[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 159 (Wednesday, November 12, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12506-S12509]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. HARKIN:
[[Page S12507]]
S. 1522. A bill to authorize the Secretary of Agriculture to provide
assistance to rural cooperatives; to the Committee on Agriculture,
Nutrition, and Forestry.
The Rural Cooperative Act
Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce the Rural
Cooperative Act, a measure proposed by the administration. Under
current law, the Rural Business--Cooperative Services within the Rural
Development Administration provides a wide variety of services for farm
cooperatives. They conduct economic analysis, provide advice on how to
form and best operate cooperatives and a wide variety of other services
for farm cooperatives, including how to deal with the complex laws
under which cooperatives operate.
Farm cooperatives are very important in rural America. They allow
farmers to come together to purchase goods, to sell their products, and
to process their agricultural commodities under farmer ownership. Some
cooperatives only perform one of those functions. Some do two or three
of them. In all cases, they allow farmers to come together and more
effectively bargain for a fair price.
Funding for cooperative services within the Department of Agriculture
has been under considerable constraint in recent years and it is now
difficult for the Department to provide the full range of services
allowed by law to farm cooperatives. I do not want to see those
services reduced. But, I do agree with the administration, that
cooperative services should also be available to those in rural areas,
in addition to farmers who want to form cooperatives. Therefore, I am
introducing the administration-proposed bill to broaden the
responsibilities of the Department in this area. I do so, requesting
that the administration increase its request for funding to carry out
these additional responsibilities and will be urging that the
Appropriations Committee appropriately increase funding in this area.
The bill provides that rural residents who are considering forming a
cooperative for one of a number of purposes or who have formed a
cooperative may receive a variety of kinds of assistance from USDA.
The types of cooperatives that would benefit would include those
purchasing consumer goods, business products or services, health care,
utilities, communications, child and day care, housing, credit,
insurance, or other goods or services. It would also include
cooperatives that market goods made by members or goods made by the
cooperative.
The Department could provide advice for such cooperatives including
conducting economic surveys and analysis of proposed cooperative
activities. It would also conduct surveys of cooperatives and issue
reports about them as well as promote rural cooperative principles and
practices.
The bill authorizes such sums as might be necessary to carry out the
purposes of the act.
I urge that the Congress consider and pass this bill in the coming
year.
______
By Mr. MURKOWSKI (for himself and Mr. Stevens):
S. 1523. A bill to allow for the investment of joint Federal and
State funds from the civil settlement of damages from the Exxon Valdez
oilspill; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
INVESTMENT OF ``EXXON VALDEZ'' TRUST FUNDS LEGISLATION
Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I rise to introduce legislation that
will allow more sensible investment of the funds jointly received by
the Federal Government and the State of Alaska from the civil
settlement of damages arising from the Exxon Valdez oilspill.
The settlement provided for Exxon to pay the Federal and State
governments a total of $900 million over a 10-year period ending in
2001. Approximately $280 million remains to be paid under this
agreement. Under the consent decree, the money is to be used for the
recovery of damaged resources, and is to be managed as a joint Federal-
State trust fund, administered by the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee
Council, which includes representatives of three Federal and three
State agencies. Under the consent decree, moneys not immediately
expended are to be placed with the U.S. District Court, Fifth Circuit
Court Registry Investment System.
Recently, the trustees requested that Congress adopt measures to
allow them to invest this money outside the Court Registry Investment
System, in which earnings are limited to approximately 5 percent, and
are further reduced by fees of 10 percent of the earnings. In the
opinion of the trustees, even extremely conservative investment outside
the court registry could yield an additional $20 to $30 million by
2002, which could greatly enhance continuing restoration projects.
This bill responds to the trustees' request. It will allow investment
outside the court registry system. Let me emphasize, however, that this
authority is entirely discretionary. The trustees may use it to
reinvest settlement moneys or not, as they deem appropriate. Further,
Mr. President, as an added protection, the district court must approve
any reinvestment.
The bill also directs that the earnings on the new investment be used
for marine research and monitoring, and for community and fishing
industry economic restoration. This provision is needed to ensure
attention to these important areas.
Here again, let me make sure I am absolutely clear. The bill I am
offering does not prevent the purchase of land or easements. It simply
directs that the earnings--and only the earnings--on new investment go
to other, equally valid purposes.
The trustee council has already spent a large part of the money
received from Exxon on land acquisition and easements that limit the
use of land it has not purchased outright. To date, the total is about
424,000 acres, and the trustees' intention is to purchase or restrict
as much as 750,000 acres.
The Federal Government already owns 248 million acres of Alaska--more
than the eastern seaboard from Maine to Florida, which is home to one-
third of the entire population of the United States. Inside the spill
area, there already are 20 different parcels of protected State and
Federal lands, including the Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge, Katmai
National Park and Preserve, and the Chugach National Forest and Copper
River Delta Critical Habitat Area.
Many of the trustees' additional land acquisitions have been for the
purpose of habitat protection, and are valuable to the trustees'
restoration mission, but some have included the purchase of land that
has already been logged or land on which public access is restricted
despite being purchased by public funds. These purchases are not so
easy to justify.
The trustees have already published plans to spend almost all of the
$900 million. By the time Exxon makes its last payment, the only money
not already spent will be the 12 percent the council is tucking away in
a restoration reserve.
After inflation-proofing, interest on this account could provide
about $2.1 million annually for long-term research and economic
reconstruction projects--or could vanish in more land acquisitions.
Finally, Mr. President, my bill also provides for the new investment
authority to sunset in 2002 unless the trustees bring to Congress their
thoughts on how an independent board might be created to administer the
funds remaining after 2002. Personally, I'd like to see them recommend
an independent, scientifically-oriented group to guide a long-term
research program--a board that would call for proposals, arrange for
scientific peer review, publish findings, and so forth, without the
appearance of conflict that exists when the trustees are funding
projects in which their own agencies are involved.
This is a responsible approach to a difficult issue. It gives the
trustees the additional investment authority they want without
prohibiting them from spending principal or the earnings from
investments that remain in the court registry system however they
choose, including more land acquisition. It does, however, encourage
them to look at some areas that are equally important to the task of
once again making whole both the resources and the people affected by
the oil spill.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent for the text of the bill to be
printed in the Record. I hope that we can take it up early next year,
and urge my colleagues' support.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
[[Page S12508]]
S. 1523
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, upon the joint
motion of the United States and the State of Alaska and the
issuance of an appropriate order by the United States
District Court for the District of Alaska, the joint trust
funds or any portion thereof, including any interest accrued
thereon, previously received or to be received by the United
States and the State of Alaska pursuant to the Agreement and
consent decree issued in United States v. Exxon Corporation,
et al. (No. A91-082 CIV) and State of Alaska v. Exxon
Corporation, et al. (No. A91-083 CIV) (hereafter referred to
as the ``Consent Decree''), may be deposited in appropriate
accounts outside the Court Registry, including the Natural
Resource Damage Assessment and Restoration Fund (hereafter
referred to as the ``Fund'') established in title I of the
Department of the Interior and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 1992 (Pub. L. 102-154, 43 U.S.C. 1474b)
and such accounts outside the United States Treasury
consisting of income-producing obligations and other
instruments or securities of a type or class that have been
determined unanimously by the federal and state natural
resource trustees for the Exxon Valdez oil spill to have a
high degree of reliability and security: Provided, That any
joint trust funds in the Fund and any such outside accounts
that have been approved unanimously by the trustees for
expenditure by or through a state or federal agency shall be
transferred promptly from the Fund and such outside accounts
to the State or United States upon the joint request of the
governments: Provided further, that the transfer of joint
trust funds outside the Court Registry shall not affect the
supervisory jurisdiction of such District Court under the
Consent Decree or the Memorandum of Agreement and Consent
Decree in United States v. State of Alaska (No. A91-081-CIV)
over all expenditures of the joint trust funds: Provided
further, That nothing herein shall affect the requirement of
section 207 of the Dire Emergency Supplemental Appropriations
and Transfers for Relief From the Effects of Natural
Disasters, for Other Urgent Needs, and for the Incremental
Cost of ``Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm'' Act of 1992
(Pub. L. 102-229, 43 U.S.C. 1474b note) that amounts received
by the United States and designated by the trustees for the
expenditure by or through a federal agency must be deposited
into the Fund, Provided further, That any interest accrued
under the authority in this section may be used only for
grants for marine research and monitoring (including applied
fisheries research) and for community and economic
restoration projects (including projects proposed by the
fishing industry and facilities), Provided further, That the
federal trustees are hereby authorized to administer such
grants: Provided further, That the authority provided in this
section shall expire on September 30, 2002, unless by
September 30, 2001 the trustees have submitted to the
Congress a proposal to authorize in federal statute a board
to administer funds invested, interest received, and grants
awarded from such interest.
______
By Mr. HARKIN:
S. 1524. A bill require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to
conduct an ongoing study of the health consequences of nuclear weapons
tests; to the Committee on Labor and Human Resources.
NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE HEALTH STUDY LEGISLATION
Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I rise to introduce a bill requiring
studies of the health effects of nuclear weapons testing. This would
build upon the study by the National Cancer Institute that was released
October 1 of this year.
On October 1, following some major news coverage, the NCI testified
before the Senate Labor, HHS, and Education Appropriations Subcommittee
on their efforts to connect nuclear weapons testing with thyroid
cancer. The NCI testimony and the report released that day were
startling. Atomic bomb tests in Nevada during the 1950's exposed
millions of Americans--particularly children--to large amounts of
radioactive iodine-131. The levels of radioactive iodine exposure is
far worse than previously reported by the Government. Hot spots where
the iodine-131 fallout was greatest includes many counties far away
from Nevada, including New York, Massachusetts, and Iowa.
Hot spots were identified as receiving as high as 5-16 rads of
exposure of iodine-131, with children being exposed to a risk up to 10
times higher. Iodine-131, which accumulates in the thyroid gland, has
been linked to thyroid cancer. To give some understanding of the
enormity of the U.S. atomic tests in Nevada, 116 million curies of
iodine-131 were released in the United States above ground tests. This
compares to 7.3 million from Chernobyl disaster the former Soviet
Union. The NCI report clearly shows that the U.S. atomic tests exposed
a lot of people to risks now considered unacceptable.
The topic hits very close to home for me. During the 1950's, I was
living in the small town of Cumming located in south-central Iowa.
Along with many Iowans, I lived in the hot spots detailed by the NCI
study. Further, like many of my neighbors, I drank milk from the cows
kept on our farm. This increased the risk faced by myself and my family
because radioactive iodine accumulates in milk.
The NCI report has attracted a lot of attention. Much of this stems
from the history of nuclear weapons testing. As we all know, the U.S.
Government was fairly cavalier with its nuclear weapons program during
the early days of the cold war. Historians can argue about the reasons,
but most people recognize the terrible toll suffered by the American
public because of our nuclear weapons program. Only recently has the
extent of exposure to radiation and other hazards to the ``down
winders'' living near nuclear weapons sites such as the Nevada test
site, Hanford in Washington State, and the Marshall Islanders in the
South Pacific.
So it is no surprise that a report detailing exposure to millions of
Americans would attract attention. However, we need to continue the
research into the health impact of nuclear weapons testing. That is why
I am introducing this bill to require further study by the Department
of Health and Human Services.
The HHS study will build upon the NCI study. There is strong evidence
that exposure to other radioactive isotopes that were spread by nuclear
weapons tests such as strontium 90, cesium 137 and barium 140 could
lead to bone cancer, leukemia, higher infant mortality, and a host of
other illnesses. This needs to be examined. So do the nuclear weapons
tests that took place not only at the Nevada test site, but at other
places as well. For example, the NCI report did not examine the nuclear
weapons testing conducted by the United States in Mississippi, Alaska,
New Mexico, Colorado, or the South Pacific. The studies should research
not only the United States nuclear weapons program, but also tests by
foreign nations including the Soviet Union and its successor states,
France, China, India, and Great Britain.
I also believe that such studies should be conducted in an open
manner. For example, this bill will require that the studies fall under
the review authority of the Advisory Committee on Energy Related
Studies and other entities established by the Federal Government to
ensure public accountability over health related studies pertaining to
nuclear weapon research, production, and testing. The bill also
requires that HHS report to Congress within 90 days of passage as to
its plan for completing the studies, as well as report to Congress each
year on its progress.
This is a simple bill that seeks some understanding of the health
consequences of our nuclear weapons testing program. I would ask my
fellow colleagues to review and support this important legislation.
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. 1524
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. ONGOING STUDY ON HEALTH CONSEQUENCES OF NUCLEAR
WEAPONS TESTS.
(a) Requirement.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary of Health and Human Services
shall conduct an ongoing study of the health consequences of
nuclear weapons tests.
(2) Covered tests.--In conducting the study, the Secretary
shall, to the maximum extent practicable, consider nuclear
weapons tests (including above ground tests and below ground
tests) by the United States, France, Great Britain, India,
the People's Republic of China, the Soviet Union and its
successor states, and any other foreign nation that has
conducted nuclear weapons tests.
(3) Particular exposures.--In conducting the study, the
Secretary shall consider, in particular, the following:
(A) The health consequences of exposure to plutonium,
strontium-90, iodine-131, radioactive cesium, and any other
radioactive element produced by a nuclear weapon test.
(B) The health consequences of exposure to such elements
for high-risk populations and for the general population.
(4) Review.--The Secretary shall provide on an-going basis
for guidance and review of
[[Page S12509]]
the conduct of the study, and review of the results of the
study, by the Advisory Committee on Energy-Related
Epidemiologic Research of the Department of Health and Human
Services and by such other entities engaged in the review of
governmental studies relating to nuclear weapons activities
as the Secretary considers appropriate.
(b) Reports.--
(1) Preliminary plan.--Not later than 90 days after the
date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to
Congress a report setting forth the Secretary's plan for the
conduct of the study under this section. The report shall set
forth an estimate of the annual costs of the study.
(2) Annual reports.--Not later than one year after the date
of the submittal of the report under paragraph (1), and
annually thereafter, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a
report on the results of the study during the one-year period
preceding the date of the report.
(c) Funding.--The Secretary of Energy shall transfer to the
Secretary of Health and Human Services each fiscal year, from
amounts appropriated for the Department of Energy for such
fiscal year for weapons activities, such amounts as the
Secretary of Energy and the Secretary of Health and Human
Services jointly determine appropriate to permit the
Secretary of Health and Human Services to conduct activities
relating to the study under this section during such fiscal
year.
______
By Mr. SPECTER (for himself and Mr. Biden):
S. 1525. A bill to provide financial assistance for higher education
to the dependents of Federal, State, and local public safety officers
who are killed or permanently and totally disabled as the result of a
traumatic injury sustained in the line of duty; to the Committee on the
Judiciary.
the public safety officers educational assistance act of 1998
Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I seek recognition today to join Senator
Biden in introducing the Public Safety Officers Educational Assistance
Act of 1998. The purpose of this bill is to build on legislation we
passed last Congress and provide education benefits to the families of
slain or disabled State and local public safety officers.
Last year, Congress passed the Federal Law Enforcement Dependents
Assistance Act. This law provides for the education of the spouse and
dependent children of Federal law enforcement officers who die or are
totally disabled in the line of duty.
I was moved to introduce last year's legislation after meeting with
the widow of Mr. Bill Degan, the U.S. marshal who was killed in the
tragic incident at Ruby Ridge. Mrs. Karen Degan, his widow, brought to
my attention the fact that the families of slain Federal law
enforcement officers were not eligible to receive the educational
benefits which the Government gives to the families of slain soldiers
in our armed services. My legislation eliminated this disparity.
The program we created last year, however, is only available to the
children of Federal law enforcement officers. Yet the idea behind the
law applies equally to all public safety officers, Federal, State, or
local. When someone gives his or her life protecting the safety and
well-being of the general public, it is the very least we can do to
ensure that the officer's children and/or spouse can continue on the
educational path they would have followed had their parent or spouse
not been killed in the line of duty.
Today we seek to remedy this disparity between Federal and non-
Federal officers by introducing the Public Safety Officers Educational
Assistance Act of 1998. This legislation will extend these same
educational benefits to the dependents of all public safety officers--
Federal, State, county and local law enforcement officers, correctional
officers, and fire and rescue personnel--who have given their lives in
the line of duty.
Under this bill, the Attorney General will administer a program which
will provide up to $4,485 per child, per year to attend a 4-year
college. This is the same amount of educational assistance the Federal
Government provides to the dependents of slain or disabled veterans and
Federal law enforcement officers. I would note that this program is
subject to appropriations and does not constitute an entitlement.
I would prefer that we did not have to worry about death and
disabling injuries for public safety officials, but it is a fact of
life that every year there are tragic losses. We are obligated to
remember the families of those officers who have paid the ultimate
price to keep our streets and homes safe.
Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, last year the Senate passed the Federal Law
Enforcement Dependents Assistance Act. A law which provides for the
education of the spouse and dependent children of Federal law
enforcement officers who die or are totally disabled in the line of
duty.
The purpose of the legislation was to remove a significant financial
burden from the families of these deceased officers and to allow them
to continue on the educational path they would have followed had their
parent or spouse not been killed in the line of duty.
This fall, several young men and women were able to go to college
under this program. Unfortunately, this program is only available to
the children of Federal law enforcement officers.
Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Public Safety Officers
Educational Assistance Act of 1998. This legislation will extend these
same educational benefits to the dependents of all public safety
officers--Federal, State, county, and local law enforcement officers,
correctional officers, and fire and rescue personnel--who have given
their lives in the line of duty.
Under my bill, the Attorney General will administer a program which
will provide up to $4,485 per child, per year to attend a 4-year
college. This is the same amount of educational assistance the Federal
Government provides to veterans.
It is critical that we remember the families of those officers who
have made the ultimate sacrifice to keep our streets and homes safe.
This bill is intended to allow the dependents of public safety officers
to continue with their education as they would have been able to do had
their parent not been killed or totally disabled in the line of duty.
I have long been concerned about the plight of families of public
safety officers killed in the line of duty--this summer, I introduced
an amendment to the Budget Reconciliation Act which provides for the
favorable tax treatment of survivor death benefits paid to the families
of fallen officers. In that vein, this legislation offers assurance to
those in the public safety profession--and even to those considering
service as public safety officers--that their loved ones will be able
to attain their educational goals in their absence.
____________________