medicaid, or shifted onto doctors and 
hospitals in the form of charity care.
  In addition, the uninsured forgo preventive care and later need 
expensive emergency room treatment. We should not tolerate this kind of 
inefficient cost shifting. We should be setting an example for the rest 
of the Government, and certainly the private sector.
  Some may say this measure will reduce cost savings from 
privatization. I believe Congress should contract out services 
performed more efficiently by the private sector. But, certainly, 
Congress should not save money by denying workers a basic benefit that 
is guaranteed to all other Federal workers. We want services that are 
leaner, but not meaner.
  Outsourcing may be the wave of the future and, frankly, I generally 
support this trend. But we need to make sure that those workers caught 
in the transition have basic benefits to which other Federal workers 
are entitled.
  For many years now, Members of Congress have spoken on the floor 
about the need to extend coverage to the uninsured. We all recognize 
there can be no financial security without health security. Let us 
simply put our money where our mouth is. Let us show our country that 
what is good for Members of Congress and their employees is also good 
for the contractors who work with us.
  My hope is that my colleagues will join me in support of this 
amendment.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. KERREY. Mr. President, my view is that this is a reasonable 
amendment. I understand there is no budget cost.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, if the distinguished Senator from 
Nebraska will yield, there is no budget cost to this. It is completely 
paid for. There is a negligible cost that is completely offset. So 
there is no increase in the deficit that is the result of this 
amendment.
  The Senator is correct.
  Mr. KERREY. I certainly support the amendment.
  We are waiting for Senator Stevens' view on this amendment. Both he 
and the chairman are right now at a defense appropriations conference 
committee. They should be back momentarily. Once they are back, we 
should be able to wrap this up and get a vote.
  Mr. DASCHLE. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. KERREY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. KERREY. Mr. President, I urge Senators who would like to get out 
of here tomorrow to get to the floor and offer their amendments. There 
are no more than seven or eight amendments on either side. We have 
worked this down to a relatively small amount, and now all we are doing 
is waiting.
  There are a number of Senators who would like to have rollcall votes. 
It takes time to have rollcall votes. We have been working as 
diligently as we can. I want nobody to be surprised when it comes to 2 
or 3 o'clock in the morning around here, if we wait until 7, 8, 9 
o'clock before somebody comes down and offers amendments.
  This is an age-old problem, and we are heading to a very predictable 
point here. We have done about all we can from the floor. Now we have 
to have Members come down and offer their amendments.
  Mr. SHELBY. As the Senator from Nebraska said, we made a lot of 
progress. We are getting down to what we hope is the beginning of the 
end tonight. If people who have some amendments pending come over here 
and try to work with us, we might work some of them out. If we cannot 
work them out, maybe they can offer them and keep the process moving. 
It is 10 minutes to 6 now. We could be out of here in a couple of 
hours, maybe less, if people would cooperate. I know the Senator from 
Nebraska has been pushing it all day, and so have I. This is our third 
day on this bill.
  I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be allowed to 
proceed for not to exceed 10 minutes as in morning business. And if we 
need to, I will be glad to yield the floor back.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________