Congressional Record, Volume 143 Issue 68 (Wednesday, May 21, 1997)

[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 68 (Wednesday, May 21, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4879-S4898]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

By Mr. MURKOWSKI:
S. 771. A bill to regulate the transmission of unsolicited commercial
electronic mail, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation.

The Unsolicited Commercial Electronic Mail Choice Act of 1977

Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation
that will address one of the major complaints of Internet users--the
proliferation of unsolicited e-mail advertisements, junk e-mail, or so-
called spam.
Mr. President, in the span of 5 years, an entirely new method of
commerce and communication--electronic mail on the Internet--has spread
around the world. Along with the benefits of this revolutionary
technology, there are some negative byproducts that can only damage the
integrity of this new communications medium.
Because of technological advances, Internet e-mail has also become a
very inexpensive means of distributing endless e-mails solicitations
that not only annoy but can also defraud recipients. Moreover, the
growth of junk e-mail can clog e-mail distribution networks and overtax
the ability of service providers to distribute legitimate
communications.
With a minimal equipment investment, any individual or business has
the capability to transmit unsolicited advertisements to thousands of
people nationwide each hour with the click of a mouse. As technology
advances, thousands will turn into millions, and junk e-mail could
overwhelm cyberspace.
Junk e-mail is known in the trade by the derisive term of ``spam.''
Based upon the content of many of these e-mails, I'd be insulted if I
were an employee of Hormel, the creator of the real Spam.
Mr. President, not only is junk e-mail an annoyance, but for many
Americans, especially citizens living in rural States like Alaska,
there is a real out-of-pocket cost they must pay to receive these
unsolicited advertisements. When an on-line subscriber in rural Alaska
or Montana, logs on to a network server, such as America OnLine, to
check to see if there is e-mail, the subscriber often must pay a long
distance charge. If there is no e-mail in his on-line mailbox, the
subscriber's long distance charge may only cover 1 minute. However, if
there are 25 messages in his mailbox, 24 of which are unsolicited e-
mail ads, his long distance charges could triple or quadruple.
So what the rural on-line user is forced to do is to pay for the
privilege of receiving junk e-mail and then having to waste his time
hitting his delete button to empty this junk out of his mail box.
Mr. President, we ought to do something to end this practice. In
1991, Congress passed the Automated Telephone Consumer Protection Act
that contained a provision which banned unsolicited fax transmissions.
In the bill I am introducing today, the Unsolicited Commercial
Electronic Mail Choice Act of 1997, I have not chosen to take such a
sweeping and unilateral approach because the Internet is about choices,
not outright bans.

What my bill does is to require the use of the word ``Advertisement''
in the subject line of any unsolicited commercial e-mail, along with
the sender's real address, real e-mail address, and telephone number in
the body of the message. This requirement will empower Internet users
to filter out messages that they do not want to receive.
Spam generators who refuse to abide by this requirement could face
legal action from private citizens, state attorneys general, and/or the
Federal Trade Commission. FTC or state action could result in civil
penalties of up to $11,000 per incident and, more importantly, cease
and desist orders. Private citizens bringing suit could recover $5,000
plus reasonable attorney's fees.
Internet users can also choose not to unilaterally block all
unsolicited commercial e-mails. Instead, they can send removal requests
to specific mailing lists with further transmissions required to end
within 48 hours.
Moreover, Internet Service Providers, such as America Online or
Microsoft Network, would be required to filter out all e-mails with the
word ``Advertisement'' in the subject line when a consumer so requests.
Large service providers would have 1 year, from the date of enactment,
to implement this requirement. Smaller Internet Service Providers would
have 2 years to meet this requirement. Internet Service Providers would
also be required to cut off service to those who use their services to
send out unsolicited commercial e-mails in violation of the provisions
of the act.
Mr. President, I want to point out what this bill does not attempt to
do. It does not ban unsolicited commercial e-mails as some have
suggested. I have not chosen an outright ban because I support the
business practices of those who flood inboxes with sales pitches for
worthless vitamin products and multilevel marketing schemes. Quite the
contrary, I abhor such solicitations.
But I do not want to set a precedent in banning commercial speech on
the Internet. Although these unsolicited advertisements are annoying, I
do not believe that is a basis for an outright ban. A better approach
is to simply ignore them by filtering them out. If enough Americans
choose to filter out such e-mail messages, I seriously doubt that
anyone will bother to send out such e-mails in the future since the
cyberspace market will no longer be there.
I would also note that this bill does not impact automated mailing
lists, e-mails between friends, or e-mails between businesses and their
customers when there is a preexisting business relationship.
Mr. President, the Internet is about choices, not bans. The
Unsolicited

[[Page S4880]]

Commercial Electronic Mail Message Choice Act of 1997 should restore to
consumers and businesses the right to be free from endless e-mail
solicitations. It will be up to the consumer to decide if he or she
wants to receive such messages. That is the way I believe Americans
want it. They don't want government telling them what they can receive,
but they want right to decide for themselves.
Mr. President, as I said earlier, this is a very new technology and
it is not my intention to hinder it's development nor interfere with
legitimate commerce transacted on the Internet. I look forward to
working with my colleagues to pass legislation that resolves this
problem.
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. 771

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 ``Unsolicited Commercial
Electronic Mail Choice Act of 1997''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

Congress makes the following findings:
(1) The Internet is a worldwide network of information that
growing numbers of Americans use on a regular basis for
educational and personal activities.
(2) Electronic mail messages transmitted on the Internet
constitute an increasing percentage of communications in the
United States.
(3) Solicited commercial electronic mail is a useful and
cost-effective means for Americans to receive information
about a business and its products.
(4) The number of transmissions of unsolicited commercial
electronic mail advertisements has grown exponentially over
the past several years as the technology for creating and
transmitting such advertisements in bulk has made the costs
of distribution of such advertisements minimal.
(5) Individuals have available no effective means of
differentiating between unsolicited commercial electronic
mail advertisements and other Internet communications.
(6) The transmitters of unsolicited commercial electronic
mail advertisements can easily move from State to State.
(7) Individuals and businesses that receive unsolicited
commercial electronic mail advertisements often pay for the
costs of such receipt, including the costs of Internet access
and long distance telephone charges.
(8) Unsolicited commercial electronic mail can be used to
advertise legitimate services and goods but is also used for
fraudulent and deceptive purposes in violation of Federal and
State law.
(9) Individuals and companies that use unsolicited
commercial electronic mail for fraudulent and deceptive
purposes often use fraudulent identification information in
such electronic mail, making it impossible for a recipient to
request to be removed from the mailing list or for law
enforcement authorities to identify the sender.
(10) The inability of recipients of unsolicited commercial
electronic mail to identify the senders of such electronic
mail or to prevent its receipt impedes the flow of commerce
and communication on the Internet and threatens the integrity
of commerce on the Internet.
(11) Internet service providers are burdened by the cost of
equipment necessary to process unsolicited commercial
electronic mail.
(12) To facilitate the development of commerce and
communication on the Internet, unsolicited commercial
electronic mail should be readily identifiable and filterable
by individuals and Internet service providers.

SEC. 3. REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO TRANSMISSIONS OF UNSOLICITED
COMMERCIAL ELECTRONIC MAIL.

(a) Information on Advertisement.--
(1) Requirement.--Unless otherwise authorized pursuant to a
provision of section 7, a person who transmits an electronic
mail message as part of the transmission of unsolicited
commercial electronic mail shall cause to appear in each
electronic mail message transmitted as part of such
transmission the information specified in paragraph (3).
(2) Placement.--
(A) Advertisement.--The information specified in
subparagraph (A) of paragraph (3) shall appear as the first
word of the subject line of the electronic mail message
without any prior text or symbol.
(B) Other information.--The information specified in
subparagraph (B) of that paragraph shall appear prominently
in the body of the message.
(3) Covered information.--The following information shall
appear in an electronic mail message under paragraph (1):
(A) The term ``advertisement''.
(B) The name, physical address, electronic mail address,
and telephone number of the person who initiates transmission
of the message.
(b) Routing Information.--All Internet routing information
contained within or accompanying an electronic mail message
described in subsection (a) shall be valid according to the
prevailing standards for Internet protocols.
(c) Effective Date.--The requirements in this section shall
take effect 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act.

SEC. 4. FEDERAL REGULATION OF UNSOLICITED COMMERCIAL
ELECTRONIC MAIL.

(a) Transmissions.--
(1) In general.--Upon notice from a person of the person's
receipt of electronic mail in violation of a provision of
section 3 or 7, the Commission--
(A) may conduct an investigation to determine whether or
not the electronic mail was transmitted in violation of the
provision; and
(B) if the Commission determines that the electronic mail
was transmitted in violation of the provision, may--
(i) impose upon the person initiating the transmission a
civil fine in an amount not to exceed $11,000;
(ii) commence in a district court of the United States a
civil action to recover a civil penalty in an amount not to
exceed $11,000 against the person initiating the
transmission; or
(iii) both impose a fine under clause (i) and commence an
action under clause (ii).
(2) Deadline.--The Commission may not take action under
paragraph (1)(B) with respect to a transmission of electronic
mail more than 2 years after the date of the transmission.
(b) Administration.--
(1) Notice by electronic means.--The Commission shall
establish an Internet web site with an electronic mail
address for the receipt of notices under subsection (a).
(2) Information on enforcement.--The Commission shall make
available through the Internet web site established under
paragraph (2) information on the actions taken by the
Commission under subsection (a)(1)(B).
(3) Assistance of federal communications commission.--The
Federal Communications Commission may assist the Commission
in carrying out its duties this section.

SEC. 5. ACTIONS BY STATES.

(a) In General.--Whenever an attorney general of any State
has reason to believe that the interests of the residents of
that State have been or are being threatened or adversely
affected because any person is engaging in a pattern or
practice of the transmission of electronic mail in violation
of a provision of section 3 or 7, the State, as parens
patriae, may bring a civil action on behalf of its residents
to enjoin such transmission, to enforce compliance with the
provision, to obtain damages or other compensation on behalf
of its residents, or to obtain such further and other relief
as the court considers appropriate.
(b) Notice to Commission.--
(1) Notice.--The State shall serve prior written notice of
any civil action under this section upon the Commission and
provide the Commission with a copy of its complaint, except
that if it is not feasible for the State to provide such
prior notice, the State shall serve written notice
immediately upon instituting such action.
(2) Rights of commission.--Upon receiving a notice with
respect to a civil action under paragraph (1), the Commission
shall have the right--
(A) to intervene in the action;
(B) upon so intervening, to be heard in all matters arising
therein; and
(C) to file petitions for appeal.
(c) Actions by Commission.--Whenever a civil action has
been instituted by or on behalf of the Commission for
violation of a provision of section 3 or 7, no State may,
during the pendency of such action, institute a civil action
under this section against any defendant named in the
complaint in such action for violation of any provision as
alleged in the complaint.
(d) Construction.--For purposes of bringing a civil action
under subsection (a), nothing in this section shall prevent
an attorney general from exercising the powers conferred on
the attorney general by the laws of the State concerned to
conduct investigations or to administer oaths or affirmations
or to compel the attendance of witnesses or the production of
documentary or other evidence.
(e) Venue; Service of Process.--Any civil action brought
under subsection (a) in a district court of the United States
may be brought in the district in which the defendant is
found, is an inhabitant, or transacts business or wherever
venue is proper under section 1391 of title 28, United States
Code. Process in such an action may be served in any district
in which the defendant is an inhabitant or in which the
defendant may be found.
(f) Actions by Other State Officials.--Nothing in this
section may be construed to prohibit an authorized State
official from proceeding in State court on the basis of an
alleged violation of any civil or criminal statute of the
State concerned.
(g) Definition.--In this section, the term ``attorney
general'' means the chief legal officer of a State.

SEC. 6. INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDERS.

(a) Exemption for Certain Transmissions.--The provisions of
this Act shall not apply to a transmission of electronic mail
by an interactive computer service provider unless the
provider initiates the transmission.
(b) Notice of Transmissions from Commission.--Not later
than 72 hours after receipt

[[Page S4881]]

from the Commission of notice that its computer equipment may
have been used by another person to initiate a transmission
of electronic mail in violation of a provision of section 3
or 7, an interactive computer service provider shall--
(1) provide the Commission such information as the
Commission requires in order to determine whether or not the
computer equipment of the provider was used to initiate the
transmission; and
(2) if the Commission determines that the computer
equipment of the provider was used to initiate the
transmission, take appropriate actions to terminate the use
of its computer equipment by that person.
(c) Notice of Transmissions from Private Individuals.--
(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), not later than
14 days after receipt from a private person of notice that
its computer equipment may have been used by another person
to initiate a transmission of electronic mail in violation of
a provision of section 3 or 7, an interactive computer
service provider shall--
(A) transmit the notice to the Commission together with
such information as the Commission requires in order to
determine whether or not the computer equipment of the
provider was used to initiate the transmission; and
(B) if the Commission determines that the computer
equipment of the provider was used to initiate the
transmission, take appropriate actions to terminate the use
of its computer equipment by that person.
(2) Minimum notice requirement.--An interactive computer
service provider shall transmit a notice under paragraph (1)
with respect to a particular transmission of electronic mail
only if the provider receives notice with respect to the
transmission from more than 100 private persons.
(d) Blocking Systems.--
(1) Requirement.--Each interactive computer service
provider shall make available to subscribers to such service
a system permitting such subscribers, upon the affirmative
electronic request of such subscribers, to block the receipt
through such service of any electronic mail that contains the
term ``advertisement'' in its subject line.
(2) Notice of availability.--Upon the applicability of this
subsection to an interactive computer service provider, the
provider shall--
(A) notify each current subscriber, if any, to the service
of the blocking system provided for under paragraph (1); and
(B) notify any new subscribers to the service of the
blocking system.
(3) Blocking by provider.--An interactive computer service
provider may, upon its own initiative, block the receipt
through its service of any electronic mail that contains the
term ``advertisement'' in its subject line.
(4) Applicability.--The requirements in paragraphs (1) and
(2) shall apply--
(A) beginning 1 year after the date of enactment of this
Act, in the case of an interactive computer service provider
having more than 25,000 or more subscribers; and
(B) beginning 2 years after that date, in the case of an
interactive computer service provider having less than 25,000
subscribers.
(e) Records.--An interactive computer service provider
shall retain records of any action taken on a notice received
under this section for not less than 2 years after the date
of receipt of the notice.
(f) Construction.--Nothing in this section may be construed
to require an interactive computer service provider to
transmit or otherwise deliver any electronic mail message
containing the term ``advertisement'' in its subject line.
(g) Definition.--In this section, the term ``interactive
computer service provider'' has the meaning given that term
in section 230(e)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47
U.S.C. 230(e)(2)).

SEC. 7. RECEIPT OF TRANSMISSIONS BY PRIVATE PERSONS.

(a) Termination of Transmissions.--
(1) Request.--A person who receives a transmission of
unsolicited commercial electronic mail not otherwise
authorized under this section may request, by electronic mail
to the same electronic mail address from which the
transmission originated, the termination of transmissions of
such mail by the person initiating the transmission.
(2) Deadline.--A person receiving a request for the
termination of transmissions of electronic mail under this
subsection shall cease initiating transmissions of electronic
mail to the person submitting the request not later than 48
hours after receipt of the request.
(b) Affirmative Authorization of Transmissions Without
Information.--
(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), a person may
authorize another person to initiate transmissions to the
person of unsolicited commercial electronic mail without
inclusion in such transmissions of the information required
by section 3.
(2) Termination.--
(A) Notice.--A person initiating transmissions of
electronic mail under paragraph (1) shall include, with each
transmission of such mail to a person authorizing the
transmission under that paragraph, notice that the person
authorizing the transmission may request at any time the
recommencement of the inclusion in such transmissions of the
information required by section 3.
(B) Deadline.--A person receiving a request under this
paragraph shall include the information required by section 3
in all transmissions of unsolicited commercial electronic
mail to the person making the request beginning not later
than 48 hours after receipt of the request.
(c) Constructive Authorization of Transmissions Without
Information.--
(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), a person who
secures a good or service from, or otherwise responds
electronically to, an offer in a transmission of unsolicited
commercial electronic mail shall be deemed to have authorized
transmissions of such mail without inclusion of the
information required under section 3 from the person who
initiates the transmission providing the basis for such
authorization.
(2) Termination.--
(A) Request.--A person deemed to have authorized the
transmissions of electronic mail under paragraph (1) may
request at any time the recommencement of the inclusion in
such transmissions of the information required by section 3.
(B) Deadline.--A person receiving a request under this
paragraph shall include the information required by section 3
in all transmissions of unsolicited commercial electronic
mail to the person making the request beginning not later
than 48 hours after receipt of the request.
(d) Effective Date of Termination Requirements.--
Subsections (a), (b)(2), and (c)(2) shall take effect 30 days
after the date of enactment of this Act.

SEC. 8. ACTIONS BY PRIVATE PERSONS.

(a) In General.--Any person adversely affected by a
violation of a provision of section 3 or 7, or an authorized
person acting on such person's behalf, may, within 1 year
after discovery of the violation, bring a civil action in a
district court of the United States against a person who has
violated the provision. Such an action may be brought to
enjoin the violation, to enforce compliance with the
provision, to obtain damages, or to obtain such further and
other relief as the court considers appropriate.
(b) Damages.--
(1) In general.--The amount of damages in an action under
this section for a violation specified in subsection (a) may
not exceed $5,000 per violation.
(2) Relationship to other damages.--Damages awarded for a
violation under this subsection are in addition to any other
damages awardable for the violation under any other provision
of law.
(c) Cost and Fees.--The court, in issuing any final order
in any action brought under subsection (a), may award costs
of suit and reasonable attorney fees and expert witness fees
for the prevailing party.
(d) Venue; Service of Process.--Any civil action brought
under subsection (a) in a district court of the United States
may be brought in the district in which the defendant is
found, is an inhabitant, or transacts business or wherever
venue is proper under section 1391 of title 28, United States
Code. Process in such an action may be served in any district
in which the defendant is an inhabitant or in which the
defendant may be found.

SEC. 9. RELATION TO STATE LAWS.

(a) State Law Applicable Unless Inconsistent.--The
provisions of this Act do not annul, alter, or affect the
applicability to any person, or otherwise exempt from the
applicability to any person, of the laws of any State with
respect to the transmission of unsolicited commercial
electronic, except to the extent that those laws are
inconsistent with any provision of this Act, and then only to
the extent of the inconsistency.
(b) Requirement Relating to Determination of
Inconsistency.--The Commission may not determine that a State
law is inconsistent with a provision of this Act if the
Commission determines that such law places greater
restrictions on the transmission of unsolicited commercial
electronic mail than are provided for under such provision.

SEC. 10. DEFINITIONS.

In this Act:
(1) Commercial electronic mail.--The term ``commercial
electronic mail'' means any electronic mail that--
(A) contains an advertisement for the sale of a product or
service;
(B) contains a solicitation for the use of a toll-free
telephone number or a telephone number with a 900 prefix the
use of which connects the user to a person or service that
advertises the sale of or sells a product or service; or
(C) contains a list of one or more Internet sites that
contain an advertisement referred to in subparagraph (A) or a
solicitation referred to in subparagraph (B).
(2) Commission.--The term ``Commission'' means the Federal
Trade Commission.
(3) State.--The term ``State'' means any State of the
United States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam,
American Samoa, the United States Virgin Islands, the
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, the Republic of
the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, the
Republic of Palau, and any possession of the United States.
______

By Mr. SPECTER (for himself, Mr. Coverdell and Mr. Hutchinson):
S. 772. A bill to establish an Office of Religious Persecution
Monitoring, to provide for the imposition of sanctions against
countries engaged in a pattern of religious persecution, and for other

[[Page S4882]]

purposes; to the Committee on Foreign Relations.

The Freedom from Religious Persecution Act of 1997

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I have sought recognition today to once
again address the subject of religious persecution. I have stood here
before describing the horrible tragedies occurring in many parts of the
world. Sadly, very little has been done to combat the problem. That is
why I am introducing the Freedom From Religious Persecution Act of
1997.
Religious persecution is a subject of great personal interest. Both
of my parents, my father from the Ukraine, my mother from a small town
on the Polish-Russian border, came to this country to avoid religious
persecution. Freedom from religious persecution is a concept
fundamental to the ideals of this country and to peoples everywhere.
Christians and other religious minorities have been and continue to
be the victims of discrimination, rape, torture, enslavement,
imprisonment, and even murder, because of their religious beliefs. This
persecution continues today, often without diplomatic or other
consequences for the offending regime. Christians are not the only ones
being persecuted. Muslims and followers of other religions are also
singled out for their beliefs.
In January 1996, the White House promised that a new senior advisor
position would be created in the Office of the President dedicated
specifically to the issue of religious persecution overseas. No such
position was ever created. Instead, President Clinton established a
committee in the State Department that will report to the Secretary of
State and will advise the Secretary on violations of religious freedoms
abroad. The committee has since met, months have gone by, but still no
action has been taken. Mr. President, I and many of my colleagues agree
that the time for action is now. We do not need more reviews and
studies or more advice on the subject. The instances of religious
persecution are well documented. We need action.

At the end of the 104th Congress, I introduced Senate Resolution 283,
which discussed the need for quick, decisive action and called upon the
President to appoint a White House advisor on religious persecution.
After that, I worked with Senators Nickles, Nunn, and Coats on a
broader Senate Concurrent Resolution, 71, which included my provisions
on a White House Senior Advisor on religious persecution. Senate
Concurrent Resolution 71, which I cosponsored, passed the Senate by
voice vote but there was insufficient time remaining in the 104th
Congress to secure passage in the House.
So today, the persecution of Christians and other religious
minorities continues to grow, often without diplomatic or other
consequences for the offending regime. In countries such as Saudi
Arabia, Sudan, China, and Ethiopia, Christians are systematically
denied their religious liberties. Muslims have also been singled out
for persecution in countries such as Burma, where Muslims are forced to
relocate to undesirable areas and where Muslims are often denied
educational opportunities.
Several examples illustrate the gravity of the problem. The Sudanese
Government continues to essentially wage a war against its Christian
population. Reports detail the forced enslavement and conversion of the
Christian populations from the southern regions of Sudan. The
Government bombs and burns Christians villages, has taken more than
30,000 Christian children as slaves in the last 6 years, and tortures
Christian worshipers and their priests.
In Pakistan in February of this year, thousands of Christians were
attacked, many houses and six churches were set on fire. Nearly 1,000
families were living in tents after being driven from their homes by
rioters. Where was the Government to stop this terror? Where were the
police?
Persecution of Christians is by no means limited to the Islamic
world. China continues to be one of the worst offenders. At least 75
million Christians live in China but cannot practice their religion.
Roman Catholics and Protestant Chinese are imprisoned and tortured for
holding worship, preaching, or distributing bibles without permission.
This past August 1996, I traveled to China and met with Chinese Vice-
Premier Qian Qichen to express my strong concerns about religious
persecution in his country. On September 12, 1996, however, Chinese
Premier Li Ping released a statement warning the Chinese people that
the free exercise of their religious faith could result in harsh
retribution.
In August 1996 I also visited Saudi Arabia and met with Crown Prince
Abdullah to discuss the restrictions that country has on religious
practices. I was deeply troubled by the fact that United States troops
stationed in Saudi Arabia are not permitted to exercise their religious
beliefs or even fly the American flag. According to the Pueblo Program
on Religious Freedom of Freedom House, the Saudi Government has even
insisted that the United States Government restrict Christian worship
by American citizens on United States Embassy grounds in Saudi Arabia.
American officials have apparently acquiesced to some of these demands
by, for example, restricting Christian services at the Embassy in
Riyadh and prohibiting Christmas services for United States troops
defending Saudi interests during the gulf war.
Other examples of such persecution of Christians and other religious
minorities abound. Earlier this year, I discussed the broad issue of
religious persecution on the ``Capitol Enlightenment'' radio show in
Virginia with host Bill Fenton and Jim Jacobson, president of Christian
Solidarity International, and on ``The Diner'' cable television show in
Pittsburgh, hosted by Tom Hinkling. The public response to these
programs and my legislative efforts to combat religious persecution has
been overwhelming. People from across the country have contacted me to
urge me to continue the fight until Christians, Muslims, Jews, and
others can practice their faith in any country without fear of
reprisal.

The time has come for the United States to stand up for the right of
all people to enjoy the fundamental freedom of religious faith. That is
why I am introducing legislation with Congressman Wolf that will
establish the position of Senior Advisor to the President dedicated to
combating religious persecution overseas.
This legislation will also define degrees of religious persecution
and will impose sanctions on offending entities. Degrees of religious
persecution are defined by two categories of activity. The first is
when religious persecution is ongoing and widespread and is carried out
by the government or with the government's support. The second is when
there is religious persecution that is not carried out with government
support, but where the government fails to take serious efforts to
eliminate the persecution.
The legislation will ban exports to the specific foreign government
entity that carries out the persecution. These sanctions would take
effect immediately upon the identification of the relevant entities and
products. Additional sanctions would take effect after 90 days or 1
year depending on the level of persecution. In addition, the
legislation includes immediate sanctions against Sudan, a country where
religious persecution is particularly egregious.
This legislation requests more than just another report by the State
Department. It is serious and it is tough. This legislation commits the
United States to real action. There is no more time for talk.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the full text of the bill
be inserted into the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:

S. 772

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 ``Freedom From Religious
Persecution Act of 1997''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

The Congress makes the following findings:
(1) Governments have a primary responsibility to promote,
encourage, and protect respect for the fundamental and
internationally recognized right to freedom of religion.
(2) The right to freedom of religion is recognized by
numerous international agreements and covenants, including
the following:
(A) Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
states that ``Everyone has the right to freedom of thought,
conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to

[[Page S4883]]

change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or
in community with others and in public or private, to
manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice,
worship and observance''.
(B) Article 18 of the Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights declares that ``Everyone shall have the right to
freedom of thought, conscience, and religion . . .'' and
further delineates the privileges under this right.
(3) Persecution of religious believers, particularly Roman
Catholic and evangelical Protestant Christians, in Communist
countries, such as Cuba, Laos, the People's Republic of
China, North Korea, and Vietnam, persists and in some cases
is increasing.
(4) In many Islamic countries and regions thereof,
governments persecute non-Muslims and religious converts from
Islam using means such as ``blasphemy'' and ``apostasy''
laws, and militant movements seek to corrupt a historically
tolerant Islamic faith and culture through the persecution of
Baha'is, Christians, and other religious minorities.
(5) The militant, Islamic Government of Sudan is waging a
self-described religious war against Christian, non-Muslim,
and moderate Muslim persons by using torture, starvation,
enslavement, and murder.
(6) In Tibet, where Tibetan Buddhism is inextricably linked
to the Tibetan identity, the Government of the People's
Republic of China has intensified its control over the
Tibetan people by perverting the selection of the Panchen
Lama, propagandizing against the religious authority of the
Dalai Lama, restricting religious study and traditional
religious practices, and increasing the persecution of monks
and nuns.
(7) The United States Government is committed to the right
to freedom of religion and its policies and relations with
foreign governments should be consistent with the commitment
to this principle.
(8) The 104th Congress recognized the facts set forth in
this section and stated clearly the sense of the Senate and
the House of Representatives regarding these matters in
approving--
(A) H. Res. 515, expressing the sense of the House of
Representatives with respect to the persecution of Christians
worldwide;
(B) S. Con. Res. 71, expressing the sense of the Senate
with respect to the persecution of Christians worldwide;
(C) H. Con. Res. 102, concerning the emancipation of the
Iranian Baha'i community; and
(D) section 1303 of H.R. 1561, the Foreign Relations
Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1996 and 1997.

SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

As used in this Act:
(1) Director.--The term ``Director'' means the Director of
the Office of Religious Persecution Monitoring established
under section 5.
(2) Persecuted community.--The term ``persecuted
community'' means any religious group or community identified
in section 4.
(3) Persecution facilitating products, goods, and
services.--The term ``persecution facilitating products,
goods, and services'' means those products, goods, and
services which are being used or determined to be intended
for use directly and in significant measure to facilitate the
carrying out of acts of religious persecution.
(4) Religious persecution.--
(A) In general.--The term ``religious persecution'' means
widespread and ongoing persecution of persons because of
their membership in or affiliation with a religion or
religious denomination, whether officially recognized or
otherwise, when such persecution includes abduction,
enslavement, killing, imprisonment, forced mass resettlement,
rape, or crucifixion or other forms of torture.
(B) Category 1 religious persecution.--Category 1 religious
persecution is religious persecution that is conducted with
the involvement or support of government officials or its
agents, or as part of official government policy.
(C) Category 2 religious persecution.--Category 2 religious
persecution is religious persecution that is not conducted
with the involvement or support of government officials or
its agents, or as part of official government policy, but
which the government fails to undertake serious and sustained
efforts to eliminate.
(5) Responsible entities.--The term ``responsible
entities'' means the specific government departments,
agencies, or units which directly carry out acts of religious
persecution.
(6) Sanctioned country.--The term ``sanctioned country''
means a country on which sanctions have been imposed under
section 7.
(7) United states assistance.--The term ``United States
assistance'' means--
(A) any assistance under the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961
(including programs under title IV of chapter 2 of part I of
that Act, relating to the Overseas Private Investment
Corporation), other than--
(i) assistance under chapter 8 of part I of that Act;
(ii) any other narcotics-related assistance under part I of
that Act, (including chapter 4 of part II of that Act), but
any such assistance provided under this clause shall be
subject to the prior notification procedures applicable to
reprogrammings pursuant to section 634A of that Act;
(iii) disaster relief assistance, including any assistance
under chapter 9 of part I of that Act;
(iv) assistance which involves the provision of food
(including monetization of food) or medicine; and
(v) assistance for refugees;
(B) sales, or financing on any terms, under the Arms Export
Control Act;
(C) the provision of agricultural commodities, other than
food, under the Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance
Act of 1954; and
(D) financing under the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945.
(8) United states person.--Except as provided in section
12(b)(1), the term ``United States person'' means--
(A) any United States citizen or alien lawfully admitted
for permanent residence into the United States; and
(B) any corporation, partnership, or other entity organized
under the laws of the United States or of any State, the
District of Columbia, or any territory or possession of the
United States.

SEC. 4. APPLICATION AND SCOPE.

(a) Scope.--The provisions of this Act shall apply to all
persecuted religious groups and communities, and all
countries and regions thereof, referred to in the resolutions
and bill set forth in paragraph (8) of section 2 or referred
to in paragraphs (3) through (6) of section 2, and to any
community within any country or region thereof that the
Director finds, by a preponderance of the evidence, is the
target of religious persecution.
(b) Designation of Additional Countries and Regions
Thereof.--The Congress may designate additional countries or
regions to which this Act applies by enacting legislation
specifically citing the authority of this section.

SEC. 5. OFFICE OF RELIGIOUS PERSECUTION MONITORING.

(a) Establishment.--There is established in the Executive
Office of the President the Office of Religious Persecution
Monitoring (hereafter in this Act referred to as the
``Office'').
(b) Appointment.--The head of the Office shall be a
Director who shall be appointed by the President, by and with
the advice and consent of the Senate. The Director shall
receive compensation at the rate of pay in effect for level
IV of the Executive Schedule under section 5315 of title 5,
United States Code.
(c) Removal.--The Director shall serve at the pleasure of
the President.
(d) Barred From Other Federal Positions.--No person shall
serve as Director while serving in any other position in the
Federal Government.
(e) Responsibilities of Director.--The Director shall do
the following:
(1) Consider the facts and circumstances of violations of
religious freedom presented in the annual reports of the
Department of State on human rights under sections 116(d) and
502B(b) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C.
2151n(d) and 2304(b)).
(2) Consider the facts and circumstances of violations of
religious freedom presented by independent human rights
groups and nongovernmental organizations.
(3) In consultation with the Secretary of State, make
policy recommendations to the President regarding the
policies of the United States Government toward governments
which are determined to be engaged in religious persecution.
(4) Prepare and submit the annual report described in
section 6, including the determination whether a particular
country is engaged in category 1 or category 2 religious
persecution, and identify the responsible entities within
such countries. This information shall be published in the
Federal Register.
(5) Maintain the lists of persecution facilitating
products, goods, and services, and the responsible entities
within countries determined to be engaged in religious
persecution, described in paragraph (4), adding to the list
as information becomes available. This information shall be
published in the Federal Register.
(6) Coordinate with the Secretary of State, the Attorney
General, the Secretary of Commerce, and the Secretary of the
Treasury to ensure that the provisions of this Act are fully
and effectively implemented.
(f) Administrative Matters.--
(1) Personnel.--The Director may appoint such personnel as
may be necessary to carry out the functions of the Office.
(2) Services of other agencies.--The Director may use the
personnel, services, and facilities of any other department
or agency, on a reimbursable basis, in carrying out the
functions of the Office.

SEC. 6. REPORTS TO CONGRESS.

(a) Annual Reports.--Not later than April 30 of each year,
the Director shall submit to the Committees on Foreign
Relations, Finance, the Judiciary, and Appropriations of the
Senate and to the Committees on International Relations, Ways
and Means, the Judiciary, and Appropriations of the House of
Representatives a report described in subsection (b).
(b) Contents of Annual Report.--The annual report of the
Director shall include the following:
(1) Determination of religious persecution.--With respect
to each country or region thereof described in section 4, the
Director shall include his or her determination, with respect
to each persecuted community, whether there is category 1
religious persecution or category 2 religious persecution.
(2) Identification of persecution facilitating products,
goods, and services.--

[[Page S4884]]

With respect to each country or region thereof which the
Director determines is engaged in either category 1 or
category 2 religious persecution, the Director, in
consultation with the Secretary of State and the Secretary of
Commerce, shall identify and list the persecution
facilitating products, goods, and services.
(3) Identification of responsible entities.--With respect
to each country determined by the Director to be engaged in
category 1 religious persecution, the Director, in
consultation with the Secretary of State, shall identify and
list the responsible entities within that country that are
engaged in religious persecution. Such entities shall be
defined as narrowly as possible.
(4) Other reports.--The Director shall include the reports
submitted to the Director by the Attorney General under
section 9 and by the Secretary of State under section 10.
(c) Interim Reports.--The Director may submit interim
reports to the Congress containing such matters as the
Director considers necessary.

SEC. 7. SANCTIONS.

(a) Prohibition on Exports Relating to Religious
Persecution.--
(1) Actions by responsible departments and agencies.--With
respect to any country in which--
(A) the Director finds the occurrence of category 1
religious persecution, the Director shall so notify the
relevant United States departments and agencies, and such
departments and agencies shall--
(i) prohibit all exports to the responsible entities listed
under section 6(b)(3) or in any supplemental list of the
Director; and
(ii) prohibit the export to such country of the persecution
facilitating products, goods, and services listed under
section 6(b)(2) or in any supplemental list of the Director;
or
(B) the Director finds the occurrence of category 2
religious persecution, the Director shall so notify the
relevant United States departments and agencies, and such
departments and agencies shall prohibit the export to such
country of the persecution facilitating products, goods, and
services listed under section 6(b)(2) or in any supplemental
list of the Director.
(2) Prohibitions on u.s. persons.--(A) With respect to any
country or region thereof in which the Director finds the
occurrence of category 1 religious persecution, no United
States person may--
(i) export any item to the responsible entities listed
under section 6(b)(3) or in any supplemental list of the
Director; and
(ii) export to that country any persecution facilitating
products, goods, and services listed under section 6(b)(2) or
in any supplemental list of the Director.
(B) With respect to any country in which the Director finds
the occurrence of category 2 religious persecution, no United
States person may export to that country any persecution
facilitating products, goods, and services listed under
section 6(b)(2) or in any supplemental report of the
Director.
(3) Penalties.--Any person who violates the provisions of
paragraph (2) shall be subject to the penalties set forth in
subsections (a) and (b)(1) of section 16 of the Trading With
the Enemy Act (50 U.S.C. App. 16(a) and (b)(1)) for
violations under that Act.
(4) Effective date of prohibitions.--The prohibitions on
exports under paragraph (1) shall take effect with respect to
a country 90 days after the finding of category 1 or category
2 religious persecution in that country or region thereof,
except as provided in section 11.
(b) United States Assistance.--
(1) Category 1 religious persecution.--No United States
assistance may be provided to the government of any country
which the Director determines is engaged in category 1
religious persecution, effective 90 days after the date on
which the Director submits the report in which the
determination is included.
(2) Category 2 religious persecution.--No United States
assistance may be provided to the government of any country
which the Director determines is engaged in category 2
religious persecution, effective 1 year after the date on
which the Director submits the report in which the
determination is included, if the Director, in the next
annual report of the Director under section 6, determines
that the country is engaged in either category 1 or category
2 religious persecution.
(c) Multilateral Assistance.--
(1) Category 1 religious persecution.--With respect to any
country which the Director determines is engaged in category
1 religious persecution, the President shall instruct the
United States Executive Director of each multilateral
development bank and of the International Monetary Fund to
vote against, and use his or her best efforts to deny, any
loan or other utilization of the funds of their respective
institutions (other than for humanitarian assistance) to that
country, effective 90 days after the Director submits the
report in which the determination is included.
(2) Category 2 religious persecution.--With respect to any
country which the Director determines is engaged in category
2 religious persecution, the President shall instruct the
United States Executive Director of each multilateral
development bank and of the International Monetary Fund to
vote against, and use his or her best efforts to deny, any
loan or other utilization of the funds of their respective
institutions (other than for humanitarian assistance) to that
country, effective 1 year after the date on which the
Director submits the report in which the determination is
included, if the Director, in the next annual report of the
Director under section 6, determines that the country is
engaged in either category 1 or category 2 religious
persecution.
(3) Reports to director.--If a country described in
paragraph (1) or (2) is granted a loan or other utilization
of funds notwithstanding the objection of the United States
under this subsection, the Executive Director of the
institution that made the grant shall report to the President
and the Congress on the efforts made to deny loans or other
utilization of funds to that country, and shall include in
the report specific and explicit recommendations designed to
ensure that such loans or other utilization of funds are
denied to that country in the future.
(4) Definition.--As used in this subsection, the term
``multilateral development bank'' means any of the
multilateral development banks as defined in section
1701(c)(4) of the International Financial Institutions Act
(22 U.S.C. 262r(c)(4)).
(d) Votes for WTO Membership.--In casting any vote
concerning the membership of a country in the World Trade
Organization, the President shall consider as a significant
factor the fact that the country is listed in the Director's
report as a country which is engaged in either category 1 or
category 2 religious persecution.
(e) Denial of Visas.--The Secretary of State shall deny the
issuance of a visa to, and the Attorney General shall exclude
from the United States, any alien who the Director determines
carried out or is responsible for carrying out acts of
religious persecution.

SEC. 8. WAIVER OF SANCTIONS.

(a) Waiver Authority.--Subject to subsection (b), the
President may waive the imposition of any sanction against a
country under section 7 for periods of not more than 12
months each, if the President, for each waiver--
(1) determines that national security interests justify
such a waiver; and
(2) provides to the Committees on Foreign Relations,
Finance, the Judiciary, and Appropriations of the Senate and
to the Committees on International Relations, Ways and Means,
the Judiciary, and Appropriations of the House of
Representatives a written notification of the President's
intention to waive any such sanction.

The justification shall contain an explanation of the reasons
why the President considers the waiver to be necessary, the
type and amount of goods, services, or assistance to be
provided pursuant to the waiver, and the period of time
during which such a waiver will be effective.
(b) Taking Effect of Waiver.--
(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), a waiver under
subsection (a) shall take effect 45 days after its submission
to the Congress.
(2) In emergency conditions.--The President may waive the
imposition of sanctions against a country under subsection
(b) or (c) of section 7 to take effect immediately if the
President, in the written notification of intention to waive
the sanctions, certifies that emergency conditions exist that
make an immediate waiver necessary.
(3) Computation of 45-day period.--The 45-day period
referred to in this subsection shall be computed by
excluding--
(A) the days on which either House of Congress is not in
session because of an adjournment of more than 3 days to a
day certain or an adjournment of the Congress sine die; and
(B) any Saturday and Sunday, not excluded under paragraph
(1), when either House is not in session.

SEC. 9. MODIFICATION OF IMMIGRATION POLICY.

(a) Credible Fear of Persecution Defined.--Section
235(b)(1)(B)(v) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8
U.S.C. 1225(b)(1)(B)(v)) (as amended by section 302 of the
Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act
of 1996; Public Law 104-208; 110 Stat. 3009-582) is amended
by adding at the end the following:

``Any alien who can credibly claim membership in a persecuted
community found to be subject to category 1 or category 2
religious persecution in the most recent annual report sent
by the Director of the Office of Religious Persecution
Monitoring to the Congress under section 6 of the Freedom
From Religious Persecution Act of 1997 shall be considered to
have a credible fear of persecution within the meaning of the
preceding sentence.''.
(b) Training for Certain Immigration Officers.--Section 235
of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1225) (as
amended by section 302 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and
Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996; Public Law 104-208; 110
Stat. 3009-579) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(d) Training on Religious Persecution.--The Attorney
General shall establish and operate a program to provide to
immigration officers performing functions under subsection
(b), or section 207 or 208, training on religious
persecution, including training on--
``(1) the fundamental components of the right to freedom of
religion;
``(2) the variation in beliefs of religious groups; and
``(3) the governmental and nongovernmental methods used in
violation of the right to freedom of religion.''.
(c) Asylum.--Section 208 of the Immigration and Nationality
Act (8 U.S.C. 1158) (as

[[Page S4885]]

amended by section 604 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and
Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996; Public Law 104-208;
1110 Stat. 3009-690) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(e) Special Rules for Religious Persecution Claims.--
``(1) Procedures upon denial.--
``(A) In general.--In any case in which the Service denies,
or refers to an immigration Judge, an asylum application
filed by an alien described in the second sentence of section
235(b)(1)(B)(v), or in any case in which an immigration Judge
denies such an application on the ground that the alien is
not a refugee within the meaning of section 101(a)(42)(A),
the Service shall provide the alien with the following:
``(i) A written statement containing the reasons for the
denial, which shall be supported by references to--

``(I) the most recent annual report sent by the Director of
the Office of Religious Persecution Monitoring to the
Congress under section 6 of the Freedom From Religious
Persecution Act of 1997; and
``(II) either--

``(aa) the most recent country report on human rights
practices issued by the Secretary of State; or
``(bb) any other report issued by the Secretary of State
concerning conditions in the country of which the alien is a
national (or, in the case of an alien having no nationality,
the country of the alien's last habitual residence).
``(ii) A copy of any assessment sheet prepared by an asylum
officer for a supervisory asylum officer with respect to the
application.
``(iii) A list of any publicly available materials relied
upon by an asylum officer as a basis for denying the
application.
``(iv) A copy of any materials relied upon by an asylum
officer as a basis for denying the application that are not
available to the public, except Federal agency records that
are exempt from disclosure under section 552(b) of title 5,
United States Code.
``(B) Credibility in issue.--In any case described in
subparagraph (A) in which the denial is based, in whole or in
part, on credibility grounds, the Service shall also provide
the alien with the following:
``(i) The statements by the applicant, or other evidence,
that were found not to be credible.
``(ii) A statement certifying that the applicant was
provided an opportunity to respond to the Service's position
on the credibility issue.
``(iii) A brief summary of such response, if any was made.
``(iv) An explanation of how the negative determination on
the credibility issue relates to the applicant's religious
persecution claim.
``(2) Effect in subsequent proceedings.--
``(A) Use at option of applicant.--Any material provided to
an alien under paragraph (1) shall be considered part of the
official record pertaining to the alien's asylum application
solely at the option of the alien.
``(B) No effect on review.--The provision of any material
under paragraph (1) to an alien shall not be construed to
alter any standard of review otherwise applicable in any
administrative or judicial adjudication concerning the
alien's asylum application.
``(3) Duty to submit report on religious persecution.--In
any judicial or administrative proceeding in which the
Service opposes granting asylum to an alien described in the
second sentence of section 235(b)(1)(B)(v), the Service shall
submit to the court or administrative adjudicator a copy of
the most recent annual report submitted to the Congress by
the Director of the Office of Religious Persecution
Monitoring under section 6 of the Freedom From Religious
Persecution Act of 1997, and any interim reports issued by
such Director after such annual report.''.
(d) Annual Report.--Not later than January 1 of each year,
the Attorney General shall submit to the Director an annual
report that includes the following:
(1) With respect to the year that is the subject of the
report, the number of applicants for asylum or refugee status
whose applications were based, in whole or in part, on
religious persecution.
(2) In the case of such applications, the number that were
proposed to be denied, and the number that were finally
denied.
(3) In the case of such applications, the number that were
granted.
(4) A description of developments with respect to the
adjudication of applications for asylum or refugee status
filed by an alien who claims to be a member of a persecuted
community that the Director found to be subject to category 1
or category 2 religious persecution in the most recent annual
report submitted to the Congress under section 6.
(5) With respect to the year that is the subject of the
report, a description of training on religious persecution
provided under section 235(d) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (as added by subsection (b)) to immigration
officers performing functions under section 235(b) of such
Act, or adjudicating applications under section 207 or 208 of
such Act, including a list of speakers and materials used in
such training and the number of officers who received such
training.
(e) Admission Priority.--For purposes of section 207(a)(3)
of the Immigration and Nationality Act, an individual who is
a member of a persecuted community that the Director found to
be subject to category 1 or category 2 religious persecution
in the most recent annual report submitted to the Congress
under section 6, and is determined by the Attorney General to
be a refugee within the meaning of section 101(a)(42)(A) of
the Immigration and Nationality Act, shall be considered a
refugee of special humanitarian concern to the United States.
In carrying out such section, such an individual shall be
given priority status at least as high as that given to any
member of any other specific group of refugees of special
concern to the United States.
(f) No Effect on Others' Rights.--Nothing in this section,
or any amendment made by this section, shall be construed to
deny any applicant for asylum or refugee status any right,
privilege, protection, or eligibility otherwise provided by
law.

SEC. 10. STATE DEPARTMENT HUMAN RIGHTS REPORTS.

(a) Annual Human Rights Report.--In preparing the annual
reports of the State Department on human rights under
sections 116(d) and 502B(b) of the Foreign Assistance Act of
1961 (22 U.S.C. 2151n(d) and 2304(b)), the Secretary of State
shall, in the section on religious freedom--
(1) consider the facts and circumstances of the violation
of the right to freedom of religion presented by independent
human rights groups and nongovernmental organizations;
(2) report on the extent of the violations of the right to
freedom of religion, specifically including whether the
violations arise from governmental or nongovernmental
sources, and whether the violations are encouraged by the
government or whether the government fails to exercise
satisfactory efforts to control such violations;
(3) report on whether freedom of religion violations occur
on a nationwide, regional, or local level; and
(4) identify whether the violations are focused on an
entire religion or on certain denominations or sects.
(b) Training.--The Secretary of State shall--
(1) institute programs to provide training for chiefs of
mission as well as Department of State officials--
(A) having reporting responsibilities regarding the freedom
of religion, which shall include training on the fundamental
components of the right to freedom of religion, the variation
in beliefs of religious groups, and the governmental and
nongovernmental methods used in the violation of the right to
freedom of religion; and
(B) the identification of independent human rights groups
and nongovernmental organizations with expertise in the
matters described in subparagraph (A); and
(2) submit to the Director, not later than January 1 of
each year, a report describing all training provided to
Department of State officials with respect to religious
persecution during the preceding 1-year period, including a
list of instructors and materials used in such training and
the number and rank of individuals who received such
training.

SEC. 11. TERMINATION OF SANCTIONS.

(a) Termination of Sanctions.--If the Director determines
that a sanctioned country has substantially eliminated
religious persecution in that country, the Director shall
notify the Congress of that determination in writing. The
sanctions described in section 7 shall cease to apply with
respect to that country 45 days after the Congress receives
the notification of such a determination. The 45-day period
referred to in this section shall be computed by excluding--
(1) the days on which either House of Congress is not in
session because of an adjournment of more than 3 days to a
day certain or an adjournment of the Congress sine die; and
(2) any Saturday and Sunday, not excluded under paragraph
(1), when either House is not in session.
(b) Withdrawal of Finding.--Any determination of the
Director under section 6 may be withdrawn before taking
effect if the Director makes a written determination, on the
basis of a preponderance of the evidence, that the country
substantially eliminated any category 1 or category 2
religious persecution that existed in that country. The
Director shall submit to the Congress each determination
under this subsection.

SEC. 12. SANCTIONS AGAINST SUDAN.

(a) Extension of Sanctions Under Existing Law.--Any
sanction imposed on Sudan because of a determination that the
government of that country has provided support for acts of
international terrorism, including--
(1) export controls imposed pursuant to the Export
Administration Act of 1979,
(2) prohibitions on transfers of munitions under section 40
of the Arms Export Control Act,
(3) the prohibition on assistance under section 620A of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961,
(4) section 2327(a) of title 10, United States Code,
(5) section 6 of the Bretton Woods Agreements Act
Amendments, 1978 (22 U.S.C. 286e-11),
(6) section 527 of the Foreign Operations, Export
Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 1997 (as
contained in Public Law 104-208), and
(7) section 901(j) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986,

shall continue in effect after the enactment of this Act
until the Director determines, in accordance with section 11,
that Sudan has substantially eliminated religious persecution
in that country, or the determination

[[Page S4886]]

that the government of that country has provided support for
acts of international terrorism is no longer in effect,
whichever occurs later. For purposes of the preceding
sentence, the reference in section 11 to ``sanctions
described in section 7'' shall be deemed to refer to
sanctions described in paragraphs (1) through (7) of this
subsection.
(b) Additional Sanctions on Sudan.--Effective 90 days after
the date of the enactment of this Act, the following
sanctions (to the extent not covered under subsection (a))
shall apply with respect to Sudan:
(1) Prohibition on financial transactions with government
of sudan.--
(A) Offense.--Any United States person who knowingly
engages in any financial transaction, including any loan or
other extension of credit, directly or indirectly, with the
Government of Sudan shall be fined in accordance with title
18, United States Code, or imprisoned for not more than 10
years, or both.
(B) Definitions.--As used in this paragraph:
(i) Financial transaction.--The term ``financial
transaction'' has the meaning given that term in section
1956(c)(4) of title 18, United States Code.
(ii) United states person.--The term ``United States
person'' means--

(I) any United States citizen or national;
(II) any permanent resident alien;
(III) any juridical person organized under the laws of the
United States; and
(IV) any person in the United States.

(2) Prohibition on imports from sudan.--No article which is
grown, produced, manufactured by, marketed, or otherwise
exported by the Government of Sudan, may be imported into the
United States.
(3) Prohibitions on united states exports to sudan.--
(A) Prohibition on computer exports.--No computers,
computer software, or goods or technology intended to
manufacture or service computers may be exported to or for
use of the Government of Sudan.
(B) Regulations of the secretary of commerce.--The
Secretary of Commerce may prescribe such regulations as may
be necessary to carry out subparagraph (A).
(C) Penalties.--Any person who violates this paragraph
shall be subject to the penalties provided in section 11 of
the Export Administration Act of 1979 (50 U.S.C. App. 2410)
for violations under that Act.
(4) Prohibition on new investment in sudan.--
(A) Prohibition.--No United States person may, directly or
through another person, make any new investment in Sudan that
is not prohibited by paragraph (1).
(B) Regulations.--The Secretary of Commerce may prescribe
such regulations as may be necessary to carry out
subparagraph (A).
(C) Penalties.--Any person who violates this paragraph
shall be subject to penalties provided in section 11 of the
Export Administration Act of 1979 (50 U.S.C. App. 2410) for
violations under that Act.
(5) Aviation rights.--
(A) Air transportation rights.--The Secretary of
Transportation shall prohibit any aircraft of a foreign air
carrier owned or controlled, directly or indirectly, by the
Government of Sudan or operating pursuant to a contract with
the Government of Sudan from engaging in air transportation
with respect to the United States, except that such aircraft
shall be allowed to land in the event of an emergency for
which the safety of an aircraft's crew or passengers is
threatened.
(B) Takeoffs and landings.--The Secretary of Transportation
shall prohibit the takeoff and landing in Sudan of any
aircraft by an air carrier owned, directly or indirectly, or
controlled by a United States person, except that such
aircraft shall be allowed to land in the event of an
emergency for which the safety of an aircraft's crew or
passengers is threatened, or for humanitarian purposes.
(C) Termination of air service agreements.--To carry out
subparagraphs (A) and (B), the Secretary of State shall
terminate any agreement between the Government of Sudan and
the Government of the United States relating to air services
between their respective territories.
(D) Definitions.--For purposes of this paragraph, the terms
``aircraft'', ``air transportation'', and ``foreign air
carrier'' have the meanings given those terms in section
40102 of title 49, United States Code.
(6) Prohibition on promotion of united states tourism.--
None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by
any provision of law may be available to promote United
States tourism in Sudan.
(7) Government of sudan bank accounts.--
(A) Prohibition.--A United States depository institution
may not accept, receive, or hold a deposit account from the
Government of Sudan, except for such accounts which may be
authorized by the President for diplomatic or consular
purposes.
(B) Annual reports.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall
submit annual reports to the Congress on the nature and
extent of assets held in the United States by the Government
of Sudan.
(C) Definition.--For purposes of this paragraph, the term
``depository institution'' has the meaning given that term in
section 19(b)(1) of the Act of December 23, 1913 (12 U.S.C.
461(b)(1)).
(8) Prohibition on united states government procurement
from sudan.--
(A) Prohibition.--No department, agency, or any other
entity of the United States Government may enter into a
contract for the procurement of goods or services from
parastatal organizations of Sudan except for items necessary
for diplomatic or consular purposes.
(B) Definition.--As used in this paragraph, the term
``parastatal organization of Sudan'' means a corporation,
partnership, or entity owned, controlled, or subsidized by
the Government of Sudan.
(9) Prohibition on united states appropriations for use as
investments in or trade subsidies for sudan.--None of the
funds appropriated or otherwise made available by any
provision of law may be available for any new investment in,
or any subsidy for trade with, Sudan, including funding for
trade missions in Sudan and for participation in exhibitions
and trade fairs in Sudan.
(10) Prohibition on cooperation with armed forces of
sudan.--No agency or entity of the United States may engage
in any form of cooperation, direct or indirect, with the
armed forces of Sudan, except for activities which are
reasonably necessary to facilitate the collection of
necessary intelligence. Each such activity shall be
considered as significant anticipated intelligence activity
for purposes of section 501 of the National Security Act of
1947 (50 U.S.C. 413).
(11) Prohibition on cooperation with intelligence services
of sudan.--
(A) Sanction.--No agency or entity of the United States
involved in intelligence activities may engage in any form of
cooperation, direct or indirect, with the Government of
Sudan, except for activities which are reasonably designed to
facilitate the collection of necessary intelligence.
(B) Policy.--It is the policy of the United States that no
agency or entity of the United States involved in
intelligence activities may provide any intelligence
information to the Government of Sudan which pertains to any
internal group within Sudan. Any change in such policy or any
provision of intelligence information contrary to this policy
shall be considered a significant anticipated intelligence
activity for purposes of section 501 of the National Security
Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 413).

The sanctions described in this subsection shall apply until
the Director determines, in accordance with section 11, that
Sudan has substantially eliminated religious persecution in
that country. For purposes of the preceding sentence, the
reference in section 11 to ``sanctions described in section
7'' shall be deemed to refer to the sanctions imposed under
this subsection.
(c) Multilateral Efforts To End Religious Persecution in
Sudan.--
(1) Efforts to obtain multilateral measures against
sudan.--It is the policy of the United States to seek an
international agreement with the other industrialized
democracies to bring about an end to religious persecution by
the Government of Sudan. The net economic effect of such
international agreement should be measurably greater than the
net economic effect of the other measures imposed by this
section.
(2) Commencement of negotiations to initiate multilateral
sanctions against sudan.--It is the sense of the Congress
that the President or, at his direction, the Secretary of
State should convene an international conference of the other
industrialized democracies in order to reach an international
agreement to bring about an end to religious persecution in
Sudan. The international conference should begin promptly and
should be concluded not later than 180 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act.
(3) Presidential report.--Not less than 210 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the President shall submit
to the Congress a report containing--
(A) a description of United States' efforts to negotiate
multilateral measures to bring about an end to religious
persecution in Sudan; and
(B) a detailed description of economic and other measures
adopted by the other industrialized countries to bring about
an end to religious persecution in Sudan, including an
assessment of the stringency with which such measures are
enforced by those countries.
(4) Conformity of united states measures to international
agreement.--If the President successfully concludes an
international agreement described in paragraph (2), the
President may, after such agreement enters into force with
respect to the United States, adjust, modify, or otherwise
amend the measures imposed under any provision of this
section to conform with such agreement.
(5) Procedures for agreement to enter into force.--Each
agreement submitted to the Congress under this subsection
shall enter into force with respect to the United States if--
(A) the President, not less than 30 days before the day on
which the President enters into such agreement, notifies the
House of Representatives and the Senate of the President's
intention to enter into such an agreement, and promptly
thereafter publishes notice of such intention in the Federal
Register;
(B) after entering into the agreement, the President
transmits to the House of Representatives and to the Senate a
document containing a copy of the final text of such
agreement, together with--
(i) a description of any administrative action proposed to
implement such agreement

[[Page S4887]]

and an explanation as to how the proposed administrative
action would change or affect existing law; and
(ii) a statement of the President's reasons regarding--

(I) how the agreement serves the interest of United States
foreign policy; and
(II) why the proposed administrative action is required or
appropriate to carry out the agreement; and

(C) a joint resolution approving such agreement has been
enacted, in accordance with section 8066(c) of the Department
of Defense Appropriations Act, 1985 (as contained in Public
Law 98-473 (98 Stat. 1936)), within 30 days of transmittal of
such document to the Congress.

For purposes of applying such section 8066(c), any reference
in such section to ``joint resolution'', ``resolution'', or
``resolution described in paragraph (1)'' shall be deemed to
refer to a joint resolution described in subparagraph (C) of
this paragraph.
(6) United nations security council imposition of same
measures against sudan.--It is the sense of the Congress that
the President should instruct the Permanent Representative of
the United States to the United Nations to propose that the
United Nations Security Council, pursuant to Article 41 of
the United Nations Charter, impose measures against Sudan of
the same type as are imposed by this section.
(d) Additional Measures and Reports; Recommendations of the
President.--
(1) United states policy to end religious persecution.--It
shall be the policy of the United States to impose additional
measures against the Government of Sudan if its policy of
religious persecution has not ended on or before December 25,
1997.
(2) Report to congress.--The Director shall prepare and
transmit to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and
the Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations of the
Senate on or before February 1, 1998, and every 12 months
thereafter, a report determining whether the policy of
religious persecution by the Government of Sudan has ended.
(3) Recommendation for imposition of additional measures.--
If the Director determines that the policy of religious
persecution by the Government of Sudan has not ended, the
President shall prepare and transmit to the Speaker of the
House of Representatives and the Chairman of the Committee on
Foreign Relations of the Senate on or before March 1, 1998,
and every 12 months thereafter, a report setting forth
recommendations for such additional measures and actions
against the Government of Sudan as the Director determines
will end the government's policy of religious persecution.
(e) Definitions.--As used in this section--
(1) Government of sudan.--The term ``Government of Sudan''
includes any agency or instrumentality of the Government of
Sudan.
(2) New investment in sudan.--The term ``new investment in
Sudan''--
(A) means--
(i) a commitment or contribution of funds or other assets,
or
(ii) a loan or other extension of credit,
that is made on or after the effective date of this
subsection; and
(B) does not include--
(i) the reinvestment of profits generated by a controlled
Sudanese entity into that same controlled Sudanese entity, or
the investment of such profits in a Sudanese entity;
(ii) contributions of money or other assets where such
contributions are necessary to enable a controlled Sudanese
entity to operate in an economically sound manner, without
expanding its operations; or
(iii) the ownership or control of a share or interest in a
Sudanese entity or a controlled Sudanese entity or a debt or
equity security issued by the Government of Sudan or a
Sudanese entity before the date of the enactment of this Act,
or the transfer or acquisition of such a share or interest,
or debt or equity security, if any such transfer or
acquisition does not result in a payment, contribution of
funds or assets, or credit to a Sudanese entity, a controlled
Sudanese entity, or the Government of Sudan.
(3) Controlled sudanese entity.--The term ``controlled
Sudanese entity'' means--
(A) a corporation, partnership, or other business
association or entity organized in Sudan and owned or
controlled, directly or indirectly, by a United States
person; or
(B) a branch, office, agency, or sole proprietorship in
Sudan of a United States person.
(4) Sudanese entity.--The term ``Sudanese entity'' means--
(A) a corporation, partnership, or other business
association or entity organized in Sudan; or
(B) a branch, office, agency, or sole proprietorship in
Sudan of a person that resides or is organized outside Sudan.

SEC. 13. EFFECTIVE DATE.

(a) In General.--Subject to subsections (b) and (c), and
except as provided in section 12, this Act and the amendments
made by this Act shall take effect 120 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act.
(b) Appointment of Director.--The Director shall be
appointed not later than 60 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act.
(c) Regulations.--Each Federal department or agency
responsible for carrying out any of the sanctions under
section 7 shall issue all necessary regulations to carry out
such sanctions within 120 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act.
______

By Mr. DURBIN (for himself, Mr. Torricelli, Ms. Moseley-Braun,
Mrs. Murray, Mr. Feingold, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Kerry, Mrs. Boxer,
and Mr. Reed):
S. 773. A bill to designate certain Federal lands in the State of
Utah as wilderness, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy
and Natural Resources.

America's Red Rock Wilderness Act

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, today I am introducing America's Red Rock
Wilderness Act to protect an important part of our Nation's natural
heritage. America's Red Rock Wilderness Act designates 5.7 million
acres of the 22 million acres of public, Bureau of Land Management
(BLM) lands in Southern Utah as wilderness.
Passage of America's Red Rock Wilderness Act is essential to protect
a national treasure for future generations of Americans. A companion
bill, H.R. 1500, has been introduced in the House by Representative
Maurice Hinchey with over 100 original cosponsors.
America's Red Rock Wilderness Act will protect 5.7 million acres of
magnificent canyons, red rock cliffs and rock formations which are
unlike any on Earth. The lands included in this legislation contain
steep slick rock canyons, high cliffs offering spectacular vistas of
rare rock formations, important archeological sites and rare plant and
animal species. Each year, almost 8 million people from across the
United States and the world visit these lands to see a part of their
natural heritage and experience the beauty and solitude of this
wilderness area.
However, these fragile, scenic lands are threatened by oil, gas and
mining interests which are willing to sacrifice these lands for short-
term economic gain. These wilderness areas are also threatened by off-
road vehicle use and proposals to construct roads, communication
towers, transmission lines, and dams.
Because of flaws in the original wilderness inventory conducted by
BLM during the Reagan administration, only 3.2 million acres in
southern Utah are currently protected as wilderness study areas. The
wilderness areas included in America's Red Rock Wilderness Act are
based on a careful assessment of BLM lands which meet the criteria for
wilderness designation by citizen groups that form the Utah Wilderness
Coalition. Unlike other proposals, this legislation does not include
special interest exemptions that would undermine the integrity of the
1964 Wilderness Act.
America's Red Rock Wilderness Act is supported by a broad coalition
of environmental organizations and citizen groups. In a national survey
conducted by USA Today, over 90 percent of the respondents supported
the designation of 5.7 million acres in southern Utah as wilderness.
Newspapers across the Nation have also editorialized in support of
protecting America's Red Rock Wilderness Area.
Theodore Roosevelt once stated that, ``The Nation behaves well if it
treats the natural resources as assets which it must turn over to the
next generation increased and not impaired in value.'' Because of the
foresight of leaders like Theodore Roosevelt, national treasures such
as the Grand Canyon and Yellowstone were preserved for all Americans. I
urge my colleagues to join me in this effort to protect America's Red
Rock Wilderness Area in southern Utah for future generations.
Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, I am very pleased to be joining the
junior Senator from Illinois [Mr. Durbin] as an original cosponsor of
legislation to designate 5.7 million acres of Federal lands in Utah as
wilderness.
Though this is the first time this particular measure has been
introduced in this body, it is not the first time that the protection
of Utah's public lands has been before the Senate. During the last
Congress, I joined with the former Senator from New Jersey, Mr.
Bradley, in opposing the Omnibus Parks legislation because it contained
provisions, which were eventually removed, that many in my home State
of Wisconsin believed not only designated as wilderness too little of
the Bureau of Land Management's holding in Utah deserving of such
protection, but also substantively changed the protections afforded
designated lands under the Wilderness Act of 1964.
Wallace Stegner wrote ``No place is a place until things that have
happened there are remembered in history, ballads, yarns, legends, or
monuments.''
The lands of southern Utah are legendary, alive, and well remembered
in

[[Page S4888]]

the minds and hearts of the people of Wisconsin. In writing to me last
Congress, my constituents described these lands as places of special
family moments, healing silence, and incredible beauty. In March 1996,
during debate on the omnibus parks bill, Ed Culhane of the Appleton
Post-Crescent wrote:

This is some of the most beautiful landscape in the world
and each year hundreds of thousands of people hike into these
canyons, into this hard, dry land of varnished cliffs and
blasted mesas.
Aldo Leopold once asked if a still higher standard of
living was worth its cost in things natural, wild, and free.
If we lose the Redrock Wilderness, we will get precious
little in return.

Some may say, Mr. President, that this legislation is unnecessary and
Utah already has the ``monument'' that Wallace Stegner wrote about,
designated by President Clinton on September 18, 1997. However, it is
important to note, the land of the Grand Staircase Escalante National
Monument, included among the lands to be given wilderness protection in
this bill, is less than one third of the lands this bill protects.
I supported the President's actions to designate the Grand Staircase
Escalante National Monument. On September 17, 1997, amid reports of the
pending designation, I authored a letter to President Clinton, cosigned
by six other members of the Senate, supporting that action. That letter
concluded with the following statement ``We remain interested in
working with the Administration on appropriate legislation to evaluate
and protect the full extent of public lands in Utah that meet the
criteria of the 1964 Wilderness Act.''

I believe that the measure being introduced today accomplishes that
goal. Identical in its designations to H.R. 1500 sponsored in the other
body by Representative Maurice Hinchey of New York, it is the
culmination of more than 10 years and four Congresses of effort in the
other body beginning with the legislative work of the former
Congressman from Utah, Mr. Owens.
The measure protects wild lands that really are not done justice in
words. Truly remarkable American resources of red rock cliff walls,
desert, canyons and gorges are found on these BLM lands which encompass
the canyon country of the Colorado Plateau, the Mojave Desert and
portions of the Great Basin. They include mountain ranges in western
Utah, stark areas like the new National Monument, and wildlife
intensive areas like the Deep Creek and Stansbury Mountains, that
support habitat for deer, elk, cougars, bobcats, bighorn sheep,
coyotes, birds, reptiles, and other wildlife. These regions appeal to
all types of American outdoor interests from hikers and sightseers to
hunters.
Phil Haslanger of the Capital Times, a paper in Madison, answered an
important question I am often asked when people want to know why a
Senator from Wisconsin would cosponsor legislation to protect lands in
Utah. He wrote on September 13, 1995 simply that ``These are not scenes
that you could see in Wisconsin. That's part of what makes them
special.'' He continues, and adds what I think is an even more
important reason to act to protect these lands than the landscape's
uniqueness, ``the fight over wilderness lands in Utah is a test case of
sorts. The anti-environmental factions in Congress are trying hard to
remove restrictions on development in some of the Nation's most
splendid areas.''
Wisconsinites are watching this test case closely. I believe, Mr.
President, that Wisconsinites view the outcome of this fight to save
Utah's lands as a sign of where the Nation is headed with respect to
its stewardship of natural resources in Wisconsin. For example, some in
my home State believe that among Federal lands that comprise the
Apostle Islands National Lakeshore and the Nicolet and Chequamegon
National Forests there are lands that are deserving of wilderness
protection. I know first hand what spectacular and special places these
Federal properties are, and what they mean to the people of Wisconsin.
Wisconsinites want to know that, should additional lands in Wisconsin
be brought forward for wilderness designation, the type of protection
they expect from Federal law is still available to be extended because
it had been properly extended to other places of national significance.
What Haslanger's Capital Times comments make clear is that while some
in Congress may express concern about creating new wilderness in Utah,
wilderness, as Wisconsinites know, is not created by legislation.
Legislation to protect existing wilderness insures that future
generations may have an experience on public lands equal to that which
is available today. The action of Congress to preserve wild lands by
extending the protections of the Wilderness Act of 1964 publicly
codifies that expectation and promise.
Finally, and perhaps the most important reason why this legislation
is receiving my support, and deserves the support of others in this
body, is that all of the 5.7 million acres that will be protected under
this bill are already public lands held in trust by the Federal
Government. Thus, while they are physically located in Utah, their
preservation is important to the citizens of Wisconsin as it is for
others.
I am eager to work with my colleague from Illinois, Mr. Durbin, to
protect these lands. I commend him for introducing this measure.
______

By Mr. CRAIG (for himself and Mr. Kempthorne):
S. 774. A bill to provide for the stabilization, enhancement,
restoration, and management of the Coeur d'Alene River basin watershed;
to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.

the coeur d'alene river basin environmental restoration act of 1997

Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, I am today introducing, with the
cosponsorship of Senator Kempthorne, the Coeur d'Alene River Basin
Environmental Restoration Act of 1997. This legislation would allow for
a workable solution to clean up the historic effects of mining on the
Coeur d'Alene Basin in North Idaho. This bill is similar to a bill (S.
1614) I introduced in the last Congress.
This legislation establishes a process that is centered around an
action plan developed between the Governor of the State of Idaho and a
Citizens Advisory Commission comprised of fourteen representatives of
affected State and Federal government agencies, private citizens, the
Coeur d'Alene Indian Tribe; and affected industries. The
responsibilities of this Commission are very important to the ultimate
success of cleaning up the Basin. I would like to note that a
Commission that mirrors the one in this legislation was created by the
Idaho legislature and that legislation was signed into law by Governor
Phil Batt. I am indeed pleased that Idaho has put in place the citizen
committee that is the crux of this plan to clean up the Silver Valley.
The Silver Valley of North Idaho has made contributions to the
national economy and to all of our country's war efforts for well over
a century. The federal government has been involved in every phase of
mineral production over the history of the Valley. It is, therefore,
appropriate that Congress specifically legislate a resolution of
natural resources damages in the Coeur d'Alene Basin and participate in
funding such a plan.
I want to make clear this legislation does not interfere with the
ongoing Superfund cleanup within the 21-square mile Bunker Hill site.
This legislation sets up a framework for voluntary cleanup of affected
areas outside this 21-square mile area. In drafting this legislation, I
have worked with the mining industry, the Coeur d'Alene tribe, local
governments, the Governor of Idaho, and citizens in North Idaho. It is
only through the involvement of all these parties that a solution will
be reached.
Throughout this effort it has been clear that all parties want the
Basin cleaned up, and they want the cleanup done with the concerns of
local citizens and entities addressed and with controls and cleanup
decisions made in Idaho, not in Washington, DC. These are the guiding
principles that I have applied in developing this legislation.
Local cleanup has already begun in the headwaters of the Basin's
drainage. Nine Mile Creek and Canyon Creek have had proven engineering
designs implemented within their drainages. The Coeur d'Alene River
Basin Environmental Restoration Act of 1997 would assure this type of
meaningful restoration could continue. However, the actions needed in
each part of the Basin are not clear. That is why my bill calls for the
Governor of Idaho and the Citizens Advisory Commission to develop an
Action Plan that can address the varying conditions within the

[[Page S4889]]

Basin. For example, engineering solutions will certainly work in
portions of the Basin--but not every place. The steeper gradient
streams in the upper Basin respond well to engineering fixes, but these
types of fixes may only exacerbate problems in the lower, flatter
portions of the Basin. Local input and control through the action plan
can address such diversity and the need for varying environmental
fixes.
The Department of Justice is currently pursuing a lawsuit for alleged
natural resources damages in the area addressed by this legislation.
For the federal government to follow such a course is folly. When the
federal government litigates under Superfund, the members of the legal
profession benefit, as litigation eats away at whatever resources are
available for a cleanup. Litigation does not benefit the citizens
affected by a cleanup and certainly does not benefit the resources that
are purported to be the primary consideration when such a suit is
pursued. I do not intend to see cleanup resources in North Idaho
squandered in litigation. It is my goal to see that Coeur d'Alene Basin
cleanup is not litigated away. That is the reason we have introduced
this legislation. it will clean up the Basin, not litigiously waste the
Basin's resources.
______

By Mr. JEFFORDS (for himself, Mr. Kohl, Mr. Grams, Mr. D'Amato,
Ms. Collins, Mr. Daschle, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Smith of New
Hampshire, Mr. Grassley and Ms. Snowe):

S. 775. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exclude
gain or loss from the sale of livestock from the computation of capital
gain net income for purposes of the earned-income credit; to the
Committee on Finance.

The Earned-Income Credit Fairness Act of 1997

Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, I am today introducing a bill along with
Senator Kohl and several of my colleagues which will amend the earned-
income credit to restore fairness to low-income dairy farmers across
the country.
Last year during the debate over welfare reform, Congress tightened
up on the requirements for eligibility for the EIC. The law was amended
to prevent taxpayers with investment assets from claiming the EIC, our
rationale being that taxpayers with substantial investment assets
should sell those assets rather than rely on the EIC to supplement
their income. Specifically, the law now reads that if you have over
$2,200 in disqualified income, you cannot claim the EIC.
The earned-income credit (EIC) is a credit against tax available to
low-income working taxpayers. The credit is refundable; in other words,
even if you don't owe any income tax, the Government may still give you
a refund. In this way, the credit is a kind of income assistance to
low-income taxpayers, encouraging them to keep working.
Mr. President, the problem lies in that the IRS has interpreted the
term disqualified income to include gains realized by dairy farmers
when they cull and sell cows no longer suitable for dairy farming. I
disagree with the IRS' interpretation, as do many of my colleagues. In
my view, culled dairy cows are not investment assets. When farmers cull
and sell cows no longer fit for dairy farming, they're not cashing in
on their investments. To the contrary, they're cutting their losses.
And we should not automatically expect proceeds from these sales to be
available to support the farmer's day-to-day living expenses. Farmers
may not be able to use this money to put food on his or her family's
table or clothing on his family's back. He or she may have to pump
these funds back into the dairy operation. If the farmer intends to
maintain a viable dairy farm, he or she may use proceeds from the sale
of a culled cow to acquire another cow suitable for dairy farming. So,
I think it is wrong that these sale proceeds should make the low-income
dairy farmer ineligible for the EIC.
The IRS' interpretation will result in the loss of income from
thousands of struggling dairy farmers across the country. Dairy farmers
have experienced a 25-percent decline in milk prices in recent months
and for years have been faced with unstable and low milk prices. Based
on the Farm Credit's analysis, the current IRS position would cost
Vermont dairy farmers nearly $1 million in refunds and/or increased tax
bills. Dairy farmers across the country will be adversely impacted by
the current position of the IRS. The greatest impact will be in States
that have a high number of small- and mid-sized family dairy
operations. Losses to the Nation's dairy farmers have been estimated to
be as much as $76 million.
In short, in my view, when the income generated by a farmer's dairy
operations is otherwise modest, he or she should not become ineligible
for the EIC when he or she has the misfortune to discover that some of
his or her dairy cows are nonproductive and disposes of those
nonproductive assets at a profit.
Because I disagree with the IRS interpretation, I, together with 16
colleagues, wrote to IRS Commissioner Margaret Richardson on March 13,
1997, to challenge the IRS interpretation of the EIC. Unfortunately,
the IRS has maintained that its interpretation is correct. Accordingly,
today I am introducing this bill, along with several of my colleagues,
to overturn what we believe is an unwise and unwarranted interpretation
by the IRS. I urge my colleagues to join us in this effort.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that additional material be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:

U.S. Senate,

Washington, DC, March 13, 1997.
Hon. Margaret Milner Richardson,
Commissioner, Internal Revenue Service, Washington, DC.
Dear Commissioner Richardson: We are writing because some
of our constituent dairy farmers have brought to our
attention their concern about a potentially adverse impact to
them that may result from an IRS interpretation of the earned
income credit (26 U.S.C. Sec. 32). Our constituents have
informed us that in conversations with taxpayers, IRS
personnel have indicated that a low-income dairy farmer may
become ineligible to claim the EIC if he decides to cull from
his herd a cow no longer suitable for dairy farming, and
subsequently sells the cow, realizing a gain of $2,200 or
more.
We believe that this interpretation is incorrect. Section
32 of the Internal Revenue Code allows low-income taxpayers a
refundable credit against tax. Under Sec. 32(i)(1), this
earned income credit (EIC) is not available to taxpayers with
more than $2,200 in disqualified income. ``Disqualified
income'' is defined to include ``capital gain net income''
for the taxable year.
According to our constituents, the IRS has characterized
gains from the sale of culled cows as ``capital gain net
income.'' For the definition of ``capital gain net income,''
Sec. 32(i)(1)(D) specifically references the definition of
that term in Sec. 1222. Section 1222(9) defines ``capital
gain net income'' as the excess of gains from sales of
``capital assets'' over such losses from such sales.
We do not believe that culled cows are ``capital assets.''
As defined in Sec. 1221(2), the term ``capital asset'' does
not include ``property used in the trade or business.''
Section 1231(b) defines the term ``property used in the trade
or business,'' and subsection (b)(3) specifically defines
cattle held by a taxpayer for 24 months or more for dairy
purposes as ``property used in the trade or business.'' It
would follow, then, that any gains resulting from the sale of
such cattle are not gains from sales of capital assets giving
rise to ``capital gain net income.'' Accordingly, we do not
believe that Sec. 32(i)(1)(D) disqualifies a dairy farmer
from claiming the EIC because of gains realized from sales of
culled cows.
We request that the IRS review and summarize the
applicability of Sec. 32(i)(1)(D) to low-income dairy farmers
who realize gains of $2,200 or more upon the sale of culled
cows that they have held for more than two years. We also
request that you summarize what tax treatment would result if
the culled cows had not been held for two years. We look
forward to your response.
Sincerely,
Jim Jeffords, Alfonse D'Amato, Jeff Sessions, Bob Smith,
Patrick Leahy, Chris Dodd, Susan M. Collins, Jack Reed,
Joe Biden, Mike DeWine, Chuck Grassley, Rick Santorum,
Herb Kohl, Rob Grams, Olympia Snowe, Russ Feingold,
Judd Gregg.

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise today as a co-author of this
important legislation, which Senator Jeffords and I, and many others,
introduce today on behalf of all of our nation's farmers.
Let me begin by thanking my colleague from Vermont for his help and
leadership on this issue. The economic health of our agricultural
economy is paramount to both of our regions, and to the country at
large. And tax provisions related to agriculture, whether it be the
earned income credit [EIC] or other provisions, have repercussions
throughout our agricultural economy.

[[Page S4890]]

In the two regions that Senator Jeffords and I represent, dairy
farming is of particular importance. And it is with our dairy farmers
in mind that we feel an urgency in introducing this legislation.
Because while the tax policy change that we are seeking to undo affects
many livestock producers, it is the dairy farmers who are the hardest
hit.
Mr. President, our legislation will clarify that the sale of
livestock should not be treated as capital gain net income for purposes
of the EIC. As you may know, in last year's welfare bill, we took steps
to tighten eligibility to the EIC, a refundable tax credit available
only to lower income, working Americans. We did so to ensure further
that, in a time of limited Federal resources, the EIC was benefiting
those that it was intended to benefit--the working poor--those who have
jobs but who often need extra help to avoid turning to public
assistance. For many facing tough financial times and struggling to
support their families, the EIC has been the difference between hard
work and a hand out, between self-worth and self-doubt. And for many
dairy farmers in Wisconsin, the EIC has helped pay seed bills and farm
operating expenses and put food on kitchen tables.
One of several EIC provisions approved by Congress last year expanded
the category of disqualified income to include capital gain net income.
As such, under current law, if a taxpayer reports more than $2,200 in
capital gain net income, he or she is automatically disqualified from
collecting the EIC.
On its face, this tax policy adjustment seems reasonable. Most
policymakers would agree that an individual who realizes substantial
capital gain income from the sale of capital assets in any given year
should not be eligible for a tax credit for the working poor. The House
Committee report confirms as much.

That said, however, we are here today because a subsequent IRS
interpretation of that adjustment has restricted EIC eligibility in
such a way that we believe goes far beyond congressional intent--
distorting the purpose of last year's reforms and denying the credit to
a population of hard working Americans that the EIC was designed to
help--small- and mid-sized family farmers.
Specifically, the Internal Revenue Service [IRS] has interpreted
capital gain income to include income generated by the sale of culled
cows for purposes of the EIC. Further, the IRS argues that dairy cows
represent the type of assets Congress would expect a taxpayer to sell
to cover living expenses in lieu of claiming the credit.
Mr. President, though I do not question their good intentions, I
believe the IRS is misguided.
As you may know, farmers sell cows no longer suited for dairy farming
as a matter of course. It is a standard part of a farmer's business.
And in times of low prices or economic stress, it can play an even more
important role when some farmers are driven to cull cows more quickly
than they otherwise would. In addition, the Tax Code defines dairy
cattle held by a taxpayer for a certain period of time as property used
in a trade or business, specifying that such property is excluded from
the definition of capital assets. Since dairy cattle are not capital
assets, it follows that sales of cattle should not give rise to capital
gain income for EIC purposes.
For our Nation's dairy farmers, this unfair policy change has come at
a particularly cruel time, when milk prices have declined
precipitously, and many have been forced to cull cows to make ends
meet. Yet instead of stretching the family budget, they learn that
their actions have actually resulted in thousands of dollars in extra
taxes, leaving them worse off than before.
The consequences for my home State have been devastating. In a sample
of cases from a seven-county area in the eastern part of the State, the
average loss of Federal and State EIC benefits to farmers has been
$2,111 per family. And these are families with between one and seven
children. The total loss to the approximately 12,000 Wisconsin dairy
farms eligible for the EIC is estimated at $15.5 million.
Denying the EIC to family farmers on the basis of culled cows sales
is wrong. It is wrong, unfair, and Congress should act swiftly to
correct it.
I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan legislation of
national significance and help ensure the EIC continues to benefit
those for whom Congress intended.
Mr. GRAMS. Mr. President, I am proud to be a leading co-sponsor of
legislation introduced today with my friend and colleague, Senator Jim
Jeffords of Vermont. The Earned Income Credit (EIC) Fairness Act of
1997 is a direct response to back-door efforts by the Internal Revenue
Service to raise revenue on the backs of family farmers. This
legislation simply clarifies the intent of Congress by preserving this
important tax credit for our Nation's dairy farmers.
I want to thank Senator Jeffords for his leadership on this issue. My
colleague from Vermont and I have differed from time to time on what is
best for the Nation's dairy industry in the way of federal dairy
policy. However, I have always had a profound respect for his hard work
and genuine commitment to Vermont's dairy farmers. They have in Senator
Jeffords a tireless advocate in the U.S. Senate.
I also want to commend Mike Foley, a teacher and dairy farmer from
Melrose, MN for bringing this issue to my attention. Like other
problems created by IRS misinterpretations of Congressional intent--
including the alternative minimum tax [AMT] and the self-employment tax
problems--few knew of the EIC problem and the hardship it would
ultimately cause. Thanks to Mike, we now have the opportunity to
restore the IRS to its proper role of carrying out current laws instead
of creating new ones.
Mr. President, unless Congress acts on this legislation, the Nation's
dairy farmers will be forced to pay $76 million in taxes they were
never intended to pay. In effect, this is an agency-created $76 million
tax hike on hard working, generally low-income, dairy producers. For
dairy farmers in Minnesota, the tax hike would amount to about $6
million. As a boy who grew up on a dairy farm, I know all too well how
hard dairy farmers must work to make ends meet. Long hours. Early
mornings. Late nights. The vacations--even for a day--which a lot of us
take for granted are unthinkable for most of our dairy producers. This
is especially true for the dairy producers who would be hit hardest by
the new IRS-imposed tax hike. This is wrong. Wrong because the IRS has
no business raising taxes by agency fiat. And, wrong because of the
severe hardship the tax hike would impose on our Nation's dairy
producers.
During consideration of the 1996 Farm Bill, we promised our farmers
long overdue tax relief, regulatory relief, improved risk management
and research, and free and fair trade. My request of the
administration, particularly the IRS, is simple. If you don't want to
help keep this promise to America's farmers, simply step aside and at
least don't hinder those of us who do.
I urge my colleagues to give the EIC Fairness Act of 1997 speedy
consideration and passage.
______

By Mr. JOHNSON (for himself, Mr. Daschle, Mr. Wellstone, Mr.
Grams, Mr. Harkin and Mr. Grassley):
S. 777. A bill to authorize the construction of the Lewis and Clark
Rural Water System and to authorize assistance to the Lewis and Clark
Rural Water System, Inc., a nonprofit corporation, for planning and
construction of the water supply system, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.

The Lewis and Clark Rural Water System Act of 1997

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, today, I am proud to be introducing
legislation, along with my colleagues, the Minority Leader Senator
Daschle of South Dakota, Senator Harkin and Senator Grassley of Iowa,
and Senator Wellstone and Senator Grams of Minnesota, to authorize the
Lewis and Clark Rural Water System. I introduced similar legislation
last year as a Member of the House of Representatives during the 104th
Congress. I look forward to again working closely with my colleagues
for timely consideration of this important measure.
The Lewis and Clark Rural Water System is made up of 22 rural water
systems and communities in southeastern South Dakota, northwestern
Iowa,

[[Page S4891]]

and southwestern Minnesota who have joined together in an effort to
cooperatively address the dual problems facing the delivery of drinking
water in this region--inadequate quantities of water and poor quality
water.
This region has seen substantial growth and development in recent
years, and studies have shown that future water needs will be
significantly greater than the current available supply. Most of the
people who are served by 10 of the water utilities in the proposed
Lewis and Clark project area currently enforce water restrictions on a
seasonal basis. Almost half of the membership has water of such poor
quality it does not meet present or proposed standards for drinking
water. More than two-thirds rely on shallow aquifers as their primary
source of drinking water, aquifers which are very vulnerable to
contamination by surface activities.
The Lewis and Clark system will be a supplemental supply of drinking
water for its 22 members, acting as a treated, bulk delivery system.
The distribution to deliver water to individual users will continue
through the existing systems used by each member utility. This
regionalization approach to solving these water supply and quality
problems enables the Missouri River to provide a source of clean, safe
drinking water to more than 180,000 individuals. A source of water
which none of the members of Lewis and Clark could afford on their own.
The proposed system would help to stabilize the regional rural
economy by providing water to Sioux Falls, the hub city in the region,
as well as numerous small communities and individual farms in South
Dakota and portions of Iowa and Minnesota.
The States of South Dakota, Iowa, and Minnesota have all authorized
the project and local sponsors have demonstrated a financial commitment
to this project through State grants, local water development district
grants, and membership dues. The State of South Dakota has already
contributed more than $400,000.
Mr. President, I do not believe our needs get any more basic than
good quality, reliable drinking water, and I appreciate the fact that
Congress has shown support for efforts to improve drinking water
supplies in South Dakota. I look forward to continue working with my
colleagues to have that support extended to the Lewis and Clark Rural
Water System.
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. 777

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 ``Lewis and Clark Rural Water
System Act of 1997''.

SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

In this Act:
(1) Environmental enhancement.--The term ``environmental
enhancement'' means the wetland and wildlife enhancement
activities that are carried out substantially in accordance
with the environmental enhancement component of the
feasibility study.
(2) Environmental enhancement component.--The term
``environmental enhancement component'' means the component
described in the report entitled ``Wetlands and Wildlife
Enhancement for the Lewis and Clark Rural Water System'',
dated April 1991, that is included in the feasibility study.
(3) Feasibility study.--The term ``feasibility study''
means the study entitled ``Feasibility Level Evaluation of a
Missouri River Regional Water Supply for South Dakota, Iowa
and Minnesota'', dated September 1993, that includes a water
conservation plan, environmental report, and environmental
enhancement component.
(4) Member entity.--The term ``member entity'' means a
rural water system or municipality that signed a Letter of
Commitment to participate in the water supply system.
(5) Project construction budget.--The term ``project
construction budget'' means the description of the total
amount of funds needed for the construction of the water
supply system, as contained in the feasibility study.
(6) Pumping and incidental operational requirements.--The
term ``pumping and incidental operational requirements''
means all power requirements that are incidental to the
operation of intake facilities, pumping stations, water
treatment facilities, reservoirs, and pipelines up to the
point of delivery of water by the water supply system to each
member entity that distributes water at retail to individual
users.
(7) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of the Interior.
(8) Water supply system.--The term ``water supply system''
means the Lewis and Clark Rural Water System, Inc., a
nonprofit corporation established and operated substantially
in accordance with the feasibility study.

SEC. 3. FEDERAL ASSISTANCE FOR THE WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM.

(a) In General.--The Secretary shall make grants to the
water supply system for the planning and construction of the
water supply system.
(b) Service Area.--The water supply system shall provide
for safe and adequate municipal, rural, and industrial water
supplies, environmental enhancement, mitigation of wetland
areas, and water conservation in--
(1) Lake County, McCook County, Minnehaha County, Turner
County, Lincoln County, Clay County, and Union County, in
southeastern South Dakota;
(2) Rock County and Nobles County, in southwestern
Minnesota; and
(3) Lyon County, Sioux County, Osceola County, O'Brien
County, Dickinson County, and Clay County, in northwestern
Iowa.
(c) Amount of Grants.--Grants made available under
subsection (a) to the water supply system shall not exceed
the amount of funds authorized under section 10.
(d) Limitation on Availability of Construction Funds.--The
Secretary shall not obligate funds for the construction of
the water supply system until--
(1) the requirements of the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) are met;
(2) a final engineering report is prepared and submitted to
Congress not less than 90 days before the commencement of
construction of the water supply system; and
(3) a water conservation program is developed and
implemented.

SEC. 4. FEDERAL ASSISTANCE FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL ENHANCEMENT
COMPONENT.

(a) Initial Development.--The Secretary shall make grants
and other funds available to the water supply system and
other private, State, and Federal entities, for the initial
development of the environmental enhancement component.
(b) Nonreimbursement.--Funds provided under subsection (a)
shall be nonreimbursable and nonreturnable.

SEC. 5. WATER CONSERVATION PROGRAM.

(a) In General.--The water supply system shall establish a
water conservation program that ensures that users of water
from the water supply system use the best practicable
technology and management techniques to conserve water use.
(b) Requirements.--The water conservation programs shall
include--
(1) low consumption performance standards for all newly
installed plumbing fixtures;
(2) leak detection and repair programs;
(3) rate schedules that do not include declining block rate
schedules for municipal households and special water users
(as defined in the feasibility study);
(4) public education programs and technical assistance to
member entities; and
(5) coordinated operation among each rural water system,
and each water supply facility in existence on the date of
enactment of this Act, in the service area of the system.
(c) Review and Revision.--The programs described in
subsection (b) shall contain provisions for periodic review
and revision, in cooperation with the Secretary.

SEC. 6. MITIGATION OF FISH AND WILDLIFE LOSSES.

Mitigation for fish and wildlife losses incurred as a
result of the construction and operation of the water supply
system shall be on an acre-for-acre basis, based on
ecological equivalency, concurrent with project construction,
as provided in the feasibility study.

SEC. 7. USE OF PICK-SLOAN POWER.

(a) In General.--From power designated for future
irrigation and drainage pumping for the Pick-Sloan Missouri
Basin program, the Western Area Power Administration shall
make available the capacity and energy required to meet the
pumping and incidental operational requirements of the water
supply system during the period beginning on May 1 and ending
on October 31 of each year.
(b) Conditions.--The capacity and energy described in
subsection (a) shall be made available on the following
conditions:
(1) The water supply system shall be operated on a not-for-
profit basis.
(2) The water supply system shall contract to purchase the
entire electric service requirements of the system, including
the capacity and energy made available under subsection (a),
from a qualified preference power supplier that itself
purchases power from the Western Area Power Administration.
(3) The rate schedule applicable to the capacity and energy
made available under subsection (a) shall be the firm power
rate schedule of the Pick-Sloan Eastern Division of the
Western Area Power Administration in effect when the power is
delivered by the Administration.
(4) It is agreed by contract among--
(A) the Western Area Power Administration;
(B) the power supplier with which the water supply system
contracts under paragraph (2);
(C) the power supplier of the entity described in
subparagraph (B); and

[[Page S4892]]

(D) the water supply system;
that in the case of the capacity and energy made available
under subsection (a), the benefit of the rate schedule
described in paragraph (3) shall be passed through to the
water supply system, except that the power supplier of the
water supply system shall not be precluded from including, in
the charges of the supplier to the water system for the
electric service, the other usual and customary charges of
the supplier.

SEC. 8. NO LIMITATION ON WATER PROJECTS IN STATES.

This Act does not limit the authorization for water
projects in the States of South Dakota, Iowa, and Minnesota
under law in effect on or after the date of enactment of this
Act.

SEC. 9. WATER RIGHTS.

Nothing in this Act--
(1) invalidates or preempts State water law or an
interstate compact governing water;
(2) alters the rights of any State to any appropriated
share of the waters of any body of surface or ground water,
whether determined by past or future interstate compacts or
by past or future legislative or final judicial allocations;
(3) preempts or modifies any Federal or State law, or
interstate compact, governing water quality or disposal; or
(4) confers on any non-Federal entity the ability to
exercise any Federal right to the waters of any stream or to
any ground water resource.

SEC. 10. COST SHARING.

(a) Federal Cost Share.--
(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the
Secretary shall provide funds equal to 80 percent of--
(A) the amount allocated in the total project construction
budget for planning and construction of the water supply
system under section 3;
(B) such amounts as are necessary to defray increases in
the budget for planning and construction of the water supply
system under section 3; and
(C) such amounts as are necessary to defray increases in
development costs reflected in appropriate engineering cost
indices after September 1, 1993.
(2) Sioux falls.--The Secretary shall provide funds for the
city of Sioux Falls, South Dakota, in an amount equal to 50
percent of the incremental cost to the city of participation
in the project.
(b) Non-Federal Cost Share.--
(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the
non-Federal share of the costs allocated to the water supply
system shall be 20 percent of the amounts described in
subsection (a)(1).
(2) Sioux falls.--The non-Federal cost-share for the city
of Sioux Falls, South Dakota, shall be 50 percent of the
incremental cost to the city of participation in the project.

SEC. 11. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION.

(a) Authorization.--The Secretary may allow the Director of
the Bureau of Reclamation to provide project construction
oversight to the water supply system and environmental
enhancement component for the service area of the water
supply system described in section 3(b).
(b) Project Oversight Administration.--The amount of funds
used by the Director of the Bureau of Reclamation for
planning and construction of the water supply system shall
not exceed the amount that is equal to 1 percent of the
amount provided in the total project construction budget for
the entire project construction period.

SEC. 12. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this
Act $226,320,000, of which not less than $8,487,000 shall be
used for the initial development of the environmental
enhancement component under section 4, to remain available
until expended.

Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, today I join my colleagues from South
Dakota, Iowa, and Minnesota in co-sponsoring Lewis and Clark Rural
Water System Act of 1977, and I do so with great enthusiasm for what
this project could mean to the people in southwestern Minnesota, as
well as those in Iowa and South Dakota who have serious problems
finding adequate drinking water supplies.
Many of us never really have to think about where our water comes
from, but for the people in Luverne and Worthington, Minnesota, it is a
constantly nagging question, Helping provide for this sort of basic
need is what I think government ought to be doing.
In a project like Lewis and Clark, governments at all levels have to
work together. Municipalities, states, and the federal government each
will have important roles to play, and each will have to carry a
significant burden. And that is as it should be--in tough situations
like this, not only is there no free lunch, but there is also no free
water.
So today I am pleased to formally state my support for the Lewis and
Clark project by cosponsoring its authorization legislation. The Lewis
and Clark Rural Water System project is sorely needed to provide safe
drinking water on a consistent basis for citizens in the tri-state
region of Minnesota, South Dakota, and Iowa. For far too long
communities in this region have faced great and sometimes overwhelming
challenges in finding safe and reliable sources of water for their
citizens. While many communities in our country have ample supplies of
drinking water, twenty-two communities in this tri-state area are not
so lucky. Shallow aquifers and high water tables have left many water
systems in the region constantly searching for potable water. Even when
these communities have managed to find sources of water, many times the
water has been contaminated with unsafe levels of nitrates and
bacteria, as well as high levels of naturally occurring iron and
manganese.
While the lack of water, reliable water sources affects the health of
these citizens in the short-term, the economic vitality of these
communities is adversely affected in the long-term. Rural communities
cannot plan economic growth when they do not possess long-term sources
of safe drinking water. Businesses are reluctant to locate in an area
where such necessities are not guaranteed. Therefore, as a strong
supporter of rural economic development. I believe that this project
will benefit the economic welfare of citizens who live in this region.
I recognize that some concerns still exist about the impacts of this
project. I intend to work to improve the bill as it makes its way
through the legislative process, and believe the concerns which some
have raised regarding the environmental impacts of this project will be
addressed as the project moves forward. Work on this important bill
will likely be going on for some time, and I look forward to helping
shape the final legislation and making the project a reality.
Mr. GRAMS. Mr. President, I rise today to join Senators Daschle,
Johnson, Grassley, Harkin, and Wellstone as a proud cosponsor of
legislation authorizing the Lewis and Clark Rural Water System. This
much-needed legislation will help provide a long-term, high-quality
water supply from the Missouri River to over 180,000 individuals in
portions of Minnesota, South Dakota, and Iowa.
For too long, and to the detriment of community development,
residents of this region have been deprived of a sustainable water
resource. In light of Minnesota's reputation as the ``land of 10,000
lakes,'' it might come as a surprise to hear my home state described as
being desperately short on water supplies. The southwestern corner of
the state, however, is geographically very different from the rest of
Minnesota. Rock County, which would be served by the Lewis and Clark
system, is the only county in Minnesota without a natural lake.
Communities within the proposed water system are now served by
shallow aquifers highly susceptible to drought, leading most of these
communities to impose severe watering restrictions. The constant
deterioration of these aquifers is evidenced through the detection of
ever-increasing nitrate levels that threaten the safety of current
drinking water. Moreover, increasing federal regulations have imposed
expensive, unfunded mandates on communities seeking to deliver clean
and healthy water to their residents.
This situation has forced communities throughout the region to
aggressively explore alternative water supplies. Since 1989, the
community of Worthington, Minnesota has spent between $50,000 to
$75,000 annually searching for another source of water, all without
success. The nearby community of Luverne, Minnesota has experienced the
same disappointing results despite its significant expenditures. It is
little wonder struggling communities across this region have joined
together to strongly support the Lewis and Clark proposal.
Bill Weber, the distinguished mayor of Luverne, Minnesota stated:
``It made sense to us to combine our financial assets in building one
system that can provide an alternative supply of drinking water for 22
systems. The only other alternative was for each of us to continue as
we have in the past, exploring more costly alternatives that only
helped one at a time and alternatives, which in the case of Luverne
appear to be nonexistent.''
Greg Degroot, President of Worthington Public Utilities, wrote that
the system ``will provide our community

[[Page S4893]]

with an alternative source of water that will give us some protection
in the event of the loss of our existing water source and will also
provide the additional water that is necessary for our community to
continue to prosper and grow.''
Mr. President, under our legislation, local communities will come
together with the affected states and the federal government to form a
strong, financial partnership, thereby ensuring an adequate, safe water
supply while reducing the costs to the American taxpayers. In fact,
with our revised proposal, the city of Sioux Falls, South Dakota--by
far the largest user of the proposed system--will pay 50% of the
construction costs for its share of Lewis and Clark water.
Mr. President, providing healthy water to our communities is one of
the most basic functions of the government. It is not a partisan issue,
and therefore I am proud to join with a bipartisan group of my
colleagues and the Governors of Minnesota, South Dakota, and Iowa in
supporting this bill. We believe our legislation to be the best, most
cost-effective answer to a severe and growing problem.
The time to enact this bipartisan legislation is now. As a member of
the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, I look forward to working
with the distinguished Chairman, Senator Murkowski; Senator Johnson,
the primary sponsor of this legislation and a Committee member; the
rest of our colleagues; and the Clinton Administration in providing
much-needed relief to our communities. They deserve nothing less.
Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I rise today in strong support of the
Lewis and Clark Water System Act of 1997. This legislation will
authorize the construction of Lewis and Clark, along with a federal
commitment of assistance for construction. Lewis and Clark is designed
to be a treated, bulk water delivery system for 22 communities and
rural water systems located in northwest Iowa, southeast South Dakota,
and southwest Minnesota. Within this tri-state area, over 200,000
persons will be assured of clean and safe drinking water from Lewis and
Clark.
Lewis and Clark is necessary to address poor water quality sources,
inadequate water supplies, population growth, and increasing federal
regulations that the member water systems are trying to deal with. In
many cases the drinking water currently delivered by Lewis and Clark's
membership exceeds secondary drinking water standards for iron,
manganese, sulfate, and total dissolved solids. Water of this quality
is very difficult and expensive to treat. In Iowa, most of the involved
drinking water systems are at, or near, their capacity, and have
serious water quality problems. An engineering feasibility study
completed by the Bureau of Reclamation in September 1993 concluded the
project is technically feasible.
However, this project will not be economically viable without federal
assistance. Because many rural areas and small communities are involved
with the project, the necessary financial resources do not exist to
bring Lewis and Clark to completion. Through the Bureau of Reclamation
study, each utility member determined that Lewis and Clark was the most
feasible and least costly alternative for meeting future drinking water
needs. It is estimated that this project will provide quality water at
a reasonable cost, an estimated 75 cents per 1,000 gallons.
Mr. President, this project represents a unique opportunity to bring
safe, clean, and affordable drinking water to hundreds of thousands of
persons in a tri-state area. It is not often Congress has the
opportunity to assist in a project that has the joint cooperation of
persons from three states, and twenty-two communities and local water
systems. In an era when we see states and communities fighting for
water resources, Lewis and Clark represents a grass-roots effort of
concerned citizens, businesses, and government officials.
Lastly, I would like to add that this is a project that clearly fits
the characteristics of projects traditionally funded by the Bureau of
Reclamation. Given its broad support, critical needs, and clear merits,
I urge the passage of this important legislation.
By Mr. LUGAR:
S. 778. A bill to authorize a new trade and investment policy for
sub-Saharan African; to the Committee on Finance.

The African Growth and Opportunity Act

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I introduce the African Growth and
Opportunity Act. A similar bill has been introduced in the House of
Representatives and is now cosponsored by nearly 50 Members. It enjoys
the support of many in the House leadership. I applaud the hard work of
those Members of the House who have toiled to draft proactive
legislation that would, if enacted, help re-shape our relationship with
countries in sub-Sahara Africa.
The bill I am introducing contains a range of trade, investment and
reform incentives for economic growth that require little or no new
spending. It reflects much of the administration's ``Partnership for
Economic Growth and Opportunity in Africa'' initiative which proposes
greater U.S. attention and priority to Africa. This bill proposes
important trade and investment initiatives that would be available to
eligible African countries which pursue meaningful internal reforms--
both economic and political reform.
The bill would seek to provide a range of trade preferences and
concessions, including GSP and lower trade barriers, to eligible
countries embarking on economic and political liberalization. It seeks
to encourage increased private sector investment flows by engaging OPIC
and other government guarantees to create private equity and
infrastructure funds targeted on Africa. It proposes certain personnel
changes in various government agencies to give greater attention to
Africa and to facilitate U.S. trade and investment. It seeks the
cooperation of international financial institutions to ease the heavy
debt burden of the poorest countries in Africa. And, it seeks the
cooperation of other developed countries to join us in granting trade
concessions and other preferences to Africa.
To achieve sustained economic growth and political stability in
Africa, the private sector must be more fully engaged. They have the
investment capital, they have the knowhow, and they have the will to
take calculated risks abroad. The private sector, however, will be more
interested in investment, trade and the technical assistance that
accompany them, if countries make the hard decisions to liberalize
their economies and open their political system to participation and
good governance. That process is underway in Africa, but much more
needs to be done.
This bill intends to increase our commercial and official contacts
and interactions in recognition of the enormous potential for economic
growth and development in Africa. It reflects the vast diversity of
people, cultures, economies, and potential among the forty-eight
countries and the more than 600 million people. It provides incentives
and rewards to the growing number of countries embarking on a host of
economic and political reforms. These are reforms we should encourage
and support. These changes are not only in the interests of African
societies, they are in our interest as well. A stable and economically
prosperous Africa will contribute to our commercial and security
interests.
The ``African Growth and Opportunity Act'', therefore, includes a
range of incentives and policy tools that would begin the long-overdue
process of linking U.S. ties with Africa on trade and investment, not
solely on foreign assistance. We should be basing our relations with
Africans as partners, not just as aid recipients. For too long,
American policy towards Africa has concentrated on our foreign
assistance programs which have resulted in little more than a series of
bi-lateral donor-recipient relationships.
While helpful in promoting economic and political development, and in
alleviating humanitarian crises and other social ills, our assistance
programs were never large enough to be effective in stimulating or
sustaining real economic growth. They are still important and needed.
But, bilateral assistance, even when coupled with assistance from other
donor countries and from international banks and lending institutions,
are insufficient by themselves to kick-start and sustain the economies
of Africa. They have not been sufficient in eradicating contagious
diseases, in eliminating chronic poverty, or in ending the cycle of
under-development and recurring political turmoil.

[[Page S4894]]

Mr. President, we have neglected Africa's economic growth potential
for too many years. For too long, American interest in sub-Sahara
Africa was largely a function of our strategic considerations and
trade-offs during the Cold War period. Most Americans paid attention to
Africa only when there was a natural or man-made calamity or disaster.
Regrettably, this has led to distortion and mis-information about the
real Africa. It has retarded interest in exploring opportunities in
this rich and diverse continent.
But, economic growth, political stability or the protection of human
rights in Africa won't happen by themselves or by the actions of the
U.S. The leadership in Africa must make it happen by their actions and
decisions. We should encourage and respond to those countries and those
leaders who are making the difficult decisions to implement economic
and political reform.
There is little doubt that those African countries which have
embarked on the road to economic and political reform are beginning to
reap the kind of benefits known in other regions of the world, such as
East Asia. Several countries already enjoy multi-year economic growth
in the five, six to ten percent range. Uganda, for example, had a
growth rate of 10% in l995 and Ethiopia exceeded that level last year.
More than 30 countries in sub-Sahara Africa have already initiated
economic reform programs and some twenty-five countries have conducted
open elections.

Many countries have begun to liberalize their exchange rates and
prices, privatize state-owned enterprises, reduce expensive state
subsidies and cut back on impediments to trade and investment. These
steps and others will help African economies grow.
African trade barriers are more onerous than those in the faster
growing economies in the developing world. Import tariffs are three and
a half times higher than those in faster growing countries in the
developing world. Along with non-tariff restrictions and assorted
protectionist practices, these practices have hurt the competitiveness
of Africa exports. They inflict trade losses that match or exceed the
total levels of aid to Africa. As these barriers to trade and
investment are eased and eliminated, they will open the way for
economic growth and assist American entrepreneurs by opening their
markets to our goods and services.
It may interest members to know that U.S. trade with sub-Saharan
Africa grew by more than 18% last year. For the second consecutive
year, the growth in U.S. trade in sub-Sahara Africa outdistanced
America's overall growth in world trade. No one who has sought to
invest or trade in Africa will deny that doing so has been difficult,
but few would deny that the many opportunities exist.
U.S. trade with Africa amounts to only about one percent of total
U.S. trade and U.S. investment there totals less than one percent of
all U.S. direct investment overseas. This, despite the fact that
roughly forty per cent of all America exports now go to developing
countries where the greatest growth in U.S. trade and exports in recent
years has taken place.
Finally, Mr. President, let me conclude by saying that I am
introducing this bill to stimulate interest and to encourage serious
debate in the Senate on re-orienting U.S. policy towards Africa.
Without question, we have a genuine interest in Africa that is only now
being recognized. Enactment of this bill will help create an
environment in which the private sector will become more fully engaged
in the economic development and growth and political modernization of
Africa. If that happens, it will be very much in the interest of the
United States.
I urge my colleagues in the Senate to take note of this bill,
consider its merits, explore the growing potential for U.S. exports and
investment and consider the prospects for revising and broadening our
overall relationship with sub-Sahara Africa.
If we do so, our country will be a major economic and security
beneficiary.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Africa Growth and
Opportunity Act be printed in full in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:

S. 778

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 ``African Growth and
Opportunity Act''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

The Congress finds that it is in the mutual economic
interest of the United States and sub-Saharan Africa to
promote stable and sustainable economic growth and
development in sub-Saharan Africa. To that end, the United
States seeks to facilitate the social and economic
development of the countries of sub-Saharan Africa in a
manner which strengthens and expands market-led economic
growth consistent with equitable and efficient development
and which reduces poverty and increases employment among the
poor. In particular, the United States seeks to assist sub-
Saharan African countries to achieve economic self-reliance
by--
(1) strengthening and expanding the private sector in sub-
Saharan Africa, especially women-owned businesses;
(2) encouraging increased trade and investment between the
United States and sub-Saharan Africa;
(3) reducing tariff and nontariff barriers and other trade
obstacles;
(4) expanding United States assistance to sub-Saharan
Africa's regional integration efforts;
(5) negotiating free trade areas;
(6) establishing a United States-Sub-Saharan Africa Trade
and Investment Partnership;
(7) focusing on countries committed to accountable
government, economic reform, and the eradication of poverty;
(8) establishing a United States-Sub-Saharan Africa
Economic Cooperation Forum; and
(9) continuing to support development assistance for those
countries in sub-Saharan Africa attempting to build civil
societies.

SEC. 3. STATEMENT OF POLICY.

The Congress supports economic self-reliance for sub-
Saharan African countries, particularly those committed to--
(1) economic and political reform;
(2) market incentives and private sector growth;
(3) the eradication of poverty; and
(4) the importance of women to economic growth and
development.

SEC. 4. ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS.

(a) In General.--A sub-Saharan African country shall be
eligible to participate in programs, projects, or activities,
or receive assistance or other benefits under this Act for a
fiscal year only if the President determines that the country
has established, or is making continual progress toward
establishing, a market-based economy, such as the
establishment and enforcement of appropriate policies
relating to--
(1) promoting free movement of goods and services and
factors of production between the United States and sub-
Saharan Africa;
(2) promoting the expansion of the production base and the
transformation of commodities and nontraditional products for
exports through joint venture projects between African and
United States companies;
(3) trade issues, such as protection of intellectual
property rights, improvements in standards, testing, labeling
and certification, and government procurement;
(4) the protection of property rights, such as protection
against expropriation and a functioning and fair judicial
system;
(5) tax issues, such as reducing high import and corporate
taxes, controlling government consumption, participation in
bilateral investment treaties, and the harmonization of such
treaties to avoid double taxation;
(6) foreign investment issues, such as the provision of
national treatment for foreign investors and other measures
to attract foreign investors;
(7) supporting the growth of regional markets within a free
trade area framework;
(8) regulatory issues, such as eliminating government
corruption, minimizing government intervention in the market,
monitoring the fiscal and monetary policies of the
government, and supporting the growth of the private sector,
in particular by promoting the emergence of a new generation
of African entrepreneurs;
(9) encouraging the private ownership of government-
controlled economic enterprises through divestiture programs;
(10) removing restrictions on investment; and
(11) the reduction of poverty, such as the provision of
basic health and education for poor citizens, the expansion
of physical infrastructure in a manner designed to maximize
accessibility, increased access to market and credit
facilities for small farmers and producers, and improved
economic opportunities for women as entrepreneurs and
employees.
(b) Additional Factors.--In determining whether a sub-
Saharan African country is eligible under subsection (a), the
President shall take into account the following factors:
(1) An expression by such country of its desire to be an
eligible country under subsection (a).
(2) The extent to which such country has made substantial
progress toward--
(A) reducing tariff levels;
(B) binding its tariffs in the World Trade Organization and
assuming meaningful binding obligations in other sectors of
trade; and

[[Page S4895]]

(C) eliminating nontariff barriers to trade.
(3) Whether such country, if not already a member of the
World Trade Organization, is actively pursuing membership in
that Organization.
(4) The extent to which such country is in material
compliance with its programs with and its obligation to the
International Monetary Fund and other international financial
institutions.
(c) Continuing Compliance.--
(1) Monitoring and review of certain countries.--The
President shall monitor and review the progress of those sub-
Saharan African countries that have been determined to be
eligible under subsection (a) but are in need of making
continual progress in meeting one or more of the requirements
of such subsection.
(2) Ineligibility of certain countries.--A sub-Saharan
African country described in paragraph (1) that has not made
continual progress in meeting the requirements with which it
is not in compliance shall be ineligible to participate in
programs, projects, or activities, or receive assistance or
other benefits, under this Act.

SEC. 5. ADDITIONAL AUTHORITIES AND INCREASED FLEXIBILITY TO
PROVIDE ASSISTANCE UNDER THE DEVELOPMENT FUND
FOR AFRICA.

(a) Use of Sustainable Development Assistance To Support
Further Economic Growth.--It is the sense of the Congress
that sustained economic growth in sub-Saharan Africa depends
in large measure upon the development of a receptive
environment for trade and investment, and that to achieve
this objective the United States Agency for International
Development should continue to support programs which help to
create this environment. Investments in human resources,
development, and implementation of free market policies,
including policies to liberalize agricultural markets and
improve food security, and the support for the rule of law
and democratic governance should continue to be encouraged
and enhanced on a bilateral and regional basis.
(b) Declarations of Policy.--The Congress makes the
following declarations:
(1) The Development Fund for Africa established under
chapter 10 of part I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961
(22 U.S.C. 2293 et seq.) has been an effective tool in
providing development assistance to sub-Saharan Africa since
1988.
(2) The Development Fund for Africa will complement the
other provisions of this Act and lay a foundation for
increased trade and investment opportunities between the
United States and sub-Saharan Africa.
(3) Assistance provided through the Development Fund for
Africa will continue to support programs and activities that
promote the long term economic development of sub-Saharan
Africa, such as programs and activities relating to the
following:
(A) Strengthening primary and vocational education systems,
especially the acquisition of middle-level technical skills
for operating modern private businesses and the introduction
of college level business education, including the study of
international business, finance, and stock exchanges.
(B) Strengthening health care systems.
(C) Strengthening family planning service delivery systems.
(D) Supporting democratization, good governance and civil
society and conflict resolution efforts.
(E) Increasing food security by promoting the expansion of
agricultural and agriculture-based industrial production and
productivity and increasing real incomes for poor
individuals.
(F) Promoting an enabling environment for private sector-
led growth through sustained economic reform, privatization
programs, and market-led economic activities.
(G) Promoting decentralization and local participation in
the development process, especially linking the rural
production sectors and the industrial and market centers
throughout Africa.
(H) Increasing the technical and managerial capacity of
sub-Saharan African individuals to manage the economy of sub-
Saharan Africa.
(I) Ensuring sustainable economic growth through
environmental protection.
(4) The African Development Foundation has a unique
congressional mandate to empower the poor to participate
fully in development and to increase opportunities for
gainful employment, poverty alleviation, and more equitable
income distribution in sub-Saharan Africa. The African
Development Foundation has worked successfully to enhance the
role of women as agents of change, strengthen the informal
sector with an emphasis on supporting micro and small sized
enterprises, indigenous technologies, and mobilizing local
financing. The African Development Foundation should develop
and implement strategies for promoting participation in the
socioeconomic development process of grassroots and informal
sector groups such as nongovernmental organizations,
cooperatives, artisans, and traders into the programs and
initiatives established under this Act.
(c) Additional Authorities.--
(1) In general.--Section 496(h) of the Foreign Assistance
Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2293(h)) is amended--
(A) by redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (4); and
(B) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following:
``(3) Democratization and conflict resolution
capabilities.--Assistance under this section may also include
program assistance--
``(A) to promote democratization, good governance, and
strong civil societies in sub-Saharan Africa; and
``(B) to strengthen conflict resolution capabilities of
governmental, intergovernmental, and nongovernmental entities
in sub-Saharan
Africa.''.
(2) Conforming amendment.--Section 496(h)(4) of such Act,
as amended by paragraph (1), is further amended by striking
``paragraphs (1) and (2)'' in the first sentence and
inserting ``paragraphs (1), (2), and (3)''.
(d) Waiver Authority.--Section 496 of the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2293) is amended by adding
at the end the following:
``(p) Waiver Authority.--
``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the
President may waive any provision of law that earmarks, for a
specified country, organization, or purpose, funds made
available to carry out this chapter if the President
determines that the waiver of such provision of law would
provide increased flexibility in carrying out this chapter.
``(2) Exceptions.--
``(A) Child survival activities.--The authority contained
in paragraph (1) may not be used to waive a provision of law
that earmarks funds made available to carry out this chapter
for the following purposes:
``(i) Immunization programs.
``(ii) Oral rehydration programs.
``(iii) Health and nutrition programs, and related
education programs, which address the needs of mothers and
children.
``(iv) Water and sanitation programs.
``(v) Assistance for displaced and orphaned children.
``(vi) Programs for the prevention, treatment, and control
of, and research on, tuberculosis, HIV/AIDS, polio, malaria,
and other diseases.
``(vii) Basic education programs for children.
``(viii) Contribution on a grant basis to the United
Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) pursuant to section 301 of
this Act.
``(B) Requirement to supersede waiver authority.--The
provisions of this subsection shall not be superseded except
by a provision of law enacted after the date of the enactment
of the African Growth and Opportunity Act which specifically
repeals, modifies, or supersedes such provisions.''.

SEC. 6. UNITED STATES-SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA TRADE AND ECONOMIC
COOPERATION FORUM.

(a) Declaration of Policy.--The President shall convene
annual high-level meetings between appropriate officials of
the United States Government and officials of the governments
of sub-Saharan African countries in order to foster close
economic ties between the United States and sub-Saharan
Africa.
(b) Establishment.--Not later than 12 months after the date
of the enactment of this Act, the President, after consulting
with the governments concerned, shall establish a United
States-Sub-Saharan Africa Trade and Economic Cooperation
Forum (hereafter in this section referred to as the
``Forum'').
(c) Requirements.--In creating the Forum, the President
shall meet the following requirements:
(1) The President shall direct the Secretary of Commerce,
the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of State, and
the United States Trade Representative to host the first
annual meeting with the counterparts of such Secretaries from
the governments of sub-Saharan African countries eligible
under section 4, the Secretary General of the Organization of
African Unity, and government officials from other
appropriate countries in Africa, to discuss expanding trade
and investment relations between the United States and sub-
Saharan Africa and the implementation of this Act.
(2)(A) The President, in consultation with the Congress,
shall encourage United States nongovernmental organizations
to host annual meetings with nongovernmental organizations
from sub-Saharan Africa in conjunction with the annual
meetings of the Forum for the purpose of discussing the
issues described in paragraph (1).
(B) The President, in consultation with the Congress, shall
encourage United States representatives of the private sector
to host annual meetings with representatives of the private
sector from sub-Saharan Africa in conjunction with the annual
meetings of the Forum for the purpose of discussing the
issues described in paragraph (1).
(3) The President shall, to the extent practicable, meet
with the heads of governments of sub-Saharan African
countries eligible under section 4 not less than once every
two years for the purpose of discussing the issues described
in paragraph (1). The first such meeting should take place
not later than twelve months after the date of the enactment
of this Act.
(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out
this section.

SEC. 7. UNITED STATES-SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA FREE TRADE AREA.

(a) Declaration of Policy.--The Congress declares that a
United States-Sub-Saharan Africa Free Trade Area should be
established, or free trade agreements should be entered into,
in order to serve as the catalyst for increasing trade
between the United

[[Page S4896]]

States and sub-Saharan Africa and increasing private sector
development in sub-Saharan Africa.
(b) Plan Requirement.--
(1) In general.--The President, taking into account the
provisions of the treaty establishing the African Economic
Community and the willingness of the governments of Sub-
Saharan African countries to engage in negotiations to enter
into free trade agreements, shall develop a plan for the
purpose of entering into one or more trade agreements with
sub-Saharan African countries eligible under section 4 in
order to establish a United States-Sub-Saharan Africa Free
Trade Area (hereafter in this section referred to as the
``Free Trade Area'').
(2) Elements of plan.--The plan shall include the
following:
(A) The specific objectives of the United States with
respect to the establishment of the Free Trade Area and a
suggested timetable for achieving those objectives.
(B) The benefits to both the United States and sub-Saharan
Africa with respect to the Free Trade Area.
(C) A mutually agreed-upon timetable for establishing the
Free Trade Area.
(D) The implications for and the role of regional and sub-
regional organizations in sub-Saharan Africa with respect to
the Free Trade Area.
(E) Subject matter anticipated to be covered by the
agreement for establishing the Free Trade Area and United
States laws, programs, and policies, as well as the laws of
participating eligible African countries and existing
bilateral and multilateral and economic cooperation and trade
agreements, that may be affected by the agreement or
agreements.
(F) Procedures to ensure the following:
(i) Adequate consultation with the Congress and the private
sector during the negotiation of the agreement or agreements
for establishing the Free Trade Area.
(ii) Consultation with the Congress regarding all matters
relating to implementation of the agreement or agreements.
(iii) Approval by the Congress of the agreement or
agreements.
(iv) Adequate consultations with the relevant African
governments and African regional and subregional
intergovernmental organizations during the negotiations of
the agreement or agreements.
(c) Reporting Requirement.--Not later than 12 months after
the date of the enactment of this Act, the President shall
prepare and transmit to the Congress a report containing the
plan developed pursuant to subsection (b).

SEC. 8. ELIMINATING TRADE BARRIERS AND ENCOURAGING EXPORTS.

(a) Findings.--The Congress makes the following findings:
(1) The lack of competitiveness of sub-Saharan Africa in
the global market, especially in the manufacturing sector,
make it a limited threat to market disruption and no threat
to United States jobs.
(2) Annual textile and apparel exports to the United States
from sub-Saharan Africa represent less than 1 percent of all
textile and apparel exports to the United States, which
totaled $45,932,000,000 in 1996.
(3) Sub-Saharan Africa has limited textile manufacturing
capacity. During 1998 and the succeeding 4 years, this
limited capacity to manufacture textiles and apparel is
projected to grow at a modest rate. Given this limited
capacity to export textiles and apparel, it will be very
difficult for these exports from sub-Saharan Africa, during
1998 and the succeeding 9 years, to exceed 3 percent annually
of total imports of textile and apparel to the United States.
If these exports from sub-Saharan Africa remain around 3
percent of total imports, they will not represent a threat to
United States workers, consumers, or manufacturers.
(b) Sense of the Congress.--It is the sense of the Congress
that--
(1) it would be to the mutual benefit of the countries in
sub-Saharan Africa and the United States to ensure that the
commitments of the World Trade Organization and associated
agreements are faithfully implemented in each of the member
countries, so as to lay the groundwork for sustained growth
in textile and apparel exports and trade under agreed rules
and disciplines;
(2) reform of trade policies in sub-Saharan Africa with the
objective of removing structural impediments to trade,
consistent with obligations under the World Trade
Organization, can assist the countries of the region in
achieving greater and greater diversification of textile and
apparel export commodities and products and export markets;
and
(3) the President should support textile and apparel trade
reform in sub-Saharan Africa by, among other measures,
providing technical assistance, sharing of information to
expand basic knowledge of how to trade with the United
States, and encouraging business-to-business contacts with
the region.
(c) Treatment of Quotas.--
(1) Kenya and mauritius.--Pursuant to the Agreement on
Textiles and Clothing, the United States shall eliminate the
existing quotas on textile and apparel exports to the United
States--
(A) from Kenya within 30 days after that country adopts a
cost-effective and efficient visa system to guard against
unlawful transshipment of textile and apparel goods; and
(B) from Mauritius within 30 days after that country adopts
such a visa system.
The Customs Service shall provide the necessary assistance to
Kenya and Mauritius in the development and implementation of
those visa systems. The Customs Service shall monitor and the
Commissioner of Customs shall submit to the Congress, not
later than March 31 of each year, a report on the
effectiveness of those visa systems during the preceding
calendar year.
(2) Other sub-saharan countries.--The President shall
continue the existing no quota policy for countries in sub-
Saharan Africa. The President shall submit to the Congress,
not later than March 31 of each year, a report on the growth
in textiles and apparel exports to the United States from
countries in sub-Saharan Africa in order to protect United
States consumers, workers, and textile manufacturers from
economic injury on account of the no quota policy. The
President should ensure that any country in sub-Saharan
Africa that intends to export substantial textile and apparel
goods to the United States has in place a functioning and
efficient visa system to guard against unlawful transshipment
of textile and apparel goods.
(d) Definition.--For purposes of this section, the term
``Agreement on Textiles and Clothing'' means the Agreement on
Textiles and Clothing referred to in section 101(d)(4) of the
Uruguay Round Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 3511(d)(4)).

SEC. 9. GENERALIZED SYSTEM OF PREFERENCES.

(a) Preferential Tariff Treatment for Certain Articles.--
Section 503(a)(1) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C.
2463(a)) is amended--
(1) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (D);
and
(2) by inserting after subparagraph (B) the following:
``(C) Eligible countries in sub-saharan africa.--The
President may provide duty-free treatment for any article set
forth in paragraph (1) of subsection (b) that is the growth,
product, or manufacture of an eligible country in sub-Saharan
Africa that is a beneficiary developing country, if, after
receiving the advice of the International Trade Commission in
accordance with subsection (e), the President determines that
such article is not import-sensitive in the context of
imports from eligible countries in sub-Saharan Africa. This
subparagraph shall not affect the designation of eligible
articles under subparagraph (B).''.
(b) Rules of Origin.--Section 503(a)(2) of the Trade Act of
1974 (19 U.S.C. 2463(a)(2)) is amended by adding at the end
the following:
``(C) Eligible countries in sub-saharan africa.--For
purposes of determining the percentage referred to in
subparagraph (A) in the case of an article of an eligible
country in sub-Saharan Africa that is a beneficiary
developing country--
``(i) if the cost or value of materials produced in the
customs territory of the United States is included with
respect to that article, an amount not to exceed 15 percent
of the appraised value of the article at the time it is
entered that is attributed to such United States cost or
value may be applied toward determining the percentage
referred to in subparagraph (A); and
``(ii) the cost or value of the materials included with
respect to that article that are produced in any beneficiary
developing country that is an eligible country in sub-Saharan
Africa shall be applied in determining such percentage.''.
(c) Waiver of Competitive Need Limitation.--Section
503(c)(2)(D) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C.
2463(c)(2)(D)) is amended to read as follows:
``(D) Least-developed beneficiary developing countries and
eligible countries in sub-saharan africa.--Subparagraph (A)
shall not apply to any least-developed beneficiary developing
country or any eligible country in sub-Saharan Africa.''.
(c) Extension of Program.--Section 505 of the Trade Act of
1974 (19 U.S.C. 2465) is amended to read as follows:

``SEC. 505. DATE OF TERMINATION.

``(a) Countries in Sub-Saharan Africa.--No duty-free
treatment provided under this title shall remain in effect
after May 31, 2007, with respect to beneficiary developing
countries that are eligible countries in sub-Saharan Africa.
``(b) Other Countries.--No duty-free treatment provided
under this title shall remain in effect after May 31, 1997,
with respect to beneficiary developing countries other than
those provided for in subsection (a).''.
(d) Definition.--Section 507 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19
U.S.C. 2467) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(6) Eligible country in sub-saharan africa.--The terms
`eligible country in sub-Saharan Africa' and `eligible
countries in sub-Saharan Africa' means a country or countries
that the President has determined to be eligible under
section 4 of the African Growth and Opportunity Act.''.

SEC. 10. INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS AND DEBT
REDUCTION.

(a) International Financial Institutions.--(1) It is the
sense of the Congress that international financial
institutions and improved application of programs such as
those of the International Development Association, the
African Development Bank, the African Development Fund, and
the Enhanced Structural Adjustment Facility of the
International Monetary Fund are vital to achieving the
purposes of this Act.
(2) The Congress supports the efforts of the executive
branch to encourage international financial institutions to
develop enhanced mechanisms for providing financing for

[[Page S4897]]

countries eligible under section 4, consistent with the
purposes of this Act.
(b) Debt Reduction.--(1) It is the sense of the Congress
that the executive branch should extinguish concessional debt
owed to the United States by the poorest countries in sub-
Saharan Africa that are heavily indebted and pursuing bold
growth-oriented policies, and that the executive branch
should seek comparable action by other creditors of such
countries.
(2) The Congress supports the efforts of the executive
branch to secure agreement from international financial
institutions on maximum debt reduction for sub-Saharan Africa
as part of the multilateral initiative referred to as the
Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) initiative.
(c) Executive Branch Initiatives.--The Congress supports
and encourages the implementation of the following
initiatives of the executive branch:
(1) American-african business partnership.--The Agency for
International Development devoting up to $1,000,000 annually
to help catalyze relationships between United States firms
and firms in sub-Saharan Africa through a variety of business
associations and networks.
(2) Technical assistance to promote reforms.--The Agency
for International Development providing up to $5,000,000
annually in short-term technical assistance programs to help
the governments of sub-Saharan African countries to--
(A) liberalize trade and promote exports;
(B) bring their legal regimes into compliance with the
standards of the World Trade Organization in conjunction with
membership in that Organization; and
(C) make financial and fiscal reforms, as well as the
United States Department of Agriculture providing support to
promote greater agribusiness linkages.
(3) Agricultural market liberalization.--The Agency for
International Development devoting up to $15,000,000 annually
as part of the multi-year Africa Food Security Initiative to
help address such critical agricultural policy issues as
market liberalization, agricultural export development, and
agribusiness investment in processing and transporting
agricultural commodities.
(4) Trade promotion.--The Trade Development Agency
increasing the number of reverse trade missions to growth-
oriented countries in sub-Saharan Africa.
(5) Trade in services.--Efforts by United States embassies
in the countries in sub-Saharan Africa to encourage their
host governments--
(A) to participate in the ongoing negotiations on financial
services in the World Trade Organization;
(B) to revise their existing schedules to the General
Agreement on Trade in Services of the World Trade
Organization in light of the successful conclusion of
negotiations on basic telecommunications services; and
(C) to make further commitments in their schedules to the
General Agreement on Trade in Services in order to encourage
the removal of tariff and nontariff barriers and to foster
competition in the services sector in those countries.

SEC. 11. SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA EQUITY AND INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDS.

(a) Initiation of Funds.--It is the sense of the Congress
that the Overseas Private Investment Corporation should,
within 12 months after the date of the enactment of this Act,
exercise the authorities it has to initiate 2 or more equity
funds in support of projects in the countries in sub-Saharan
Africa.
(b) Structure and Types of Funds.--
(1) Structure.--Each fund initiated under subsection (a)
should be structured as a partnership managed by professional
private sector fund managers and monitored on a continuing
basis by the Corporation.
(2) Capitalization.--Each fund should be capitalized with a
combination of private equity capital, which is not
guaranteed by the Corporation, and debt for which the
Corporation provides guaranties.
(3) Types of funds.--
(A) Equity fund for sub-saharan Africa.--One of the funds
should be an equity fund, with assets of up to $150,000,000,
the primary purpose of which is to achieve long-term capital
appreciation through equity investments in support of
projects in countries in sub-Saharan Africa.
(B) Infrastructure fund.--One or more of the funds, with
combined assets of up to $500,000,000, should be used in
support of infrastructure projects in countries of sub-
Saharan Africa. The primary purpose of any such fund would be
to achieve long-term capital appreciation through investing
in financing for infrastructure projects in sub-Saharan
Africa, including for the expansion of businesses in sub-
Saharan Africa, restructurings, management buyouts and
buyins, businesses with local ownership, and privatizations.
(4) Emphasis.--The Corporation shall ensure that the funds
are used to provide support in particular to women
entrepreneurs and to innovative investments that expand
opportunities for women and maximize employment opportunities
for poor individuals.

SEC. 12. OVERSEAS PRIVATE INVESTMENT CORPORATION AND EXPORT-
IMPORT BANK INITIATIVES.

(a) Overseas Private Investment Corporation.--
(1) Board of directors to include member with private
sector experience in sub-saharan africa.--Section 233(b) of
the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2193(b)) is
amended in the first paragraph by inserting after the fifth
sentence the following: ``At least one of the eight Directors
appointed under the fourth sentence shall have extensive
private sector experience in sub-Saharan Africa.''.
(2) Advisory board.--
(A) In general.--Section 233 of the Foreign Assistance Act
of 1961 is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(e) Advisory Board.--The Board shall take prompt measures
to increase the loan, guarantee, and insurance programs, and
financial commitments, of the Corporation in sub-Saharan
Africa, including through the establishment and use of an
advisory committee to assist the Board in developing and
implementing policies, programs, and financial instruments
designed to support the expansion of, and increase in, the
provision of loans, guarantees, and insurance with respect to
sub-Saharan Africa. In addition, the advisory board shall
make recommendations to the Board on how the Corporation can
facilitate greater support by the United States for trade and
investment with and in sub-Saharan Africa.''.
(B) Reports to the congress.--Within 6 months after the
date of the enactment of this Act, and annually for each of
the 4 years thereafter, the Board of Directors of the
Overseas Private Investment Corporation shall submit to the
Congress a report on the steps that the Board has taken to
implement section 233(e) of the Foreign Assistance Act of
1961 and any recommendations of the advisory board
established pursuant to such section.
(b) Export-Import Bank.--
(1) Board of directors to include member with private
sector experience in sub-saharan africa.--Section 3(c)(8)(B)
of the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945 (12 U.S.C.
635a(c)(8)(B)) is amended by inserting ``, and one such
member shall be selected from among persons who have
extensive private sector experience in sub-Saharan Africa''
before the period.
(2) Advisory board.--
(A) In general.--Section 3 of such Act (12 U.S.C. 635a) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(f) The Board of Directors shall take prompt measures to
increase the loan, guarantee, and insurance programs, and
financial commitments, of the Bank in sub-Saharan Africa,
including through the establishment and use of an advisory
committee to assist the Board of Directors in developing and
implementing policies, programs, and financial instruments
designed to support the expansion of, and increase in, the
provision of loans, guarantees, and insurance with respect to
sub-Saharan Africa. In addition, the advisory board shall
make recommendations to the Board of Directors on how the
Bank can facilitate greater support by United States
commercial banks for trade and investment with and in sub-
Saharan Africa.''.
(B) Reports to the congress.--Within 6 months after the
date of the enactment of this Act, and annually for each of
the 4 years thereafter, the Board of Directors of the Export-
Import Bank shall submit to the Congress a report on the
steps that the Board has taken to implement section 3(f) of
the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945 and any recommendations of
the advisory board established pursuant to such section.

SEC. 13. ESTABLISHMENT OF ASSISTANT UNITED STATES TRADE
REPRESENTATIVE FOR SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA.

(a) Establishment.--The President shall establish a
position of Assistant United States Trade Representative
within the Office of the United States Trade Representative
to focus on trade issues relating to sub-Saharan Africa.
(b) Funding and Staff.--The President shall ensure that the
Assistant United States Trade Representative appointed
pursuant to paragraph (1) has adequate funding and staff to
carry out the duties described in paragraph (1).

SEC. 14. REPORTING REQUIREMENT.

The President shall submit to the Congress, not later than
1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, and not
later than the end of each of the next 4 1-year periods
thereafter, a report on the implementation of this Act.

SEC. 15. SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA DEFINED.

For purposes of this Act, the terms ``sub-Saharan Africa'',
``sub-Saharan African country'', ``country in sub-Saharan
Africa'', and ``countries in sub-Saharan Africa'' refer to
the following:
Republic of Angola (Angola)
Republic of Botswana (Botswana)
Republic of Burundi (Burundi)
Republic of Cape Verde (Cape Verde)
Republic of Chad (Chad)
Republic of the Congo (Congo)
Republic of Djibouti (Djibouti)
State of Eritrea (Eritrea)
Gabonese Republic (Gabon)
Republic of Ghana (Ghana)
Republic of Guinea-Bissau (Guinea-Bissau)
Kingdom of Lesotho (Lesotho)
Republic of Madagascar (Madagascar)
Republic of Mali (Mali)
Republic of Mauritius (Mauritius)
Republic of Namibia (Namibia)
Federal Republic of Nigeria (Nigeria)
Democratic Republic of Sao Tome and Principe (Sao Tome and
Principe)
Republic of Sierra Leone (Sierra Leone)
Somalia
Kingdom of Swaziland (Swaziland)
Republic of Togo (Togo)
Republic of Zaire (Zaire)

[[Page S4898]]

Republic of Zimbabwe (Zimbabwe)
Republic of Benin (Benin)
Burkina Faso (Burkina)
Republic of Cameroon (Cameroon)
Central African Republic
Federal Islamic Republic of the Comoros (Comoros)
Republic of Cote d'Ivoire (Cote d'Ivoire)
Republic of Equatorial Guinea (Equatorial Guinea)
Ethiopia
Republic of the Gambia (Gambia)
Republic of Guinea (Guinea)
Republic of Kenya (Kenya)
Republic of Liberia (Liberia)
Republic of Malawi (Malawi)
Islamic Republic of Mauritania (Mauritania)
Republic of Mozambique (Mozambique)
Republic of Niger (Niger)
Republic of Rwanda (Rwanda)
Republic of Senegal (Senegal)
Republic of Seychelles (Seychelles)
Republic of South Africa (South Africa)
Republic of Sudan (Sudan)
United Republic of Tanzania (Tanzania)
Republic of Uganda (Uganda)
Republic of Zambia (Zambia)

____________________