Congressional Record, Volume 143 Issue 102 (Thursday, July 17, 1997)

[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 102 (Thursday, July 17, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7659-S7663]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

TREASURY AND GENERAL GOVERNMENT APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1998

The Senate continued with the consideration of the bill.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I recognize and appreciate the hard work
of the Appropriations Committee staff in putting together this detailed
legislation. Members' attention to detail is easily apparent in the
thoroughness with which they have presented the committee's
recommendations.
There are many good provisions in this bill, particularly the
language which would continue the limitations on courthouse
construction that are designed to ensure lower costs and standard
designs. However, there are many aspects of this bill which cause me
serious concern.
First, this bill increases the funding for these agencies by $1.1
billion over last year's level. Frankly, I believe it is ill-advised
for the Senate to increase spending for these Federal agencies at a
time when we are struggling to reach agreement on tax relief and
spending bills and balancing the budget.
I am sorry to say that this bill and report contain numerous earmarks
of new funds for particular States, as well as language designed to
ensure the continued flow of Federal funds into certain States.
Let me just mention a few of those projects.
The earmark of an additional $3 million for Rocky Mountain High
Intensity Drug Trafficking Assessment Center.
The earmark of $2.5 million for Globe Trade and Research Program at
the Montana World Trade Center, which is described in the report as a
one-time appropriation to support the center's research and information
dissemination activities on ``issues designed to explore, define, and
measure contributions to economic globalization.''
Mr. President, let me run that by you again. That is $2.5 million--
2.5 million taxpayer dollars--to support the Montana World Trade
Center's research and information dissemination activities on issues
designed to explore, define, and measure contributions to economic
globalization.
A prohibition on IRS field support reorganization in Aberdeen, SD,
until the IRS toll-free help line reaches an 80 percent service level.
A prohibition on reducing the number of IRS criminal investigators in
Wisconsin below the 1996 level.
A requirement to establish the port of Kodiak, AK, as a port of entry
and requiring U.S. Customs Service personnel in Anchorage to serve the
Kodiak port of entry.
The earmark of $4 million for repairs and restoration of the Truman
Library in Independence, MO, and $3 million earmarked for repairs to
the Lyndon Baines Johnson Presidential Library in Austin, TX, and, very
disturbing, various protectionist Buy-America provisions, which are in
sections 509, 510 and 511.

[[Page S7660]]

In the report language, Mr. President, there is $750,000 earmarked
for additional part-time and temporary positions in the Honolulu, HI,
Customs District.
There is language stating that the committee expects Customs to work
with other agencies to successfully implement a dedicated commuter lane
at the Stanton Street Bridge in El Paso, TX.
There is language directing the Office of National Drug Control
Policy to conduct pilot programs in Colorado and Wisconsin--Colorado
and Wisconsin--to control methamphetamine trafficking.
I note with interest that that directs the National Drug Control
Policy to conduct those programs in Colorado and Wisconsin. It might be
of some interest that it is a huge problem in the State of Arizona,
larger than it is certainly in Wisconsin and I believe larger than
Colorado. That is the view of the experts.
There is language recommending that the National Archives consider
providing $50,000 to their Alaska Region to prepare an interpretive
exhibition on their Alaska Gold Rush collections for the 1998
centennial celebration and a similar recommendation that the National
Historical Publications and Records Commission consider a grant of
$100,000 for the Alaska Gold Rush Centennial projects.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the entire list of
earmarks and protective language be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:

Objectionable Provisions in S. 1023 fiscal year 1998 Treasury/Postal
Appropriations Bill

Overall funding is $1.1 billion higher than last year's
levels.

bill language

Earmark of additional $3 million for Rocky Mountain High
Intensity Drug Trafficking Assessment Center.
Earmark of $2.5 million for Globe Trade and Research
Program at the Montana World Trade Center, which is described
in the report as a one-time appropriation to support the
center's research and information dissemination activities on
``issues designed to explore, define, and measure
contributions to economic globalization.''
Prohibition on IRS field support reorganization in
Aberdeen, South Dakota, until the IRS toll-free help line
reaches an 80 percent service level.
Prohibition on reducing the number of IRS criminal
investigators in Wisconsin below the 1996 level.
Requirement to establish the port of Kodiak, Alaska, as a
port of entry and requiring U.S. Customs Service personnel in
Anchorage to serve the Kodiak port of entry.
Earmark of $4 million for repairs and restoration of Truman
Library in Independence, Missouri, and $3 million earmarked
for repairs to Lyndon Baines Johnson Presidential Library in
Austin, Texas.
Various protectionist ``Buy America'' provisions (Sections
509, 510, and 511).

report language

Earmark of $4 million to allow Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
and Firearms to comply with requests from states and local
law enforcement entities for technology under the CEASEFIRE/
IBIS program; states specifically singled out for assistance
are: West Virginia, North Carolina, Kentucky, Pennsylvania,
Mississippi, Nevada, Georgia, Alabama, and Illinois.
Language urging BATF to maintain staffing levels in rural
areas and small and medium-sized states, particularly
Wisconsin.
Reiterates that funding in bill for Achilles Task Force
Program will continue operations at existing levels in
Albuquerque and Houston.
Language stating that Committee expects Customs Service to
maintain current staffing and service levels at the
Charleston, West Virginia Customs office.
$750,000 earmarked for additional part-time and temporary
positions in the Honolulu, Hawaii Customs District.
Language stating that Committee expects Customs to assign
sufficient staff to operate the Santa Teresa, New Mexico
border facility.
Language stating that Customs should give high priority to
funding inspection personnel at ports of entry in Florida.
Language urging Customs to review and reconsider staffing
allocations in smaller states, particularly Montana and
Vermont.
Language stating that Committee expects Customs to work
with other agencies to successfully implement a dedicated
commuter lane at the Stanton Street Bridge in El Paso, Texas.
$500,000 earmarked for a feasibility study and
implementation plan to create an international freight
processing center in Kansas City.
Language urging IRS to take steps to fill five vacant
positions at the Newport, Vermont office.
Language stating the Committee believes IRS should maintain
certain specific tax assistance positions in both Alaska and
Hawaii.
Language directing the Postal Service to work to ensure
plant and animal pests and diseases are not introduced into
Hawaii.
Language directing Office of National Drug Control Policy
to conduct pilot programs in Colorado and Wisconsin to
control methamphetamine trafficking.
Language directing the General Services Administration to
expeditiously move to consolidate the Food and Drug
Administration offices at the White Oak Naval Surface Warfare
Center in Maryland.
Language urging GSA to give priority consideration to
construction of new Centers for Disease Control laboratory in
Atlanta, Georgia.
Language urging GSA to work with CDC to develop a plan to
replace or upgrade the Division of Vector-Borne Infectious
Diseases laboratory in Fort Collins, Colorado.
Language urging GSA to give priority consideration to two
Pennsylvania projects: $12.5 million in repairs at Byrne-
Greene Federal complex in Philadelphia, and $3.6 million in
repairs at the Pittsburgh Post Office and Courthouse.
Language directing GSA to give priority consideration to
security problems at the former Bureau of Mines property in
Avondale, Maryland.
Language urging GSA to give priority consideration to the
request of the U.S. Olympic Committee to obtain title to the
Federal Building in Colorado Springs, Colorado, if the Air
Force Space Command vacates the building.
Language recommending that the National Archives consider
providing $50,000 to their Alaska Region to prepare an
interpretive exhibition on their Alaska Gold Rush collections
for the 1998 centennial celebration; similar recommendation
that the National Historical Publications and Records
Commission consider a grant of $100,000 for Alaska Gold Rush
Centennial projects.
Language stating that Committee expects Office of Personnel
Management to continue to use the expertise of the University
of Hawaii to support a $300,000 program to ensure that
federal employees and their families have ready access to
health promotion and disease prevention activities.

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, in just a few bills we have now managed to
put in 5 billion dollars worth of earmarks and add-ons to the five
appropriations bills that have come before the Senate. We have eight
more appropriations still to be considered.
The $5 billion is quite a bit of money, even here in Washington. And
I urge my colleagues to recognize that the American people do not
approve of these practices. Every time I ask any of them about it, they
resoundingly reject these practices.
I hope we can stop them. I do not know if we will or not, but I
really am concerned about the continued practice of earmarking funds
without any meritorious screening, without any requirements or any
authorization process in many cases.
Mr. President, I yield the floor.
Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. CAMPBELL. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum
call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Sessions). Without objection, it is so
ordered.

Amendment No. 926

Mr. CAMPBELL. I send an amendment to the desk on behalf of Senator
Mikulski and ask for its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Colorado [Mr. Campbell], for Ms. Mikulski,
proposes an amendment numbered 926:
On page 71, line 16, strike ``or night differential''.
On page 71, line 18, strike ``or differential''.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, this amendment has been cleared by the
majority. I urge its adoption.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
The amendment (No. 926) was agreed to.
Mr. CAMPBELL. I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. KOHL. I move to lay it on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Mr. CAMPBELL. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call.

[[Page S7661]]

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I say to my colleagues time is running
on. We have been here over 3 hours. We have about three or four
amendments filed. Senators have not come to the floor to offer them. On
behalf of Senator Kohl and myself, I urge Members to come down to the
floor with their amendments so we can finish this bill. If we do not
want to be here in the middle of the night working on this, we ought to
move ahead.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call.
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the
pending amendment be set aside.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Amendment No. 927

(Purpose: To allow postal patrons to contribute to funding for breast
cancer research through the voluntary purchase of certain specially
issued United States Postage stamps)

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

The Senator from California [Mrs. Feinstein], for herself,
Mr. Conrad, Mr. Harkin, Mr. Inouye, Mr. Faircloth, Mr.
Feingold, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Mack, Mr. Reid, Mr.
Thurmond, and Mr. Torricelli, proposes an amendment numbered
927.

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

At the appropriate place, insert the following:
Sec. . (a) Special Postage Stamps.--In order to afford
the public a convenient way to contribute to funding for
breast-cancer research, the United States Postal Service
shall establish a special rate of postage for first-class
mail under this section.
(b) Higher Rate.--The rate of postage established under
this section--
(1) shall be 1 cent higher than the rate that would
otherwise apply;
(2) may be established without regard to any procedures
under chapter 36 of title 39, United States Code, and
notwithstanding any other provision of law; and
(3) shall be offered as an alternative to the rate that
would otherwise apply.

The use of the rate of postage established under this section
shall be voluntary on the part of postal patrons.
(c) Use of Funds.--
(1) In General.--
(A) Payments.--The amounts attributable to the 1-cent
differential established under this section shall be paid by
the United States Postal Service to the Department of Health
and Human Services.
(B) Use.--Amounts paid under subparagraph (A) shall be used
for breast-cancer research and related activities to carry
out the purposes of this section.
(C) Frequency of payments.--Payments under subparagraph (A)
shall be paid to the Department of Health and Human Services
no less than twice in each calendar year.
(2) Amounts attributable to the 1-cent differential.--For
purposes of this subsection, the term ``amounts attributable
to the 1-cent differential established under this section''
means, as determined by the United States Postal Service
under regulations that it shall prescribe--
(A) the total amount of revenues received by the United
States Postal Service that it would not have received but for
the enactment of this section, reduced by
(B) an amount sufficient to cover reasonable administrative
and other costs of the United States Postal Service
attributable to carrying out this section.
(d) Special Postage Stamps.--The United States Postal
Service may provide for the design and sale of special
postage stamps to carry out this section.
(e) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of the Congress
that--
(1) nothing in this section should directly or indirectly
cause a net decrease in total funds received by the
Department of Health and Human Services or any other agency
or instrumentality of the Government (or any component or
other aspect thereof) below the level that would otherwise
have been anticipated absent this section; and
(2) nothing in this section should affect regular first-
class rates or any other regular rate of postage.
(f) Annual Reports.--The Postmaster General shall include
in each annual report rendered under section 2402 of title
39, United States Code, information concerning the operation
of this section.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I am prepared to yield to the Senator
from Colorado for a unanimous-consent request, and I would appreciate
regaining the floor.
Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that there be 1
hour of debate regarding the Feinstein amendment regarding breast
cancer stamps, equally divided in the usual fashion, without any
second-degree amendments.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The Senator from California is recognized.
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Colorado. I'm
delighted to see the Senator from New York on the floor. I am hopeful
that Senator Faircloth will join us here, since the Senator moved this
as an amendment to the appropriations bill in committee. I very much
appreciate that and have enjoyed working with him on this matter.
Mr. President, I want to talk for a moment about breast cancer. I
think every Member of this body was aware that we unanimously passed a
sense-of-the-Senate not too long ago urging that more money be devoted
to research for cancer. Also, in the women's community, and, really, I
think still the majority population of this country, there is rising
and enormous concern about breast cancer.
The amendment I am making today on behalf of myself and a number of
others. I want to mention that just before the recess, in this very
Chamber, 51 Senators said they would cosponsor the breast cancer
research stamp bill (S. 726) which creates a breast cancer research
stamp with 1 cent above the rate of first-class postage. Members
thought it was a good idea. Well, I need to move this because I very
much fear it will not happen if I don't take the opportunity that we
have today to bring this matter forward.
Let me begin by saying that this is a wellspring from the breast
cancer community. This measure is supported by the American Cancer
Society, the American Medical Association, the American Hospital
Association, Association of Operating Room Nurses, California Health
Collaborative, the YWCA, and I could go on and on.
Representative Fazio in the House has introduced the same legislation
with 100 cosponsors in January of this year. It is my understanding
that Representative Molinari talked to the Speaker and is putting it on
a calendar which will move it rapidly in the House.
The idea for this legislation came from a physician in Sacramento,
CA, an oncologist; and Representative Fazio brought it to the attention
of the House as the original sponsor. This oncologist has treated some
1,000 women for breast cancer. And he, like physicians all over this
country in the health community, has seen a really startling rise in
breast cancer. In the 1950's, 1 in 20 women developed breast cancer.
Today, the incidence is one in eight, and growing. It kills 46,000
women a year. Every 12 minutes an American woman dies of breast cancer.
It is the leading cause of cancer death for women between the ages of
35 and 52, and it is the second leading cause of death in all women.
So, today, 1.8 million women in America are diagnosed with breast
cancer, and 1 million women, in addition to that, don't know they have
breast cancer. This year, 184,300 new breast cancer cases will be
diagnosed, and 17,100 of those in California.
One of the interesting things is that the breast cancer rates differ
throughout the United States. The San Francisco Bay Area has one of the
highest breast cancer rates in the world. Rates in the Northeastern
United States are substantially higher than in the South. Some believe
in the medical community that environmental factors may contribute as
much as 90 percent to breast cancer. The rates vary among countries.
Women in Japan have about five times less breast cancer than women in
the United States. And when people migrate they tend to acquire the
cancer rates closer to those of the newly adopted countries within a
generation. So within a generation, we find that reduced tendency for
cancer increases.

[[Page S7662]]

We have invested as a country, about $2 million in breast cancer
research. The funding has quadrupled since 1990. There is still no
cure. The national commitment to cancer research has been stagnant
since 1980. Today, NIH can fund only 23 percent of their applications.
The NIH budget is less than 1 percent of the Federal budget. And I
believe the latest polls show that 80 percent of the people of this
country believe that cancer research and medical research is an
appropriate cause of action for the Federal Government.
The National Cancer Institute in 1996 could fund 26 percent of their
applications. That is a drop from 32 percent in 1992.
So the idea came from Sacramento, from the oncologist who treated
1,000 women with breast cancer. What if we had a unique trial project,
an optional stamp of 1 cent above whatever the first class rate was,
where breast cancer groups and women all across this Nation who care
have the option to buy that stamp, and 1 cent would go for breast
cancer research? The administration costs incurred by the post office
would be absorbed by that additional 1 cent.
I have had an occasion to discuss this with the Postmaster General.
He is not in favor of it. He is not in favor of it because it has not
been done before. And it has not been done because there are those that
say, ``If we do it for this, why don't we do it for that? If we do it
for women, we should to it for men.''
Well, we are in an era of diminishing resources. We all know that.
Everybody has looked at cuts. This is not a cut. This is a unique
thing. It is a trial project. If it works, we learn something from it.
If it doesn't work, no money is lost from the Federal Treasury, or from
the post office.
One of the things I believe every Member of this body has seen,
whether it is in ``The Race for the Cure'' or the women that come into
our offices, is a very unusual resilience in the breast cancer survivor
community. They are climbing mountains, they are showing they can
survive. They have banded together in support groups. It is a
wonderfully unusual thing. They would like this to be done. They are in
these Halls lobbying for it. They are in my office. I know they are in
Senator Faircloth's office, and they have been in other offices saying,
``Give us a chance. We will use this as fundraisers. We will go out and
buy first-class stamps for a cent above the rate. We will sell them to
our members. We will get our members to do this.''
I think it is a worthy trial. It is a worthy project. Whether it
works, I don't know. They tell me that if 10 percent of the first-class
stamps were bought through this option it would produce $60 million. I
don't know whether it will or not. I know that there is an enthused,
energized community out there. You may see them wearing one design for
a breast cancer stamp on their lapels, walking around the Capitol. I
know that they care and care very deeply.
When I first introduced the bill earlier this year, I had some
sponsors on the bill. They came to me, and said, ``You know, you
haven't been working very hard. You only have 6 or 7 co-sponsors.'' So
because we were on the floor for 3 hours before the Fourth of July
break, I went around to each member, and 51 Senators said, ``Yes.''
They would vote for it. ``Put my name down.'' And I did. They are on
this piece of paper in front of me.

This is an opportunity to cast that vote. This is an opportunity to
try something new.
People will come before us and say, ``Oh, my goodness. If we do this
for breast cancer, we should do it for prostate cancer.'' Well, maybe
we should. I don't know. But the proposal out there is this one, and it
is all throughout the United States now.
People will say, ``Oh. Why don't we do it for AIDS?'' Well, the
breast cancer community has made this proposal. They are united about
it. They want to try it.
I have agreed to sponsor it in the Senate. Senator Faircloth has
agreed to be a cosponsor, along with Senator D'Amato, Senator Kent
Conrad, Senator Tom Harkin, Senator Feingold, Senator Johnson, Senator
Kerry, Senator Mack, Senator Reid, Senator Thurmond, and Senator
Torricelli. I can't put all of the 51 names on this because I didn't
specifically say it would be an amendment. I said, a bill.
So I am told I should call everybody again. But I believe there is
the opportunity. I think the case has been made, if you see what
happens to women afflicted with breast cancer. And you see this amazing
surviver community and what they are willing to do. In a way, this
stamp is a tribute to that kind of resolute spirit that can conquer
what for many has been a mortal disease.
So I am hopeful, Mr. President, despite those who I know on the
Appropriations Committee that do not want to see this happen. They
don't want to do it on this bill. But if it doesn't happen here,
perhaps it won't, and we will send out a message to the breast cancer
survival community that we will not try anything new.
If you have a disease, you will try anything to get rid of it. I
think this body should try one new thing, and let's see if it works,
and let's see if we can produce 60, 70, 80, or 90 million new dollars
for breast cancer research.
I thank the Chair. I yield the floor.
Mr. CAMPBELL addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Colorado.
Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, before the Senator leaves for her next
appointment, I would like to make a couple of comments and ask her some
questions.
First of all, as I am sure she knows, I have always been a big
supporter of increased money going into breast cancer research, as she
has. And I commend her for the leadership she has taken on this issue.
In fact, many of our colleagues have not only supported additional
research money but have participated on our own time on Saturdays and
Sundays in raising private funds for breast cancer research. The most
common that we are aware of is the Susan Komen Foundation and The Run
for the Cure, which is done all over the United States.
Just a few weeks ago here in Washington, DC, we had something like
45,000 or 50,000 people that contributed money to run through the
streets of Washington to help raise money for that very, very badly
needed program.
But I am a little concerned. She mentioned a few of the concerns
already. But I am told that the chairman of the authorizing
subcommittee, Senator Cochran, has some concerns about this proposal,
as does Senator Stevens who will be here in about 25 minutes to make
some comments on it, too.
First, one of my concerns is certainly the administrative costs to
the Postal Service. I think they would be significant, as I understand
it.
I would like to ask the Senator. Is there a provision that allows
them to recoup their costs? Or does the whole profit of this additional
cost of stamps just go to the program, and do they have to absorb the
administrative costs for doing it?
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Yes. The administrative costs are absorbed under the
one additional cent.
Mr. CAMPBELL. A portion of 1 cent will go back to recover the cost.
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. The cost of collecting the money is absorbed in that
1 cent. Yes.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I might also just comment that, as I
understand it, if this 1-cent increase had been for the single best-
selling stamp of all time--which was the Elvis Presley stamp that went
on sale a couple of years ago, that stamp sold $500 million individual
stamps--but if this 1-cent additional had been on that stamp, it would
have raised only $5 million. Certainly that is an important amount but
not as much as we need. As I also understand, only about 1.6 million
breast cancer stamps have been sold so far.
So the amount, I would tell my friend from California, that she would
hope to realize from what I have heard and seen is probably going to be
quite a bit less than she would hope to get into this account.
The Senator already mentioned that there are some concerns by some of
the Members that there are many, many programs that are equally
important--muscular dystrophy, prostate cancer is important,
Alzheimer's disease, heart disease--many things that we need to address
some more. And I think, as some of my colleagues think, that we may be
opening an avenue for all kinds of new groups to ask for the same kind
of consideration.
If that happens, then I think, No. 1, we are going to confuse the
public and

[[Page S7663]]

we will probably dilute the amount of money needed for any one of them.
But I am not opposed to this amendment. I just wanted to make sure
that my colleague understands that I am very supportive of her efforts.
But I do have these concerns.
I thank her, and I thank the Chair.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, there is one Member seeking time. If the
Senator from California is finished, I will suggest the absence of a
quorum until Senator Stevens gets here.
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. I thank the Senator. Yes. At this time, if I may be
afforded a reaction and comment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California.
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. I thank the Chair.
As we know, with anything done the first time you never really quite
know what it is going to do. I have had estimates. The group supporting
this has done some research. I know what they have told me. I cannot
make any guarantee to this body that it will produce a lot of money. I
do know that it is worth a try, in my opinion. It is important to
people. There is a movement behind it.
The breast cancer stamp now exists as of now and it has no
fundraising connected to it. It is simply a first-class stamp. This has
the ability, for people that want to do so, to buy for the reason of
raising an additional cent. I think every one of us know people
immediately close to us that are suffering from breast cancer. I happen
to believe the women of America are going to respond to this. I think
young women are going to respond to it. I think you are going to see
interesting ways that people are going to sell first-class stamps. I
think that is good for the post office. It is good for the mail, and
hopefully it will be good for breast cancer.
I know I didn't buy an Elvis Presley stamp. What was the other stamp?
I didn't buy the other breast cancer stamp. I will buy these. I think
there are many others like me. I don't know how many. But I think it is
worth a try.
I thank the Senator for his comments.
I yield the floor.
Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, as Chairman of the Governmental Affairs
Subcommittee on International Security, Proliferation, and Federal
Services, which has jurisdiction over postal matters, I must point out
that the Feinstein amendment would require the U.S. Postal Service to
issue a special postage stamp.
Such a special stamp--generally referred to as a semipostal--would
sell for 1 cent above the basic first-class letter rate, with most of
the differential going to fund breast cancer research. Though this is a
well-intentioned amendment, and breast cancer research is a highly
worthwhile cause, the idea of using the Postal Service as a fund-
raising tool is not a good one. The list of diseases that should be
given added research funds is endless. Requiring the Postal Service to
issue a semipostal stamp for breast cancer would place the Postal
Service and Congress in the very difficult position of determining
which worthy organizations or research programs should receive
fundraising assistance from the Postal authorities and which should
not.
The concept of semipostals has been around for years. Some nations
issue them, but most do not. The European experience with this kind of
stamp has shown that they are rarely as beneficial to the designated
organization as expected. Consider the example of Canada. In 1975, the
Canadian Postal Corporation issued a series of semipostal stamps to
provide supplementary revenue for the Canadian Olympic Committee. It
was reported that while the program received exceptionally good
promotional and advertising support, it fell short of its intended
revenue objective. Demand for the semipostals throughout Canada was
reportedly insubstantial. The program--viewed as a failure--concluded
in 1976. More recently, the Canada Post issued a semipostal to support
literacy. With a surcharge of 5 cents per stamp, it raised only
$252,000. After raising only a modest amount of money, combined with a
tremendous administrative expense, Canada Post says they will not issue
another semipostal.
There is a strong U.S. tradition of private fund-raising for
charities. Such a stamp would effectively use the United States Postal
Service as a fundraiser, a role it never has had. The Postal Service's
job--and expertise--is mail delivery. Congress should be mindful that
the postage stamp pays strictly for postal operations. It is not a fee
for anything but delivering the mail and paying the cost of running the
service. In fact, section 3622 of the Postal Reorganization Act of 1970
precludes charging rates in excess of those required to offset the
Postal Service's costs of providing a particular service. In other
words, the Postal Service does not have the authority to put a
surcharge on a postage rate that is cost and overhead driven. There is
simply no legitimate connection between the desire to raise money for a
cause, and maintenance of the postal service's mission of providing
universal service at a universal rate.
This is an effort to bypass the legislative process with an amendment
on an appropriation bill and even though the Feinstein amendment's
goals are laudatory, it should be rejected.
Mr. CAMPBELL. I suggest the absence of a quorum, Mr. President.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. CAMPBELL. I would also ask unanimous consent that the remaining
time be equally charged to both the proponents and the opponents of the
Feinstein amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. CAMPBELL. With that, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Ms. MOSELEY-BRAUN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the
order for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Ms. MOSELEY-BRAUN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to be
allowed to speak as if in morning business for a period of 10 minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

____________________