[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 156 (Saturday, November 8, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12087-S12088]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, EDUCATION AND RELATED 
          AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1998--CONFERENCE REPORT

  The Senate continued with the consideration of the conference report.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I thank my friend from the State of Iowa, 
Senator Harkin. I also thank the Senator from Pennsylvania, Senator 
Specter.
  This is a good bill. It is not an easy bill to write. Having been a 
member of the Appropriations Committee in the other body, I know some 
bills are tougher than others. This is the toughest.
  The committee empowered with writing this legislation entertains 
literally hundreds of witnesses who ask for help in this bill. Some are 
the most touching and amazing stories, as people come before this 
committee with a variety of different medical problems and ask for help 
in funding research at the National Institutes of Health. I am really 
encouraged that this piece of legislation increases spending on Federal 
medical research projects by 7 percent. I wish it were a lot more, and 
I bet the Senator from Iowa and the Senator from Pennsylvania agrees. 
Not too many years ago, we found that the NIH was only approving a 
fraction of those good research projects which should have been funded. 
There just wasn't enough money there.
  Anyone in this body, any member of our family, anyone listening to 
this statement, either in the galleries or by television, understands 
how vulnerable we all are to medical illness. There are times in each 
of our lives when we pray that someplace at sometime someone is 
investing enough money to make sure that the cures for these illnesses 
are found. This is the bill that invests the money.
  People say, what do these people do in Washington that has any impact 
on my life? We invest money in the National Institutes of Health to try 
to find ways to cure cancer, heart disease and a variety of diseases 
that are not as well known. I commend my colleagues who work hard on 
this committee to make it happen.
  Another contentious issue in this bill is the whole issue of 
education testing. I don't particularly like this bill's provision on 
education testing. I see it a lot differently. I understand at some 
point the debate has to end, and we have to move forward to pass the 
legislation.
  I believe in local control of education, but I think it is naive for 
us to believe that we should live in a nation where 50 different States 
set 50 different standards for scientific educational achievement. For 
example, the kids graduating in Illinois may go to work in Iowa. The 
kids graduating in Iowa may end up going to Nebraska. The kids in 
Nebraska may end up going to California.
  The education standards we are espousing and the ones we are trying 
to make certain we achieve should be nationwide goals. Understanding 
the achievement levels of our schools is the first step toward 
appreciating the good schools and improving those that aren't as good.
  The city of Chicago is going through a dramatic change in reforming 
its public education system. The city of Chicago voluntarily signs up 
for national testing to make certain that the kids coming out of those 
schools can make it wherever they happen to live. As a result of that 
testing, the public school system of the city of Chicago virtually 
closed down seven high schools within the last few months and said 
those high schools just aren't meeting the basic requirements for the 
kids. They demanded that the teachers in those schools basically step 
aside and only those who were competent were rehired. Others were told 
they had to do something else with their lives. That is what testing 
can give you, some objective standard to make a tough decision.

[[Page S12088]]

  The final point I will make in conclusion, I especially thank the 
conferees for including a provision that I added to the Senate version 
of the bill. Section 608 of this conference committee report includes 
the provision which I added on the floor of the Senate which basically 
nullified the $50 billion setoff that was given to tobacco companies in 
a tax bill that was passed a little before our August recess. It turned 
out the vast majority of my colleagues agreed with me that this was a 
bad provision, and we eliminated it. The conference committee has 
honored that and kept it in the bill.
  Let me say in closing that I hope as part of the tobacco settlement 
agreement, with the leadership of Senator Harkin and so many others, 
that we cannot only do the right thing in reducing kids smoking, but 
come up with the revenues to put it into things that are critically 
important, such as medical research, so that maybe next year when this 
appropriations bill comes to the floor, we won't be talking about a 7-
percent increase in medical research but a dramatically larger increase 
paid for by the tobacco settlement agreement.
  I thank the Senator from Iowa and the Senator from Pennsylvania for 
their fine work on this bill. I yield back the remainder of my time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who seeks recognition?
  Mr. SESSIONS addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be 
allowed to have 5 minutes off Senator Specter's time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. HARKIN. How much time does Senator Specter have remaining?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania has 12 minutes.
  Mr. HARKIN. I yield 5 minutes off Senator Specter's time to the 
Senator from Alabama.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The 
Senator from Alabama.

                          ____________________