[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 127 (Tuesday, September 22, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10722-S10725]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. WARNER:
S. 2506. A bill to establish a National Commission on Terrorism; to
the Committee on the Judiciary.
national commission on terrorism legislation
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, terrorism, both domestic and
international, will regrettably, continue to be a threat to United
States citizens and, indeed, to humanity into the millennium. It is the
weapon of choice for those nations, entities, and individuals bent on
pursuing myriad aims through the cowardly, cold-blooded sacrifice of
innocents.
In his remarks to the opening session of the United Nations General
Assembly yesterday, President Clinton focused on the reality of
terrorism in the world community. ``This is a threat,'' he said, ``to
all humankind.'' At the end of this statement, I include excerpts of
the President's speech.
Terrorism is one of the principal threats to global economic and
political stability and will continue to be for the foreseeable future.
As such, U.S. foreign and economic policies designed to foster peace
and prosperity through stability will be weakened.
U.S. policies, citizens and interests continue to be prime targets
for international terrorism. The April 1998 Department of State report,
``Patterns of
[[Page S10723]]
Global Terrorism,'' noted that approximately 33% of all terrorist
incidents worldwide were committed against U.S. citizens or property.
These attacks were by and large perpetrated outside of the continental
United States.
The Congress will soon be considering appropriations to increase the
physical security to United States missions abroad. Of the 260
diplomatic posts overseas, only 40 are determined to be safe against
terrorist attack.
While it is clear that the safety and stability of the world
community continue to be threatened, terrorist activity and the
perpetrators of that activity require leaders to reexamine our
understanding of terrorism and develop policy to continue to combat the
threat.
The motivation to commit acts of terrorism are no longer viewed as
those with simply political ends. No longer are these senseless acts of
death and destruction purely the domain of those with a political
agenda. Increasingly, terrorists are motivated by religious goals, by
the pursuit of financial profit, by long-standing racial, ethnic or
tribal divisions and animosities, or by a mix of all of the above.
The age of information technology and proliferation of weapons of
mass destruction threaten to increase the potential arsenal for terror.
In testimony before the Armed Services Committee, witnesses have
explained, as you can well imagine, the possible devastation which
could be inflicted through skilled use of modern technologies. What
have been violent attacks with rudimentary car bombs, may very well
soon be attacks of apocalyptic proportions.
A few days ago, Representative Frank Wolf, an outstanding Member of
the House from just across the Potomac and able member of the
Commonwealth's delegation, presented to me this legislation to address
the challenges of the terrorism threat. His bill has been accepted by
the House of Representatives and will be a conference item by the
Appropriations Committee. I present this legislation to my colleagues
in the Senate for consideration and deliberation.
The legislation assembles 15 distinguished experts in the field of
terrorism, including three Congressmen and three Senators. Their goal
will be to review and assess United States policies on terrorism, from
basic understanding to appropriate response, and recommend changes as
warranted. This initiative is not intended as an attack on existing
policy, but a means to enhance our understanding of one of the
principal threats to stability in the millennium and focus every
available resource to eliminate the threat.
I urge my colleagues to review this important legislation.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that excerpts from President
Clinton's address to the United Nations be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the excerpts where ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
Remarks by the President to the Opening Session of the 53rd United
Nations General Assembly
The President. * * * We still are bedeviled by ethnic,
racial, religious and tribal hatreds; by the spread of
weapons of mass destruction; by the almost frantic effort of
too many states to acquire such weapons; and, despite all
efforts to contain it, terrorism is not fading away with the
end of the 20th century. It is a continuing defiance of
Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which
says, ``Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security
of person.''
* * * * *
Obviously this is a matter of profound concern to us. In
the last 15 years our citizens have been targeted over and
over again--in Beirut, over Lockerbie, in Saudi Arabia, at
home in Oklahoma City by one of our own citizens, and even
here in New York in one of our most public buildings, and
most recently on August 7th in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam,
where Americans who devoted their lives to building bridges
between nations, people very much like all of you, died in a
campaign of hatred against the United States.
* * * * *
If terrorism is at the top of the American agenda--and
should be at the top of the world's agenda--what, then are
the concrete steps we can take together to protect our common
destiny. What are our common obligations? At least, I believe
they are these: to give terrorists no support, no sanctuary,
no financial assistance; to bring pressure on states that do;
to act together to step up extradition and prosecution; to
sign the Global Anti-Terror Conventions; to strengthen the
Biological Weapons and Chemical Convention; to enforce the
Chemical Weapons Convention; to promote stronger domestic
laws and control the manufacture and export of explosives; to
raise international standards for airport security, to combat
the conditions that spread violence and despair.
* * * * *
______
By Mr. McCAIN (for himself, Mr. Thurmond, Mr. Burns, and Mrs.
Hutchison):
S. 2507. A bill to stimulate increased domestic cruise ship
opportunities for the American cruising public by temporarily reducing
barriers for entry into the domestic cruise ship trade; to the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
The United States Cruise Ship Tourism Act of 1998
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, today I, with Senators Thurmond,
Burns, and Hutchison, introduce the United States Cruise Ship Tourism
Act of 1998. The purpose of this bill is to stimulate increased
domestic cruise vessel opportunities for the American cruising public
by temporarily reducing barriers for entry into the domestic cruise
ship trade.
The oceangoing cruise ship industry offers the American cruising
public with a multitude of itineraries in international trade. However,
due to barriers to entry such as the Passenger Vessel Services Act,
large cruise ship domestic trade options are limited to one oceangoing
cruise ship in Hawaii. Also, the U.S. port calls of these international
itineraries are heavily concentrated in Florida and Alaska due to the
proximity of these states to neighboring countries. This means that
America's cruising public is denied the opportunity to cruise to many
attractive U.S. port destinations, and those ports are denied the
economic benefits of those visits, due to these domestic cruise ship
trade barriers to entry.
Three separate bills addressing the domestic cruise ship trade have
been referred to the Commerce Committee this Congress: S. 668, S. 803,
and S. 2290. Each of these bills takes a different approach to removing
barriers and stimulating growth in this area. Senator Hutchison, the
Chairman of the Subcommittee on Surface Transportation and Merchant
Marine, held a hearing last year on this subject. I would prefer we
take the approach proposed in S. 803, of which I am a cosponsor, but I
understand that bill does not address the concerns of some other
members. We have been working with representatives of all industries
concerned with this legislation for several months in an attempt to
reach a consensus on this issue.
While a consensus has not yet been achieved, I believe it is time to
take another step forward in the legislative process. My bill would
allow the Secretary of Transportation to waive certain current
coastwise trade restrictions on a limited basis to stimulate the
domestic cruise ship trade. I expect some of my colleagues on the on
the Commerce Committee may want to make additional changes to this bill
in Committee. I look forward to working these issues out with them in
the next week so that we may report this bill to the Senate later this
month.
I believe it is important for this Congress to take action on this
issue this year. We should maximize the economic growth potential of
the domestic cruise ship trade and the cruising opportunities for
America's public.
____
By Mr. WYDEN:
S. 2509. A bill to provide further protections for the watershed of
the Little Sandy River as part of the Bull Run Watershed Management
Unit, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources.
LITTLE SANDY WATERSHED PROTECTION
Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I am today, along with Congressman
Blumenauer in the U.S. House, introducing legislation to make sure that
in the next century the children of Portland can go to their kitchen
faucet and take a glass of drinking water that is as safe and pure as
any that the pioneers found when they got here.
Why protect the Little Sandy? The answer is as clear as the water in
that stream. Essentially, what we are proposing is to finish the job
begun two years ago with passage of the Oregon Resources and
Conservation Act of
[[Page S10724]]
1996, which brought statutory protection to the Bull Run Watershed.
Portland's city fathers acted in 1890 to protect Bull Run, and it is
fitting that we continue that effort today. More than one-third of the
Little Sandy watershed has already been logged; clearly, this drainage
has already been pushed, and pushed hard, in terms of past timber
harvest.
The protection our bill would offer will not only affect clean
drinking water, but salmon recovery as well. I am hopeful that this
legislation will become an important part of our region's approach to
restoring steelhead habitat.
Finally, I want to commend the leadership of Mayor Vera Katz,
Commissioner Erik Sten, and former Commissioner Mike Lindberg, whose
vision for Portland's future laid the foundation for the introduction
of this bill.
I first introduced legislation to protect the Little Sandy when I was
in the House. In passing the Oregon Resource Conservation Act of 1996,
I made a compromise with Senator Hatfield in which we would designate
the Bull Run Watershed Management Unit as a protected area that is off
limits to commercial timber harvest, and designate the Little Sandy as
a study area. I am now asking the Congress to approve the addition of
the Little Sandy study area to the Bull Run Management Unit, and to be
subject to the management prescriptions which were established under
the ORCA governing the Bull Run.
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. 2509
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. INCLUSION OF ADDITIONAL PORTION OF THE LITTLE
SANDY RIVER WATERSHED IN THE BULL RUN WATERSHED
MANAGEMENT UNIT, OREGON.
(a) In General.--Public law 95-200 (16 U.S.C. 482b note) is
amended by striking section 1 and inserting the following:
``SECTION 1. ESTABLISHMENT OF SPECIAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
UNIT; DEFINITION OF SECRETARY.
``(a) Establishment.--
``(1) In general.--There is established, subject to valid
existing rights, a special resources management unit in the
State of Oregon comprising approximately 98,272 acres, as
depicted on a map dated September, 1998, and entitled `Bull
Run Watershed Management Unit'.
``(2) Map.--The map described in paragraph (1) shall be on
file and available for public inspection in the offices of
the Regional Forester-Pacific Northwest Region, Forest
Service, Department of Agriculture, and in the offices of the
State Director, Bureau of Land Management, Department of the
Interior.
``(3) Boundary adjustments.--Minor adjustments in the
boundaries of the unit may be made from time to time by the
Secretary after consultation with the city and appropriate
public notice and hearings.
``(b) Definition of Secretary.--In this Act, the term
`Secretary' means--
``(1) with respect to land administered by the Secretary of
Agriculture, the Secretary of Agriculture; and
``(2) with respect to land administered by the Secretary of
the Interior, the Secretary of the Interior.''.
(b) Conforming and Technical Amendments.--
(1) Secretary.--Public Law 95-200 (16 U.S.C. 482b note) is
amended by striking ``Secretary of Agriculture'' each place
it appears (except subsection (b) of section 1, as added by
subsection (a), and except in the amendments made by
paragraph (2)) and inserting ``Secretary''.
(A) In general.--Section 2(a) of Public Law 95-200 (16
U.S.C. 482b note) is amended by striking ``applicable to
National Forest System lands'' and inserting ``applicable to
National Forest System land (in the case of land administered
by the Secretary of Agriculture) or applicable to land under
the administrative jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land
Management (in the case of land administered by the Secretary
of the Interior)''.
(B) Management plans.--The first sentence of section 2(c)
of Public Law 95-200 (16 U.S.C. 482b note) is amended--
(i) by striking ``subsection (a) or (b)'' and inserting
``subsections (a) and (b)''; and
(ii) by striking ``, through the maintenance'' and
inserting ``(in the case of land administered by the
Secretary of Agriculture) or section 202 of the Federal Land
Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1712) (in the
case of land administered by the Secretary of the Interior),
through the maintenance.''.
SEC. 2. MANAGEMENT.
(a) Timber Harvesting Restrictions.--Section 2(b) of Public
Law 95-200 (16 U.S.C. 482b note) is amended by striking
paragraph (1) and inserting the following:
``(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), the Secretary
shall prohibit the cutting of trees on Federal land in the
entire unit, as designated in section 1 and depicted on the
map referred to in that section.''.
(b) Repeal of Management Exception.--The Oregon Resource
Conservation Act of 1996 (division B of Public Law 104-208)
is amended by striking section 606 (110 Stat. 3009-543).
(c) Repeal of Duplicative Enactment.--Section 1026 of
division I of the Omnibus Parks and Public Lands Management
Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-333, 110 Stat. 4228) and the
amendments made by that section are repealed.
(d) Water Rights.--Nothing in this section strengthens,
diminishes, or has any other effect on water rights held by
any person or entity.
SEC. 3. LAND EXCHANGE.
(a) Land Exchange.--Upon application by the city of
Portland, Oregon (referred to in this section as the
``city''), the Secretary of Agriculture shall enter into
negotiations with the city for the transfer of National
Forest System land underlying the city's Bull Run water
supply facilities to the city in exchange for city-owned land
lying within the boundaries of any unit of the National
Forest System in Oregon or Washington.
(b) Time for Exchange.--Subject to subsection (c), the
Secretary shall expedite the negotiations, if the city
applies for a land exchange under subsection (a), and shall
complete such a land exchange not later than September 30,
2001.
(c) Applicability of Other Laws.--Except as provided in
subsection (d), any land exchange under this section shall be
carried out in accordance with section 206 of the Federal
Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1716) and
other applicable law.
(d) Exception to Single State Limitation on Exchange.--The
requirement that Federal and non-Federal parcels of land
exchanged for each other must be located within the same
State, as specified in the Act entitled ``An Act to
Consolidate National Forest Lands'', approved March 20, 1922
(16 U.S.C. 485), and the first sentence of section 206(b) of
the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C.
1716(b)), shall not apply to the land exchange authorized by
this section.
______
By Mr. LUGAR (for himself and Mr. Harkin) (by request):
S. 2511. A bill to authorize the Secretary of Agriculture to pay
employees of the Food Safety and Inspection Service working in
establishments subject to the Federal Meat Inspection Act and the
Poultry Products Inspection Act for overtime and holiday work performed
by the employees; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and
Forestry.
federal meat and poultry employees pay act of 1998
Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, today I introduce legislation, by
request, to modify the overtime pay for meat inspectors who are
veterinarians. Senator Harkin, the ranking minority member of the
Senate Agriculture Committee, has joined as a cosponsor.
This legislation was transmitted to Congress by the U.S. Department
of Agriculture earlier this year. As drafted, the bill would provide
the Secretary of Agriculture with the authority to pay Food Safety and
Inspection Service employees, working in plants subject to federal meat
or poultry inspection, for overtime and holiday work at rates
determined by the Secretary.
Due to an anomaly in current law, meat inspectors who are
veterinarians receive lower pay for overtime hours than they receive
for regular hours. These veterinarians are seeking true overtime pay of
1\1/2\ times their hourly rate without a cap on the rate.
While the Federal Meat Inspection Act allows the U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA) to provide overtime pay at rates determined by USDA,
the Poultry Products Inspection Act does not provide this authority.
The legislation introduced today would allow USDA to pay overtime for
veterinarians at rates determined by USDA. Clearly an inequity exists
for veterinarians who work overtime.
I am pleased to introduce this legislation at the request of the U.S.
Department of Agriculture. I look forward to hearing the views of my
colleagues about this legislation and will seek opportunities to move
this bill through the legislative process.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record a
copy of the transmittal letter from the Secretary of Agriculture.
There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
[[Page S10725]]
Department of Agriculture,
Office of the Secretary,
Washington, DC, March 23, 1998.
Hon. Albert Gore, Jr.,
President of the Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. President: This letter transmits, for the
consideration of the Congress, a draft bill ``To provide the
Secretary of Agriculture with the authority to pay employees
of the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) working in
establishments subject to the Federal Meat Inspection Act and
the Poultry Products Inspection Act for overtime and holiday
work performed by such employees at rates the Secretary deems
appropriate'' that the Department of Agriculture (USDA)
recommends be enacted.
The proposed legislation would provide the Secretary of
Agriculture with the discretion to pay employees of FSIS,
working in establishments subject to the Federal Meat
Inspection Act (FMIA) and the Poultry Products Inspection Act
(PPIA), for overtime and holiday work at rates determined by
the Secretary.
Under current authorities, the Secretary is authorized to
pay employees performing inspection under the FMIA for
overtime work at rates the Secretary determines. However, no
similar authority exists for employees performing inspection
under the PPIA. Further, because current law caps overtime
rates for Federal veterinarians working in poultry
establishments, those at the higher steps of the Federal pay
scale receive an hourly overtime rate less than their hourly
rate of basic pay.
The draft bill will eliminate the potential inequity
between FSIS veterinarians providing inspection services
under the FMIA and the PPIA and will provide the Secretary
with the authority to compensate appropriately FSIS
veterinarians performing inspections in meat and poultry
establishments.
Enactment of the legislation would cost FSIS approximately
$300,000 per year to cover situations when the veterinarian
is on overtime but the establishment is not. The Department
believes that it will be able to absorb these additional
costs within current budgetary levels. When an establishment
is in an overtime status, it must reimburse USDA for the
overtime at rates determined by the Secretary.
Enactment of this proposed legislation would have no
significant effect on the quality of the human environment.
The Office of Management and Budget advises that there is
no objection to the presentation to Congress of this proposed
legislation from the standpoint of the Administration's
program.
A similar letter is being sent to the Speaker of the House.
Sincerely,
Dan Glickman, Secretary.
______
By Mr. COCHRAN:
S. 2508. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to
impose conditions on the implementation of the interim payment system
for home health services furnished by home health agencies under the
Medicare Program and to modify the standards for calculating the per
beneficiary payment limits under such payment system, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
homebound elderly relief opportunity act of 1998
Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, today I am introducing the ``Homebound
Elderly Relief Opportunity Act of 1998'' (HERO). This measure addresses
a very serious concern: the future of home care within the Medicare
system.
For Mississippians, home health has had a two-fold benefit: Home care
serves to reduce costly hospitalization stays while enhancing the
patient's quality of life through continued stay in the familiar home
setting.
Additionally, in a rural state like Mississippi, home health has
enabled health care to be delivered to the immobile and elderly who are
often miles and hours from the nearest hospital or clinic.
Despite these obvious benefits, home health is very expensive,
however. With Medicare and government expenditures, it is not always a
question of ``What we should afford?'' but ``What we can afford?''
Congress answered these questions with the Balanced Budget Act of
1997, which has brought fiscal responsibility back to government. BBA
97 dealt with among other issues, Medicare, and in turn home health,
probably the fastest growing expenditure within the program. The work
of Senator Roth and the Finance Committee has helped insure some
stability in home health expenditures, so that a good thing does not
quickly become a bad thing and bankrupt the trust fund. However,
instead of saving this vital Medicare benefit, HCFA's application of
the Balanced Budget Act to home health--through the use of the Interim
Payment System--has threatened its very existence. In so doing, HCFA
has ignored both equity and the elderly, particularly in rural America.
The Senate has not completely ignored the home health crisis: Sixty-
eight of my colleagues have made statements which appear with their
photographs on a recent industry poster proclaiming the ills of HCFA's
interim payment system and its threat to the continuation of home
health services.
Five of my colleagues--Senators Grassley and Breaux; Senator Bond;
Senator Collins; and Senator Kennedy have each introduced bills to
adjust or eliminate IPS. Senator Bond has been the Senate champion of
saving home health. His Senate Bill 2354, of which I am cosponsor,
provides a direct, honest response to the HCFA-created nightmare. His
bill would impose a moratorium on IPS from fiscal year 1998 forward
until HCFA develops the prospective payment system, the only sure way
to solve the home health expenditure issue in a fair manner. However,
the Moratorium Bill's cost has been scored by CBO to be in the many
many billions. While we must save home health, we cannot do so in a way
that jeopardizes all of Medicare. We must find a compromise. That is
the purpose of introducing HERO today.
The HERO Bill is an effort to correct the essential problems with the
interim payment system and to create a better bridge to the prospective
payment system which we all hope will be developed and implemented
soon. I believe it provides the best opportunity for success with
respect to Government spending, Medicare reimbursement, and protecting
beneficiaries.
It establishes budget limits for Medicare home health expenditures
for 1999-2002 with the same savings levels currently projected by the
Congressional Budget Office under the Balanced Budget Act of 1997
provisions. If expenditure estimates exceed the budget limits, payments
to providers will be limited to regional levels on an equitable basis.
Finally, it insures access to home care for all qualified Medicare
beneficiaries.
Overall, this bill provides one last opportunity in this session for
all home health beneficiaries to receive the Medicare benefit to which
they are entitled and for the providers of those services to be fairly
reimbursed. It corrects the essential flaw in the original payment
reform which rewarded the inefficient and punished the efficient
providers and failed to account for the variation in the types of
patients served by home health agencies. However, this bill operates
with budgetary and operational safeguards to insure that the home
health benefit stays on its steady course.
Mr. President, Congress must reform IPS immediately before even more
reputable home health agencies are forced out of business and more
seniors are forced to go without care or leave their homes for more
expensive hospital or nursing home care. I urge Senators to support
this bill.
____________________