[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.

                          ____________________