[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 140 (Thursday, October 8, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12022-S12023]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                         THE YEAR 2000 PROBLEM

 Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I rise today to express my 
great concern about the Year 2000 computer problem, and to urge that 
funding be approved on an emergency basis to address this problem.
  Mr. President, in less than 500 days, an unknown number of computers 
around the world will fail because they can't tell the difference 
between the year 1900 and the year 2000. Although this may seem like a 
minor problem that could be easily fixed, it is not. It's time 
consuming, difficult, and expensive to address. And the implications of 
failure are enormous.
  We have known about the Year 2000 problem for some time, Mr. 
President, but many have failed to appreciate its severity. Throughout 
the private and public sectors, top officials assumed that someone else 
would find a solution. Or they simply did not appreciate the importance 
of making this problem a priority.
  Fortunately, Mr. President, many in the private sector are now taking 
this threat seriously. One Federal Reserve official speculated that 
private sector spending on the problem could exceed $50 billion. While 
many small businesses are just beginning to face the problem, most 
major large businesses are acting aggressively. Banks, utilities, 
hospitals, factories, insurance companies, and railroads are scrambling 
to ensure that they will be ready. Many understand that this truly is 
an emergency, and they're treating it that way.
  Still, I am afraid that most Americans still do not appreciate the 
severity of the Y2K problem. And I would urge all those listening to 
educate themselves about it. Admittedly, it is very difficult for most 
of us to evaluate the risks. But many credible experts have discussed 
scenarios that are truly alarming.
  Consider, for example, the impact of the Y2K problem on public 
utilities. Senators Bennett and Dodd, the co-chairs of the Senate 
Special Committee on the Year 2000 Technology Problem, have held a 
hearing on this, and I commend both of them for their leadership. Their 
Committee surveyed major utilities and found that many are far from 
ready for the year 2000. The Committee's work raises very serious 
questions about the risks of major power outages throughout our 
country, and the impact of such outages on our financial and 
telecommunications systems. Indeed, the essential infrastructure of our 
nation could be at risk.
  Largely because of such threats, some economists have argued that the 
Year 2000 problem is likely to lead to a severe recession. Some see a 
parallel to the downturn of the 1970's when oil supplies were 
disrupted. In fact, quick and reliable computing may be even more 
important to our economy than oil was two decades ago. Without reliable 
computer information, as without oil, production and distribution 
systems could break down. And that could dramatically increase 
unemployment, interest rates and inflation, all at the same time.
  Now, Mr. President, I'm not saying that this is bound to happen. 
Experts disagree about the likelihood of major economic and social 
dislocations. However, even if the odds of a significant breakdown are 
modest, the potential enormity of the problem demands that we take it 
seriously.
  I do know from my own experience that software problems can be 
terribly serious and difficult to address. Before I came to public 
life, I was an executive in a computer services firm, a firm that has 
been quite successful. I can tell you that nothing is more vexing than 
a seemingly insignificant software glitch that grinds an entire program 
to a halt. Fixing such a glitch can require laborious, line-by-line 
examination of impenetrable computer code. Meanwhile, everything is 
often brought to a standstill.
  While analysts may disagree about the scope of the Y2K problem, Mr. 
President, it does seem clear that some things will go wrong on January 
1, 2000. We just can't say exactly which, or how many. Compounding 
matters, even if one system has had its Y2K problems fixed, it still 
can be corrupted by interacting with other systems that are flawed. We 
have a systemic problem--and it will only be solved if all of us work 
together.
  What is the government's role in all this? Well, our first 
responsibility is to put our own house in order.

[[Page S12023]]

  As the General Accounting Office has reported, Y2K could have a 
devastating impact on the provision of public services. These include 
air traffic control, Social Security and Medicare payments, supervision 
of the financial system, monitoring of nuclear facilities, and a wide 
variety of other services. And let's not forget the Nation's defense. 
We are all proud of our modern military with its smart weapons and 
computerized battlefields. But a technology-dependent military is 
subject to the same computer hazards as everyone else.
  Unfortunately, Mr. President, many agencies are way behind schedule 
in fixing the Y2K problem. According to GAO, ``unless agency progress 
improves dramatically, a substantial number of mission-critical systems 
will not be compliant in time.''
  So, Mr. President, this is truly an emergency, and it's critical that 
we act as soon as possible. Unlike many problems we face in the 
Congress, this one can't be delayed or postponed. We can't set up a 
commission. We can't put it off until the next Congress. On January 1, 
2000, the problem will hit, whether we like it or not. And we have to 
do everything we can to prepare.
  Mr. President, let me commend my colleagues on the Appropriations 
Committee, and throughout the Senate, for approving emergency funding 
to address the Y2K problem. I wish we had done so earlier. 
Unfortunately, there are many Members in the House of Representatives 
who strongly oppose treating this funding as an emergency. And they 
have created serious obstacles to allocating the funding. I urge them 
to reconsider their opposition, and am hopeful they will.
  Beyond increasing funding, Mr. President, there are other steps that 
the Federal government must consider to address the Y2K problem. For 
example, we need to reform laws that discourage businesses from sharing 
relevant information with each other. We need to ensure that businesses 
accurately report on their compliance efforts to the SEC and investors. 
We need to support small businesses' efforts to fix their computers. I 
have actively supported these types of legislative initiatives. But I 
recognize that they are not sufficient. We also need to communicate 
better with our constituents about the problem, so that all Americans 
can prepare.
  Mr. President, given differing views on the actual risks, the only 
wise thing is to prepare for the worst. When a hurricane approaches, we 
never know exactly where it will hit, or how destructive it will be. 
But that doesn't stop us from evacuating and boarding up our homes in 
expectation of the worst case scenario. Sometimes, those preparations 
prove unnecessary. And, if the hurricane does hit, there will also be 
cleanup costs later. But the better one prepares, the more efficient, 
and less expensive, the cleanup will be. And the same is true for Y2K.
  So, Mr. President, I would strongly urge this Congress to focus 
serious attention on Y2K, and to strongly support all funding needed to 
solve the problem. This is an emergency, and the time to act is now. We 
shouldn't panic. But we must prepare. Even if nobody knows the exact 
dimensions of the problem, this is one threat that we ignore at our 
peril.

                          ____________________