[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 86 (Thursday, June 19, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6000-S6005]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. MACK (for himself and Mr. Graham):
S. 937. A bill to amend the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to
provide for the cancellation of 6 existing leases and to ban all new
leasing activities in the area off the coast of Florida, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
FLORIDA COAST PROTECTION ACT
Mr. MACK. Mr. President, I rise today with my colleague, Senator
Graham, to introduce the Florida Coast Protection Act. This legislation
will cancel the six oil and gas leases on the Outer Continental Shelf
closest to Florida's coast. Representative Scarborough is leading a
similar effort in the House of Representatives.
Mr. President, Floridians have always been justifiably concerned
about the prospect of oil and gas exploration in the waters off our
State. We are well aware of the risk this activity poses to our
environment and our economy.
Throughout my tenure in the Senate I have opposed exploration and
drilling off Florida's coasts. My goal--and the goal the entire Florida
congressional delegation--is to permanently remove this threat from our
coastlines. In recent years, we have stood together in opposition to
drilling and have successfully extended the annual moratorium on all
new leasing activities on Florida's continental shelf.
The reason for our concern is simple, Mr. President. In Florida, a
healthy environment means a healthy economy. Millions of people come to
our State each year to enjoy the climate, the coastlines, and our fine
quality of life. It would only take one disaster to end Florida's good
standing as America's vacationland and we cannot afford to let that
happen.
Mr. President, if the current exploration plan runs its course, there
is the potential for the operation of up to 400 drill rigs off
Florida's panhandle. A recent permit report from the Environmental
Protection Agency states that a typical rig can be expected to
discharge between 6,500 and 13,000 barrels of waste. This presents a
huge potential for damage to our near-shore coastal waters and beaches.
The report warns of further harmful impact on marine mammal
populations, fish populations, and air quality. We cannot afford these
risks in Florida and we do not want these risks in Florida.
But while the opposition of Floridians to oil drilling is well
documented, the reality remains that leases have been let, potential
drilling sites have been explored and it is likely that actual
extraction of resources will take place 17 miles off the coast of
Florida. Mr. President, if this is allowed to happen, the drill rigs
will be within the line of sight from vacationers in Pensacola. This
Congress must not allow that to happen.
The legislation we are introducing today is very simple. It provides
for cancellation of the lease tract 17 miles off Pensacola. Under the
OCS Lands Act, Mr. President, the current holders of these leases would
be entitled to fair compensation for their investment. This is only
fair. The bill also makes permanent the moratorium on any new leasing
activity in order to ensure the past mistake of leasing in the OCS off
Florida is not repeated.
If the threat of oil and gas exploration is to be permanently removed
from our shores, it will require responsible leadership from the
Congress. This legislation, in my view, is absolutely necessary to
protect our state's economic and environmental well-being.
I urge my colleagues to support this worthwhile effort.
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I am very pleased to join my colleague
Senator Mack in introducing the Florida Coast Protection Act today. It
represents the next step in the State of Florida's long battle to
preserve our beautiful coastal and marine ecosystem.
Floridians oppose offshore oil drilling because of the threat it
presents to the State's greatest natural and economic resource: our
coastal environment. Florida's beaches, fisheries, and wildlife draw
millions of tourists each year from around the globe, supporting our
State's largest industry. Tourism supports, directly or indirectly,
millions of jobs all across Florida, and the industry generates
billions of dollars every year.
The Florida coastline boasts some of the richest estuarine areas in
the world. These brackish waters, with their mangrove forests and
seagrass beds, provide an irreplaceable link in the life cycle of many
species, both marine and terrestrial. Florida's commercial fishing
industry relies on these estuaries because they support the nurseries
for the most commercially harvested fish. Perhaps the most
environmentally delicate regions in the gulf, estuaries could be
damaged beyond repair by a relatively small oil spill.
Over the years, we have met with some success in our effort to
protect Florida's OCS. In 1995, the lawsuit surrounding the
cancellation of the leases around the Florida Keys was settled,
removing the immediate threat of oil and gas drilling from what is an
extremely sensitive area. While I believe strongly that a long-term
strategy is needed for the entire Florida coastline, the legislation we
are introducing today focuses on a more near-term goal: to cancel six
leases in an area 17 miles off the coast from Pensacola. The bill
provides a mechanism for leaseholders to seek compensation under
section 5 of the OCS Lands Act. Both Senator Mack and I believe the
leaseholders have the absolute right to just compensation from the
Federal Government in order to recover their investment.
As the member of the Florida delegation who serves on the Energy and
Natural Resources Committee--the committee with jurisdiction over this
issue--I anticipate a difficult and precarious road to enactment. But
the Florida delegation as a whole has no other choice than to pursue
with all our combined abilities the goal we envision: to take another
major step toward ensuring the wellbeing of the Outer Continental Shelf
offshore the State of Florida.
In addition to introducing this legislation today, Senator Mack and I
intend to write to Chairman Frank Murkowski of the Energy and Natural
Resources Committee to request a hearing on this bill as soon as
possible. Floridians will have our very best effort to make the Florida
Coast Protection Act Federal law.
______
By Mr. BOND (for himself and Mr. Bumpers):
S. 938. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to provide
surveillance, research, and services aimed at the prevention and
cessation of prenatal and postnatal smoking, and for other purposes; to
the Committee on Labor and Human Resources.
THE MOTHERS AND INFANTS HEALTH PROTECTION ACT
Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Mothers and
Infants Health Protection Act on behalf of myself and Senator Bumpers.
First, I express my sincere thanks to my colleagues in the Senate last
week for having passed the Birth Defects Prevention Act. That act was a
tremendous step forward in protecting the health of our Nation's most
vulnerable population and in saving families from the economic and
emotional hardships associated with birth defects.
[[Page S6001]]
However, we must keep moving forward. After having had numerous
discussions with the Centers for Disease Control and child advocacy
organizations about the adverse birth outcomes and infant health
problems connected with smoking during and after pregnancy, I decided
we would introduce this legislation here today to carry the next step
in our battle against birth defects.
The main purpose of the measure introduced today is to provide
surveillance, research, and services aimed at the prevention and
cessation of smoking, both during and after pregnancy. The CDC, along
with the Association of Maternal and Child Health Programs, is meeting
today here in Washington to highlight that although the overall smoking
rate for pregnant women is slowly declining, the smoking rate for
pregnant teens is increasing. That is bad news. For black teenagers
specifically, the rate rose 6 percent, the first increase since this
information first became available in 1989. And even with this
increase, smoking rates for white teenagers are still four to five
times the rate for black teenagers. Furthermore, the smoking rate for
those between the ages of 15 and 24 is 23 percent higher than the
smoking rate among all pregnant women.
In my home State of Missouri, this public health program is even more
dramatic: 20 percent of all pregnant women in Missouri admit to
smoking. This is 44 percent higher than the national average. This,
unfortunately, may be connected to the fact that our incidence of birth
defects and infant mortality is 50 percent higher than the national
average.
The consequences of smoking during and after pregnancy are downright
horrifying. Recent studies show that this activity is a problem.
Increases in maternal and fetal risk causes 20 to 30 percent of low
birth rates and 10 percent of fetal and infant deaths in the United
States.
Smoking triples the risk of sudden infant death syndrome. Smoking
elevates the risk of a child being born with a birth defect. Smoking
increases the risk of spontaneous abortion, premature rupture of
membranes, and the delivery of a stillborn infant. Smoking may impede
the growth of a fetus and increase the likelihood of mental retardation
by 50 percent, and smoking increases the risk of respiratory illness in
infants and children.
Adding to this devastating problem, the proportion of women who quit
smoking during pregnancy but then relapse at 6 months postpartum is
nearly 63 percent, thereby exposing their infants to passive smoke and
increasing their risk for SIDS and other health-related problems.
These are just a few of the problems related to smoking during and
after pregnancy. But in addition to the risks for the fetus and infant,
smoking is associated with a wide variety of hazards for pregnant
women, such as infertility and ectopic pregnancy.
There is no question that smoking during and after pregnancy is a
compelling public health problem. These facts clearly underscore the
necessity for smoking prevention and cessation programs aimed
specifically for pregnant women. This legislation aims to reverse these
devastating outcomes on several fronts.
First, the CDC is directed to foster coordination between all
governmental levels, other public entities, and private voluntary
organizations that conduct or support prenatal and postnatal smoking
research, prevention, and surveillance.
Second, the bill provides grants to state and local health
departments, community health centers, other public entities, and non-
profit organizations for the development of community-based public
awareness campaigns aimed at the prevention and cessation of smoking
during and after pregnancy.
Third, monies would be made available to the groups just mentioned
for the purpose of coordinating and conducting basic and applied
research concerning prenatal and postnatal smoking and its effects on
fetuses and newborns.
Fourth, the bill calls for a procedure for the dissemination of
effective prevention and cessation strategies and the diagnostic
criteria for infants suffering the effects of exposure to intrauterine
and passive tobacco smoke to health care professionals.
Finally, this measure authorizes a modest appropriation of $10
million to achieve these goals.
Similar to the Birth Defects Prevention Act, this is another stride
in improving the health of our children and in reducing infant
mortality and morbidity.
Fetuses, newborns, and children are too vulnerable and cannot protect
themselves. We must therefore have a coordinated effort among
government, nonprofit groups and local communities to get the message
out on the devastating outcomes associated with pre and post natal
smoking as well as information on effective prevention and cessation
opportunities.
Again, it is important to note that overall, fewer pregnant women are
smoking now that they know the health risks for themselves and for
their babies. The bad news is that not everyone has gotten the
message--in particular those between the ages of 15 and 24. They are
moving directly against the trend.
This is the generation coming up; and these women are likely to go on
having more children. If they are smoking more, that does not bode well
for their future health, or for that of their children.
Many people still do not understand that there is a link between
adverse birth outcomes and prenatal and postnatal smoking. Part of the
reason is that not all women have adequate access to prenatal care.
Thus, it is my firm belief that this legislation will ensure that all
mothers will receive information on the potential tragedies of smoking
during and after pregnancy and the much needed assistance in quitting
their habit.
Mr. BUMPERS. Mr. President, let me first extend my sincere and
profound gratitude to Senator Bond for creating and being the
originator of this legislation. I am honored he has asked me to be his
chief cosponsor.
I just want to say for the Record and for those who may be watching,
I remember when I was Governor of my State and my wife, Betty, was
first lady. She had spent 2 years laying the groundwork for a statewide
immunization program. It was a howling success. We immunized 300,000
children one Saturday without a single reaction. That evening I said,
``Betty, you ought to take great pride in what you just accomplished
today.'' She said, ``I do. Of course, this is good for your political
career and it is good for the babies who were immunized today, but it
is certainly no final solution because we will lapse right back into
the lethargy we have experienced and watched for years with low
immunization rates among children who are yet to be born.'' She said
until we institutionalize a program that can track each child's
immunizations from birth through early childhood we will not have
succeeded. Thanks to her efforts and many others, including Rosalynn
Carter, and the program Every Child By Two, immunization levels in this
country are now at an all-time high.
The same principle applies in this case. Once we get this bill
passed, and we will get it passed, it is imperative that we follow it
up year after year after year so we do not lapse into the condition we
are in right now where the rate of smoking among teenage women,
pregnant teenage women, is going up. We got it down to 14 percent and
now it is back up to 17 percent.
If you ask that same teenage mother, what and whom do you love most,
she loves mostly that fetus that lies inside her womb, and when that
baby is born, she loves that baby above everything under the shining
sun--above all else.
So ask yourself, why would a woman, or why would parents smoke during
pregnancy, and why would parents smoke after the baby is born? Every
pediatrician in the country will tell you horror stories about sending
children home after asthma attacks, only to see them come back with
another asthma attack because people are smoking in the household.
Senator Bond and I are asking for $10 million for this new
initiative, an infinitesimal sum when compared to the savings it will
produce. Hubert Humphrey stood at that desk right there. I never will
forget the speech he made. ``We don't have national health insurance.
What we have is national sick insurance. It isn't worth anything until
you get sick.'' He told me about preventive programs that Ford Motor
Company had instituted among all their employees and how much they
[[Page S6002]]
were saving on health care costs through preventive medicine.
Here we are now with a chance to save 10 to 100 times more than the
paltry $10 million we will spend educating pregnant women in this
country and telling them the consequences of asthma and low-birthweight
babies. After the baby is born, one of the biggest single problems is
sudden infant death syndrome. One of its causes is smoking around
newborn babies.
Mr. President, I am honored to join my distinguished colleague,
Senator Bond, in pushing this. I hope we will be able to get hearings
on this very shortly. Incidentally, I hope that the Centers for Disease
Control will not just conduct outreach and education among pregnant
women. I hope they will also work to educate the College of
Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American Academy of Pediatrics.
Sometimes the very best professionals neglect and forget to tell
pregnant women how to conduct themselves during pregnancy. I do not
think that is a big problem, but I do think providers must be made
acutely aware that they have this grave responsibility to at least tell
pregnant women what they are up against and tell women what they must
do when they go home from the hospital with a newborn.
I yield the floor.
______
By Mr. COCHRAN:
S. 939. A bill to establish a National Panel on Early Reading
Research and Effective Reading Instruction; to the Committee on Labor
and Human Resources.
THE SUCCESSFUL READING RESEARCH AND INSTRUCTION ACT
Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, today, I am introducing the Successful
Reading Research and Instruction Act. It establishes a panel that will
include parents, scientists, and educators to conduct a study of the
research relevant to reading development and advise the Congress of its
recommendations for disseminating its findings and instruction
suggestions to those who would like to have them.
Reading is the skill students must master to meet life challenges in
a confident and successful manner. For a child, breaking the code of
written language not only opens academic opportunities; it is a
cornerstone to building high self esteem. Both reading and self esteem
affect the knowledge and experiences that form a child's character and
future.
Teaching children to read is the highest priority in education today.
Many teachers and parents I've talked with are frustrated and confused
about what method of reading instruction is best. Every American should
be concerned that 40 to 60 percent of elementary school children are
not reading proficiently. Even more disturbing is research that shows
fewer than one child in eight who is failing to read by the end of
first grade ever catches up to grade level.
Success in reading is essential if one is to progress socially and
economically. In fact, most of the federally funded literacy programs
are targeted to helping adults learn to read because the education
system failed them, and more than likely, failed them at an early age.
This indicates that we need to start solving the problem of poor
readers at the beginning, instead of working backward. It seems to me
that the first step to finding a solution is to seriously analyze
sound, rigorous research on the subject.
Mr. President, at a hearing on April 16, of the Senate Appropriations
Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, I
brought to the attention of the Secretary of Education, Richard Riley,
research by the National Institute of Child Health and Human
Development mandated by the Health Research Extension Act of 1985, and
asked that he use such research in the development of federally
supported reading programs. This research is ongoing, in a
collaborative network with multidisciplinary research programs to study
genetics, brain pathology, developmental process and phonetic
acquisition. NICHD has spent over $100 million over the past 15 years,
and has studied approximately ten thousand children.
On June 11 of this year, when officials from the National Institutes
of Health came before the same appropriations subcommittee, I asked Dr.
Duane Alexander, the Director of NICHD, about this study. Dr.
Alexander's testimony about the research confirmed what I suspect most
teachers already know--at least 20 percent of children have difficulty
learning to read. But the research also suggests that 90 to 95 percent
of these can be brought up to average reading level.
As a result of this research, techniques for early identification of
those with reading problems and intervention strategies are now known.
But administrators, teachers, tutors and parents are not aware of the
key principles of effective reading instruction. The NICHD findings
underscore the need to do a better job of teacher training, as
researchers found fewer than 10 percent of teachers actually know how
to teach reading to children who don't learn reading automatically.
I am surprised that the Department of Education hasn't looked to this
study and found a way to effectively get the information to teachers,
schools, parents, and most importantly, teacher colleges.
What scientists have learned from their studies of reading hasn't
been passed on to the teachers who are teaching, so parents are telling
us their kids aren't reading. It is time we put all this experience
together; come up with suggestions for dealing with the problems and,
if schools, teachers, parents or higher education institutions want the
information, let's make it available.
This is a proposal to develop answers that are based on scientific,
model based research. I think it can be a helpful beginning for
successful reading instruction.
I ask unanimous consent that a copy of Dr. Duane Alexander's
testimony and a copy of my bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
S. 939
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 ``Successful Reading Research
and Instruction Act''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.
(a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
(1) At least 20 percent, and in some States 50 to 60
percent, of children in elementary school cannot read at
basic levels. The children cannot read fluently and do not
understand what they read.
(2) Research suggests that the majority of the children, at
least 90 to 95 percent, can be brought up to average reading
skills if--
(A) children at risk for reading failure are identified
during the kindergarten and first grade years; and
(B) early intervention programs that combine instruction in
phonological awareness, phonics, and reading comprehension
are provided by well-trained teachers.
(3) If the early intervention programs described in
paragraph (2)(B) are delayed until the children reach 9 years
of age (the time that most children are identified),
approximately 75 percent of the children will continue to
have reading difficulties through high school.
(4) While older children and adults can be taught to read,
the time and expense of doing so is enormous.
(b) Purpose.--The purposes of this Act are--
(1) to conduct an assessment of research and knowledge
relevant to early reading development, and instruction in
early reading, to determine the readiness of the research and
knowledge for application in the Nation's classrooms; and
(2) if appropriate, to develop a national strategy for the
rapid dissemination of the research and knowledge to teachers
and schools throughout the United States as a means of
facilitating effective early reading instruction; and
(3) to develop a plan for additional research regarding
early reading development, and instruction in early reading,
if the additional research is warranted.
SEC. 3. NATIONAL PANEL.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of Education, or the
Secretary's designee, and the Director of the National
Institute of Child Health and Human Development, or the
Director's designee, jointly shall--
(1) establish a National Panel on Early Reading Research
and Effective Reading Instruction;
(2) establish the membership of the panel in accordance
with subsection (b);
(3) select a chairperson of the panel;
(4) provide the staff and support necessary for the panel
to carry out the panel's duties; and
(5) prepare and submit to Congress a report regarding the
findings and recommendations of the panel.
(b) Membership.--The panel shall be composed of 15
individuals, who are not officers
[[Page S6003]]
or employees of the Federal Government. The panel shall
include leading scientists in reading research,
representatives of colleges of education, reading teachers,
educational administrators, and parents.
(c) Duties.--The panel shall--
(1) conduct a thorough study of the research and knowledge
relevant to early reading development, and instruction in
early reading, including research described in section 9 of
the Health Research Extension Act of 1985 (42 U.S.C. 281
note);
(2) determine which research findings and what knowledge
are available for application in the Nation's classrooms; and
(3) determine how to disseminate the research findings and
knowledge to the Nation's schools and classrooms.
(d) Termination.--The panel shall terminate 9 months after
the date of enactment of this Act.
____
Testimony of Dr. Duane Alexander
Thank you Senator Cochran:
I think that it is important to point out that our
intensive research efforts in reading development and
disorders is motivated to a great extent by our seeing
difficulties learning to read as not only an educational
problem, but also a major public health issue. Simply put, if
a youngster does not learn to read, he or she will simply not
likely to make it in life. Our longitudinal studies that
study children from age five through their high school years
have shown us how tender these kids are with respect to their
own response to reading failure. By the end of the first
grade, we begin to notice substantial decreases in the
children's self-esteem, self-concept, and motivation to learn
to read if they have not been able to master reading skills
and keep up with their age-mates. As we follow them through
elementary and middle school these problems compound, and in
many cases very bright youngsters are deprived of the wonders
of literature, history, science, and mathematics because they
can not read the grade-level textbooks. By high school, these
children's potential for entering college has decreased to
almost nil, with few choices available to them with respect
to occupational and vocational opportunities.
In studying approximately 10 thousand children over the
past 15 years, we have learned the following:
(1) At least 20%, and in some states 50 to 60%, of children
in the elementary grades can not read at basic levels. They
can not read fluently and they do not understand what they
read.
(2) However, the majority of these children--at least 90 to
95%--can be brought up to average reading skills IF:
(A) children at-risk for reading failure are identified
during the kindergarten and first grade years and,
(B) early intervention programs that combine instruction in
phonological awareness, phonics, and reading comprehension
are provided by well trained teachers. If we delay
intervention until nine-years-of-age (the time that most
children are currently identified), approximately 75% of the
children will continue to have reading difficulties through
high school. While older children and adults CAN be taught to
read, the time and expense of doing so is enormous.
(3) We have learned that phonological awareness--the
understanding that words are made up of sound segments called
phonemes--plans a casual role in reading acquisition, and
that it is a good predictor because it is a foundational
ability underlying basic reading skills.
(4) We have learned how to measure phonological skills as
early as the beginning of kindergarten with tasks that take
only 15 minutes to administer--and over the past decade we
have refined these tasks so that we can predict with 92%
accuracy who will have difficulties learning to read.
(5) The average cost of assessing each child during
kindergarten or first grade with the predictive measures is
between $15 to $20 depending upon the skill level of the
person conducting the assessment. This includes the costs of
the assessment materials. If applied on a larger scale,
these costs may be further decreased.
(6) We have learned that just as many girls as boys have
difficulties learning to read. The conventional wisdom has
been that many more boys than girls have such difficulties.
Now females should have equal access to screening and
intervention programs.
(7) We have begun to understand how genetics are involved
in learning to read, and this knowledge may ultimately
contribute to our prevention efforts through assessment of
family reading histories.
(8) We are entering very exciting frontiers in
understanding how early brain development can provide us a
window on how reading develops. Likewise, we are conducting
studies to help us understand how specific teaching methods
change reading behavior and how the brain changes as reading
develops.
(9) Very importantly, we continue to find that teaching
approaches that specifically target the development of a
combination of phonological skills, phonics skills, and
reading comprehension skills in an integrated format are the
most effective ways to improve reading abilities.
At the present time, we have held several meetings with
officials from the USDOE and have discussed how these
findings can be used across the two agencies. As an example
of this collaboration, NICHD and USDOE have been developing a
preliminary plan to determine which scientific findings are
ready for immediate application in the classroom and how to
best disseminate that information to the Nation's schools and
teachers.
______
By Mr. HELMS (for himself, Mr. Akaka, Mr. Lott, Mr. McCain and
Mr. Murkowski):
S. 940. A bill to provide for a study of the establishment of Midway
Atoll as a national memorial to the Battle of Midway, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
THE BATTLE OF MIDWAY NATIONAL MEMORIAL ACT
Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, on July 31, 1995, Senator Dole and I
introduced S. 1098, the Battle of Midway Memorial Act. Today I am proud
to offer an updated version of S. 1098 on behalf of the majority
leader, Mr. Lott, the Senator from Hawaii, Mr. Akaka, the Senator from
Arizona, Mr. McCain, and the Senator from Alaska, Mr. Murkowski.
This bill directs the Secretary of the Interior to study the
feasibility and advisability of establishing Midway Atoll as a national
memorial to the Battle of Midway. It goes without saying that the
sponsors of this bill strongly believe that this should be done without
delay. I am confident that the Interior Secretary will agree.
Mr. President, it was on June 4, 1942, that courageous American
sailors, soldiers, and airmen stationed on Midway Atoll, and aboard 29
warships, clashed with 350 warships of the Imperial Japanese Navy in
what became known as the Battle of Midway. When the smoke cleared, the
small American force, under the overall command of Admiral Nimitz, had
soundly defeated the Imperial Japanese Navy in one of the most
spectacular and historically significant naval battles of all time, and
a turning point in the Pacific theater in World War II.
There is no reason to delay further the establishment of Midway Atoll
as a national memorial to honor the American heros who fought and died
there in defense of our liberties. Approval of this bill will be the
first step in recognizing what those gallant Americans did in 1942--and
that recognition is in fact long overdue.
Mr. President, on April 25, 1996, the Energy Committee's Subcommittee
on Parks, Historic Preservation, and Recreation held an extensive
hearing on S. 1098, the predecessor to the bill we introduce today.
Chairman Nighthorse Campbell received testimony from my treasured
friend, Adm. Tom Moorer, who in my judgment, was the greatest Chairman
of the Joint Chiefs of Staff ever to serve in that post--and a veteran
of the Pacific theater of World War II, and Dr. James D'Angelo,
president of the International Midway Memorial Foundation.
If the committee chooses to have another hearing on this issue, I
hope Chairman Murkowski and Chairman Nighthorse Campbell will ask
whether any historic structures on Midway Atoll have been destroyed,
and if so, why. If this has occurred, I will support modifying the bill
to prohibit explicitly any further destruction of any historic
structure on Midway Atoll.
Mr. President, Adm. James W. (Bud) Nance, chief of staff of the
Foreign Relations Committee, Esther Kia'aina of Sen. Akaka's staff, and
Jim O'Toole with the Energy and Natural Resources Committee deserve
special thanks. When Midway Atoll becomes a national memorial, it will
in large part be due to their tireless efforts.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the full 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. 940
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SEC. 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited the ``Battle of Midway National
Memorial Act''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
The Senate makes the following findings:
(1) September 2, 1997, marks the 52th anniversary of the
United States victory over Japan in World War II.
(2) The Battle of Midway proved to be the turning point in
the war in the Pacific, as United States Navy forces
inflicted such severe losses on the Imperial Japanese Navy
during the battle that the Imperial Japanese Navy never again
took the offensive against United States or allied forces.
[[Page S6004]]
(3) During the Battle of Midway on June 4, 1942, an
outnumbered force of the United States Navy, consisting of 29
ships and other units of the Armed Forces under the command
of Admiral Nimitz and Admiral Spruance, out-maneuvered and
out-fought 350 ships of the Imperial Japanese Navy.
(4) It is in the public interest to establish Midway Atoll
as a national memorial to the Battle of Midway to express the
enduring gratitude of the American people for victory in the
battle and to inspire future generations of Americans with
the heroism and sacrifice of the members of the Armed Forces
who achieved that victory.
SEC. 3. SENSE OF THE SENATE.
It is the sense of the Senate that--
(1) Midway Atoll and the surrounding seas deserve to be a
national memorial;
(2) the historical significance of the Battle of Midway
deserves more recognition;
(3) the historic structures on Midway Atoll deserve to be
protected and maintained;
SEC. 4. STUDY OF THE ESTABLISHMENT OF MIDWAY ATOLL AS A
NATIONAL MEMORIAL TO THE BATTLE OF MIDWAY.
(a) In General.--Not later than six months after the date
of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior
shall, acting through the Director of the National Park
Service and in consultation with the Director of the United
States Fish and Wildlife Service, the International Midway
Memorial Foundation, Inc. (hereafter referred to as the
`Foundation'), and Midway Phoenix Corporation, carry out a
study of the feasibility and advisability of establishing
Midway Atoll as a national memorial to the Battle of Midway.
(b) Considerations.--In studying the establishment of
Midway Atoll as a national memorial to the Battle of Midway
under subsection (a), the Secretary shall consider the
following:
(1) Whether, and under what conditions, to lease or
otherwise allow the Foundation or another appropriate
organization to administer, maintain, and utilize fully for
use as a national memorial to the Battle of Midway the lands
(including any equipment, facilities, infrastructure, and
other improvements) and waters of Midway Atoll.
(2) Whether, and under what circumstances the needs and
requirements of the wildlife refuge should take precedence
over the needs and requirements of a national memorial on
Midway Atoll.
(3) Whether, and under what conditions, to permit the use
of the facilities on Sand Island for purposes other than a
wildlife refuge or a national memorial.
(4) Whether to impose conditions on public access to Midway
Atoll as a national memorial.
(c) Report.--Upon completion of the study required under
subsection (a), the Secretary shall submit to Congress a
report on the study, including any recommendations for
further legislative action. The report shall also include an
inventory of all past and present structures of historic
significance on Midway Atoll.
SEC. 5. RULE OF STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION.
Nothing under this Act should be construed to delay or
inhibit discussions between the Foundation and the United
States Fish and Wildlife Service or any other government
entity regarding the future role of the Foundation on Midway
Atoll.
______
By Mr. INOUYE (for himself, Mr. Gorton, Mr. Kerry, Mrs. Murray,
and Mr. Breaux):
S. 941. A bill to promote the utilization of marine ferry and high-
speed marine ferry services; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation.
high-speed marine ferry act
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation,
cosponsored by Senators Gorton, Kerry, Murray, and Breaux to promote
the use of marine ferry and high-speed marine ferry services.
The marine ferry system of the United States provides an invaluable
component to the transportation requirements of our Nation. As a
Senator from an island State, I appreciate the need for passenger/
vehicle ferry services. In general, marine ferries require minimal
costs as compared to the costs of new infrastructure such as highways,
bridges, and tunnels. In addition, marine ferries are one of the most
environmentally friendly modes of transportation.
In coastal urban centers, marine ferry service can provide low-cost,
environmentally friendly transportation to areas suffering from
congestion. In rural coastal areas, such as barrier islands, marine
ferries have been utilized as the sole source of transportation to
connect coastal communities to the mainland. While States with marine
barriers such as rivers or lakes have utilized marine ferries as low-
cost alternatives to highway bridges or additional roadways. Marine
ferries have also been used to provide transportation in areas
devastated by natural disasters and floods. Ferries were used in the
aftermath of the earthquakes in northern California to provide
transportation across San Francisco Bay.
States such as Washington, Alaska, North Carolina, and Delaware have
invested, with great success, in State-run marine ferry services. While
other States such as New York, New Jersey, and my own State of Hawaii,
are exploring incentives to induce private ferry operations in order to
fulfill certain transportation objectives. Private ferry operations and
high-speed marine passenger vessels used for dinner cruises and tour
excursions, have contributed to the tourism potential of certain areas
as well.
I am particularly hopeful that the Marine Ferry and High-Speed Marine
Ferry Act will help us to fulfill our Nation's potential for high-speed
marine technology. In the early 1970's, Boeing Marine pioneered the
development and construction of commercial passenger hydrofoils capable
of operating at 45 knots. Boeing built 25 hydrofoils for high-speed use
on the Hong Kong-Macau route before licensing production to Kawasaki
Heavy Industries of Japan in the early 1980's, and by 1989, only one
high-speed marine passenger/vehicle ferry of significant size was in
operation.
The international and domestic high-speed marine passenger vessel
market has recently seen a dramatic expansion, and currently over 60
high-speed marine passenger/vehicle ferries are in service or under
construction. Fast ferries, until recently, have been primarily used in
short sea services on protected routes, but recent advances in design
and materials have allowed for the construction of larger vessels
capable of being operated on longer open sea routes. New technologies
have also opened possibilities for high-speed cargo-carrying
operations.
The United States has benefited from a number of recent high-speed
projects, and from the establishment of a shipyard specifically
designed for high-speed marine passenger vessel construction. The
Maritime Administration's ``1996 Outlook for the U.S. Shipbuilding and
Repair Industry'' indicates:
New orders for ferries should also continue to provide work
for the second-tier shipyards. The enactment of ISTEA
continues to provide a significant boost to new ferry
projects. In addition, MARAD has a Title XI application
pending for the construction of two passenger/vehicle ferries
for a foreign owner, valued at more than $171 million. Demand
will come from continued promotion of states of ferries for
use in their tourist industries, as well as in
transportation/commuting, as an alternative to building
infrastructure projects such as highways and bridges. The
recent award of a $181 million contract to Todd Seattle for
three 2,500-passenger ferries and the solicitation for
proposals for two additional 350-passenger ferries by the
State of Washington, is an added sign that the ferry industry
is strong. On the private sector side, there is a demand for
the deployment of high-speed, high-tech ferries in the
passenger excursion industry.
The Marine Ferry and High-Speed Marine Ferry Act will build on
previous enactments aimed at promoting marine ferry operations. The
bill would reauthorize section 1064 of ISTEA, at levels consistent with
past years, to allow State-run ferry programs to apply for Federal
grants for the construction of ferries, and/or related ferry
infrastructure. The bill would also initiate a new program to help
provide loan guarantees for private marine ferry operators. A number of
States have decided not to operate their own ferry vessels, but
instead, have encouraged the private sector to establish marine ferry
operations. The provision of loan guarantees to qualified applicants
will allow private sector operators to contribute to legitimate public
sector transportation needs by providing favorable financing through
federally guaranteed loans.
The bill would also require DOT to report on existing marine ferry
operations and to make recommendations on areas that could benefit from
future marine ferry operations, and directs DOT to meet with relevant
State and local municipal planning agencies to discuss the marine ferry
program. The bill also directs the Marine Board to study high-speed
marine technologies, and potential utilization of such technology.
I hope my colleagues can join in to continue our support of marine
ferry operations. For a relatively small investment, we can leverage
State and private operations to address our pressing infrastructure
demands.
[[Page S6005]]
____________________