[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 145 (Tuesday, October 13, 1998)]
[House]
[Pages H10717-H10723]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
{time} 1230
YEAR 2000 PREPAREDNESS ACT OF 1998
Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 4756) to ensure that the United States is prepared to meet
the Year 2000 computer problem, as amended.
The Clerk read as follows:
H.R. 4756
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Year 2000 Preparedness Act
of 1998''.
SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.
For purposes of this Act--
(1) the term ``end-to-end testing'' means testing data
exchange software with respect to--
(A) the initiation of the exchange by sending computers;
(B) transmission through intermediate communications
software and hardware; and
(C) receipt and acceptance by receiving computers;
(2) the term ``small and medium-sized businesses'' means
businesses with less than 500 employees;
(3) the term ``Year 2000 compliant'' means, with respect to
information technology, that the information technology
accurately processes (including calculating, comparing, and
sequencing) date and time data from, into, and between the
20th and 21st centuries and the years 1999 and 2000, and leap
year calculations, to the extent that other information
technology properly exchanges date and time data with it;
(4) the term ``Year 2000 computer problem'' means, with
respect to information technology, any problem which prevents
such technology from accurately processing, calculating,
comparing, or sequencing date or time data--
(A) from, into, or between--
(i) the 20th and 21st centuries; or
(ii) the years 1999 and 2000;
(B) with regard to leap year calculations; or
(C) with regard to such other dates as the Year 2000
Conversion Council may identify and designate; and
(5) the term ``Year 2000 Conversion Council'' means the
President's Council on Year 2000 Conversion established under
section 2 of Executive Order No. 13073, issued on February 4,
1998;
SEC. 3. CRITICAL GOVERNMENT SERVICES.
The President shall provide for the acceleration of the
development of business continuity plans by Federal agencies
necessary to ensure the uninterrupted delivery by those
agencies of critical mission-related services.
SEC. 4. SENSE OF CONGRESS.
It is the sense of the Congress that--
(1) the President should take a high profile national
leadership position to aggressively promote Year 2000 date
change awareness for information technology systems and
sensitive infrastructure applications;
(2) the President should authorize the Chair of the Year
2000 Conversion Council to take a leadership role in
resolving Year 2000 issues in any critical Federal civilian
agency system that is in jeopardy because of ineffective
management of not meeting the January 1, 2000, deadline with
respect to the Year 2000 computer problem;
(3) consistent with the spirit of the Government
Performance and Results Act of 1993, the Chair of the Year
2000 Conversion
[[Page H10718]]
Council, in consultation with the President's Council on
Infrastructure Assurance, officers of the Federal Government
and of State and local governments, and representatives of
the private sector, should work toward a national strategy to
assure that the critical infrastructures and key sectors of
the economy will be prepared for the Year 2000 date change,
with such strategy including, for each sector, goals
appropriate to each;
(4) the Chair of the Year 2000 Conversion Council is making
a significant contribution to Year 2000 computer problem
awareness by scheduling a National Y2K Action Week for
October 19 through 23, 1998;
(5) the Small Business Administration, the Department of
Commerce, the Department of Agriculture, and other
appropriate Federal agencies should undertake maximum efforts
to assist American family businesses and farmers in assessing
their exposure to the Year 2000 computer problem, undertaking
the necessary remedial steps, and formulating contingency
plans; and
(6) State and local governments, as well as private sector
industry groups and companies, should find ways to
participate in this effort to prepare the American economy
for the year 2000.
SEC. 5. AGENCY REPORTS.
All Federal agency reports to the Office of Management and
Budget relating to the Year 2000 computer problem shall be
concurrently transmitted to the Congress, including all
Federal agency monthly submissions to the Office of
Management and Budget.
SEC. 6. GUIDELINES.
The Chair of the Year 2000 Conversion Council is encouraged
to develop, in consultation with industry, guidelines of best
practices and standards for remediation and validation with
respect to the Year 2000 computer problem to provide better
direction for government and private sector efforts.
SEC. 7. NATIONAL ASSESSMENT OF YEAR 2000 COMPUTER PROBLEM.
The Chair of the Year 2000 Conversion Council shall submit
to the Congress any national assessment of the Year 2000
computer problem, conducted through or in conjunction with
the Year 2000 Conversion Council, covering all critical
national infrastructures and key sectors of the economy,
including banking and finance, energy, telecommunications,
transportation, and vital human services which protect the
public health and safety, the water supply, housing and
public buildings, and the environment.
SEC. 8. FEDERAL AGENCY ACTIONS.
To ensure that all computer operations and processing can
be provided without interruption by Federal agencies after
December 31, 1999, the head of each Federal agency shall--
(1) take actions necessary to ensure that all systems and
hardware administered by the agency are Year 2000 compliant,
to the extent necessary to ensure that no significant
disruption of the operations of the agency or of the agency's
data exchange partners occurs, including--
(A) establishing, before March 1, 1999, schedules for
testing and implementing new data exchange formats for
completing all data exchange corrections, which may include
national test days for end-to-end testing of critical
processes and associated data exchanges affecting Federal,
State, and local governments;
(B) notifying data exchange partners of the implications to
the agency and the exchange partners if they do not make
appropriate date conversion corrections in time to meet the
Federal schedule for implementing and testing Year 2000
compliant data exchange processes;
(C) giving priority to installing filters necessary to
prevent the corruption of mission-critical systems from data
exchanges with noncompliant systems; and
(D) developing and implementing, as part of the agency's
continuity and contingency planning efforts, specific
provisions for data exchanges that may fail, including
strategies to mitigate operational disruptions if data
exchange partners do not make timely date conversion
corrections;
(2) beginning not later than 30 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, convene meetings at least quarterly
with representatives of the agency's data exchange partners
to assess implementation progress; and
(3) after each meeting convened pursuant to paragraph (2),
transmit to the Congress a report summarizing--
(A) the results of that meeting; and
(B) the status of the agency's completion of key data
exchange corrections, including the extent of data exchange
inventoried, an assessment of data exchange formats agreed to
with data exchange partners, testing and implementation
schedules, and testing and implementation completed.
SEC. 9. ASSISTANCE FOR SMALL AND MEDIUM-SIZED BUSINESSES.
To ensure that the Nation's small and medium-sized
businesses are prepared to meet the Year 2000 computer
problem challenge, the National Institute of Standards and
Technology, in conjunction with the Small Business
Administration, shall develop a Year 2000 compliance outreach
program to assist small and medium-sized businesses. Such
program shall include--
(1) the development of a Year 2000 self-assessment
checklist;
(2) an explanation of the Year 2000 computer problem and an
identification of best practices for resolving the problem;
(3) a list of Federal Government Year 2000 information
resources; and
(4) a list of Year 2000 compliant products provided by the
General Services Administration.
SEC. 10. CONSUMER AWARENESS.
To ensure that the Nation's consumers are aware of and
prepared to meet the Year 2000 computer problem challenge,
the Under Secretary of Commerce for Technology, in
consultation with the Consumer Product Safety Commission and
the Federal Trade Commission, shall develop a Year 2000
consumer awareness program to assist the public in becoming
aware of the implications of the Year 2000 computer problem.
Such program shall include--
(1) the development of a Year 2000 self-assessment
checklist;
(2) a list of Federal Government Year 2000 computer problem
information resources;
(3) a list of Year 2000 compliant products provided by the
General Services Administration;
(4) a series of public awareness announcements or seminars
on the impact of the Year 2000 computer problem on consumer
products and services; and
(5) a series of public awareness announcements or seminars
on the potential effect that the Year 2000 computer problem
could have on the provision of services by the Federal
Government to the public, and the progress made in resolving
the problem by the Federal agencies providing those services.
]The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Shimkus). Pursuant to the rule, the
gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella) and the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Barcia) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella).
General Leave
Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on H.R.
4756.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentlewoman from Maryland?
There was no objection.
Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I think we all know the dangers that lurk around the
corner if we fail to take the action necessary to fix the Year 2000
computer problem. We all know that time is running out. We are
competing in a race against time to avert an impending computer
catastrophe. If we do not act fast, we will be ringing in the beginning
of the new millennium with the mother of all computer glitches. If
computers around the world will think that it is the Year 1900 when it
is the Year 2000, millions of computer programs as well as products
that use a computer microchip may be in jeopardy, billions of dollars
may be lost and just about every human on the planet will be affected.
Affected will be critical government functions such as air traffic
control systems, veterans' benefits, Social Security and student loans,
as well as the everyday conveniences of modern life, like home security
systems, video recorders and elevators in high-rise buildings.
Additionally our energy utilities, the financial service industry, the
telecommunications industry, vital modes of transportation and
virtually every critical indispensable industrial sector could be
adversely affected. By failing to address the Y2K problem, our Nation
is in danger of being plunged into a catastrophic economic recession
with severe business disruptions in the delivery of essential
government and private industry services.
We in Congress have been working diligently over the past 2\1/2\
years to raise the Nation's awareness and to push our Federal
Government as well as State and local governments and private industry
for immediate corrective action. We have aggressively pursued Year 2000
issues through legislation requiring a National Federal Y2K strategy
and prohibiting the purchase of information technology which is not Y2K
compliant. We have also conducted an ongoing series of hearings and
provided attentive oversight on government and industry Y2K efforts.
Yet despite all of our efforts we have great concern that our Nation
may simply not be moving with the required alacrity to be Year 2000
compliant by the new millennium.
While the Federal agencies and the private sector have been
scrambling to avert a disaster, our hearings and reports demonstrate
they are not scrambling fast enough. If our Nation does not develop a
greater sense of urgency and if we do not take immediate aggressive
action, the Federal Government will be risking the delivery of vital
services or functions that are
[[Page H10719]]
critical to the health, safety and welfare of the American public. With
just 450 days before January 1, 2000, we need to take more direct
action.
Since the Speaker established a House Year 2000 Task Force, which I
cochair along with the gentleman from California (Mr. Horn) for the
majority and with the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Barcia) and the
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich) for the minority, we have been
attempting to move our Nation's Year 2000 efforts forward. The creation
of this task force underscores the House's commitment to correct the
Y2K problem, and will begin to build on the extensive work the House
has already started through the committees. The House Y2K Task Force is
intended to coordinate all House initiatives and be the counterpart to
the Senate Special Committee on the Year 2000 Technology Problem which
is chaired by Senator Bennett of Utah.
The formation of the House Y2K Task Force has allowed us to
collaborate more effectively with our Senate colleagues to expedite
oversight and legislative measures to ensure that both government and
private industry are moving forward with the necessary dispatch to
correct the problem in a timely manner. To that end, along with the
assistance of the majority leader's office, we have been successful in
engaging virtually every one of our committees to hold hearings
reviewing the potential Y2K impact on agencies and programs within
their jurisdiction. To this date the House has held over 40 hearings on
the Year 2000. As a result, we have a well-documented need for taking
the enhanced measures contained in H.R. 4756, the bill before us.
H.R. 4756 seeks to ensure that the United States is prepared to meet
the Year 2000 computer problem. What the bill does is it urges the
President to provide for the acceleration of business continuity plans
to ensure uninterrupted delivery of Federal services and programs; it
urges the President to take a high profile national leadership position
to aggressively promote Y2K; it enhances congressional oversight by
providing that all agency reports be submitted to Congress; it codifies
certain recommendations made by the General Accounting Office regarding
electronic data exchanges which GAO has identified as critical to Y2K
compliance; it provides for Y2K assistance for small and medium-sized
businesses; and it develops a Y2K consumer awareness program.
H.R. 4756 is essentially an amalgamation of three introduced Year
2000 bills and incorporates certain provisions from each bill. H.R.
4706 is included, the Year 2000 Preparedness Act, which I introduced;
H.R. 4682, the Year 2000 Act, introduced by the gentleman from Michigan
(Mr. Barcia) the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Technology; and
H.R. 3968, the National Year 2000 Critical Infrastructure Readiness
Act, introduced by the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Leach), chair of the
Committee on Banking and Financial Services. This is a very important
bill that addresses a number of our concerns and problems.
Special thanks to our staff who helped enormously: Ben Wu, Joe
Pinder, Cindy Sprunger, Harrison Fox and Mike Quear.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BARCIA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume,
and I thank the gentlewoman from Maryland for her comments.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 4756, the Year
2000 Preparedness Act. This legislation is the product, as has just
been mentioned, of the bipartisan efforts of the Science, Banking and
Government Reform and Oversight Committees. In addition, I want to
commend Mr. Koskinen, chair of the President's Y2K Conversion Council,
for working with us to craft legislation that we could bring to the
floor expeditiously. Working together, we were able to address the need
for greater Y2K information among consumers and small business. I want
to also thank the gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella) as well as
the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Leach), the gentleman from New York (Mr.
LaFalce), the gentleman from California (Mr. Horn) and the gentleman
from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich) for including the provisions of H.R. 4682, a
bill I introduced on a bipartisan basis with 11 of my colleagues last
week. The provisions in H.R. 4682 have three very specific goals:
First, to raise the consumer awareness and create a consumer Y2K
checklist; secondly, to raise the Y2K awareness in small and medium-
sized businesses; and, thirdly, to create a Y2K self-assessment
checklist for the Nation's small and medium-sized companies as well as
to require Federal agencies that have worked with outside entities to
ensure that all date sensitive data exchanges are Year 2000 compliant.
As a member of the House Y2K Task Force and the ranking member on the
Subcommittee on Technology, I have found that many people do not know
how Y2K will impact them nor do they know what specific actions they
can take to minimize the impact of the Y2K problem on their everyday
lives. This bill requires the Under Secretary for Technology at the
Department of Commerce in consultation with the Federal Trade
Commission and the Consumer Protection Agency to develop a Year 2000
self-assessment checklist for consumers, provide a list of Federal
Government Year 2000 computer problem resources, a list of Year 2000
compliant products provided by the GSA, and conduct a series of public
awareness announcements or seminars on the impact of the Y2K problem on
consumer products and services. These goals are consistent with the
recommendations made by witnesses who have appeared before the
Subcommittee on Technology. I am confident that with the right
information, consumers will be able to make those decisions necessary
to minimize the disruption the Y2K problem may pose.
The situation at small and medium-sized businesses mirrors that of
consumers. The Nation's more than 381,000 small and medium-sized
manufacturers contribute more than half of the country's total value in
manufacturing. However, as of 1997, 88 percent of all companies with
fewer than 2,000 employees had not yet started Year 2000 remediation
projects. Small and medium-sized companies are an integral part of the
business supply chain. They are increasingly reliant on computer
applications for manufacturing operations, accounting and billing
practices, and meeting just-in-time order and delivery concepts. To
assist our small and medium-sized manufacturers in meeting the Y2K
challenge, this bill requires that the National Institute of Standards
and Technology's highly successful Manufacturing Extension Partnership
program, working with the Small Business Administration, identify the
best practices to attack the problem, develop a Year 2000 self-
assessment checklist, and list all Federal Government Y2K resources
including the General Service's listing of Y2K compliant products.
Federal agencies make thousands of date sensitive data exchanges
every day. These data exchanges include Social Security and Medicare
information, information related to the air traffic control system
which the distinguished gentlewoman just mentioned so eloquently in her
remarks, and other important financial transactions. Data exchange
partners include State and local governments, Federal contractors and
the private sector. As Federal computer systems are converted to
process Year 2000 dates, the associated data exchanges must also be
made Year 2000 compliant. The testing and implementation of Year 2000
compliant data exchanges must be closely coordinated with exchange
partners. Agencies must not only test its own software but effective
testing includes end-to-end testing and agreed-upon date formats with
all exchange partners. If these Year 2000 data exchanges do not
function properly, data will not be exchanged between systems or
invalid data could cause receiving computer systems to malfunction. In
other words, regardless of Federal efforts to fix its own computer
systems, unless their data exchange partners have Y2K compliant
systems, the computer network as a whole will fail.
A recent GAO report entitled ``Year 2000 Computing Crisis: Actions
Needed on Electronic Data Exchanges'' found that Federal agencies have
made little progress in addressing this data exchange issue. This
legislation is based on these specific GAO recommendations and will
help ensure that Federal agencies fully address the data exchange
issue. This legislation also requires agencies to establish a test
schedule with data exchange partners,
[[Page H10720]]
notify exchange partners of the implications and consequences of
noncompliance, develop contingency plans and send a quarterly report to
Congress outlining their progress.
With so much to be done before January 1, 2000, there is not much
time to act. While we cannot legislate Y2K compliance, we must ensure
the availability of good information so that consumers and small
businesses are able to check existing products, make sure their
equipment will work with other equipment and, most importantly,
successfully address any Y2K problems in their operations. With this
information in hand, I believe that the public and Congress will be
able to make the right decisions and avoid the panic which is so often
predicted in articles about the Y2K computer crisis. I urge my
colleagues to support this badly needed bipartisan legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr.
Barcia) for the kind of leadership and enthusiasm and energy he has put
into trying to do something about this Y2K computer glitch.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr.
Davis) who really is in a dual capacity because he is a member of the
Subcommittee on Technology of the Committee on Science and he is also a
member of the Subcommittee on Government Management, Information, and
Technology of Committee on Government Reform and Oversight and
represents a high-technology community.
Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R.
4756, a bill that will help ensure that American citizens can count on
the Federal Government and this administration to be ready for the Year
2000 computer problem.
Despite hearings held by the gentleman from California (Mr. Horn)
beginning 2 years ago in the Subcommittee on Government Management,
Information, and Technology and then in the Subcommittee on Technology
chaired by the gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella), we have really
very little assurance today from the administration that the Federal
Government is going to be able to ensure that critical public and
private services will not be shut down at 12:01 a.m. on January 1,
2000.
{time} 1245
Congress is taking a proactive role in keeping the focus on how much
work remains to be done in resolving the Y2K problem, and this bill is
another step in that direction. We recently passed the Year 2000
Information and Readiness Disclosure Act and sent the bill to the
President in order to encourage businesses to share information that
will help resolve the Y2K problems without fear of incurring civil
liability. This was a major step. H.R. 4756 builds on this legislation
by combining 3 Year 2000 bills that will make Federal efforts more
cohesive in this regard. The bill urges the President to accelerate
business continuity plans by taking steps to protect the uninterrupted
delivery of Federal services and programs. It encourages the President
to take a more high-profile role in promoting Y2K compliance because
Americans need to know that this administration is providing leadership
on one of the most important technical issues facing our economy. H.R.
4756 requires all Federal agencies to establish a testing schedule
before March 1, 1999, to ensure that Y2K compliance of the agency as
well as outside entities with which that agencies exchanges data are
included. Most importantly, this legislation will ensure that all
Americans are prepared for any Y2K related problems by requiring the
Commerce Department to develop a consumer awareness program.
This problem goes back to the 6th century monk Dionysius Exigus,
Dennis the Small, who invented the consecutive year calendar, and we
were taught in high school that in the year 999 Christians and pagans
were there cowering at the moon waiting for the end of the millennium
and the fulfillment of scriptural prophecy, but we now know that did
not happen because in the Year 999 about one-tenth of 1 percent of the
population knew what year it was, let alone what day it is. The irony
is that in the Year 2000 everybody is going to know what day and year
it is except for the computers which run our lives. Thus we have come
full circle unless we get this situation taken care of.
There is an extraordinary amount of work yet to be done. At this
point Congress has a moral responsibility to do as much as we can to
protect the smooth operation of agencies and their Y2K departments.
While every Federal agency is now aware of the problem, the challenge
now is to pick up the pace in the long process of fixing the problem.
This legislation is critical to achieving our goals in this and
achieving as many Y2K fixes as possible before then.
For this reason I want to urge all of my colleagues to support this
legislation, and I wanted to particularly thank the gentlewoman from
Maryland (Mrs. Morella) for swiftly bringing H.R. 4756 to the floor
today.
Mr. BARCIA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from New
York (Mr. LaFalce), a senior member of the Committee on Banking and
Financial Services.
(Mr. LaFALCE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. LaFALCE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding this
time to me.
Mr. Speaker, first of all I would like very much to congratulate the
individuals who have spoken thus far and who will speak because they
have taken a real leadership role: The gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs.
Morella), the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Barcia), the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Davis), the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich), the
gentleman from California (Mr. Horn), the gentleman from Iowa (Mr.
Leach), et cetera, a real leadership role in trying to cope with the
extremely significant problems that could be posed by the Year 2000
problems.
The Year 2000 Readiness Act before us today is another in a series of
bills aimed at fashioning a national strategy for curing this well
known millennium bug. As all Members are now aware, this glitch
threatens national disruptions in the entire computer grid, and this in
turn could very adversely affect everything from the power supply to
all financial transactions, and so I am happy to be a cosponsor of this
legislation, the passage of which is now not objected to by the White
House.
Additionally, I would point out that this bill is a bipartisan effort
in which most of those Members who are heavily involved in Year 2000
issues have joined. Two weeks ago we enacted S. 2392, the Year 2000
Information Disclosure Act, a mirror of legislation which a number of
us had cosponsored in July as H.R. 4355. That legislation set the stage
to allow groups like the Institute of Electronic and Electrical
Engineers to post massive bulletin boards on the Internet to let
millions of computer users know about the millennium bug defects.
Instead of tedious, expensive and time consuming searches for
information on how to cure their computers, the business and consuming
public can now quickly and efficiently locate and begin to fix their
problems.
The currently pending measure lays out a further strategy which
strengthens the role of the President's Year 2000 Conversion Council in
dealing with the domestic and international situation. Under John
Koskinen the council in the Executive Office of the President is doing
yeoman work to banish the Y2K threat from our systems. The legislation
also points the way toward improved performance reviews at all levels
without imposing inflexible standards on the council to achieving such
estimates. With these tools the council can measure, as it sees fit,
how serious the inevitable shortfalls in preparation
[[Page H10721]]
for the beginning of the next millennium might be and make contingency
plans to meet them.
While the bill itself is very meritorious, I want to point with some
satisfaction to the bipartisan way it has been developed. I know the
Year 2000 problem has always contained the seeds of a partisan
division. Next year it will become a very hot issue as questions of
liability, insurance and fault for Y2K failures emerge as we draw
closer to the various deadlines. A number of cases have already been
filed. My sincere hope is that this spirit of working together in the
national interest, as we have in this bill, will continue to pervade
the Y2K effort, and with the passage of this bill we move another step
in the direction of preserving this spirit.
Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I agree with the comments of the gentleman from New York
(Mr. LaFalce). This is a good example of bipartisanship in the best
interests of the American people.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 6 minutes to the very distinguished gentleman
from Iowa (Mr. Leach), who chairs the Committee on Banking and
Financial Services ever so ably and has always been a mentor of mine.
Mr. LEACH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Maryland for
yielding this time to me.
Mr. Speaker, I also rise in support of the Year 2000 Preparedness
Act, and I would like to commend the chairwoman of the subcommittee,
the gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella), as well as the ranking
member, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Barcia), for bringing this
bipartisan legislation to the floor. As one of the cosponsors of this
new bill, I am pleased that it incorporates several aspects of H.R.
3968, the National Year 2000 Readiness Acts, which I introduced earlier
this year along with my colleague on the other side of the aisle, the
gentleman from New York (Mr. LaFalce), as well as the chairmen of all
five of the banking subcommittees.
There are over 20,000 financial institutions in the United States
today. Millions of individuals as well as businesses depend as never
before on technology, intensive banking and financial services.
Americans are accustomed to timely access to their direct deposit
paychecks and Social Security benefits. They use credit and debit cards
for billions of dollars of commercial transactions each year, and most
of us have long forgotten the days before we had easy access to 24-hour
cash through ATMs.
We love the convenience of our 20th century technology.
Unfortunately, as the American people are now coming to realize, our
dependence on that technology has left us vulnerable to the Year 2000
computer bug. Because of this challenge, the Committee on Banking and
Financial Services has held five hearings on the problem this year.
During the course of our work the committee has broadened the authority
of Federal thrift and credit union supervisors to examine data service
providers for Year 2000 readiness and approve legislation to direct the
Federal financial regulatory agencies to hold seminars for financial
institutions and to provide model approaches for dealing with the year
2000 problem.
The good news is that after the establishment of timetables and
benchmarks the five Federal financial regulatory agencies have
testified that the vast majority of banks, thrifts and credit unions
had earned satisfactory ratings during the first round of Year 2000
exams. Nevertheless, the Year 2000 issue remains not only a significant
safety and soundness problem for banks, but unless comprehensively
dealt with a potential precipitator of a global recession. While there
is no guarantee that 100 percent of our financial institutions will be
100 percent compliant, Americans can be assured that their deposits in
federally-insured financial institutions are protected up to the
statutory limit in the event of a Year 2000 computer glitch.
There is no reason for the average American to panic and put savings
in mattresses. Indeed, there has never been a greater case to save in
secure federally-insured institutions.
While it would be irrational to assume that regulators will be on top
of every detail of bank compliance, the Committee on Banking and
Financial Services and numerous other committees of this body are doing
everything we can to assure the public that their interest in welfare
of the highest priority and that Year 2000 accountability is expected.
When we first started working with Federal financial regulators on the
issue, there was a great deal of discomfort among the agencies about
their roles in the oversight intrusion of the Congress in this process.
However, we strived to establish a constructive and cooperative
relationship and believe that ultimately this oversight process is
motivating parts of the government and private sector which may have
been behind to catch up.
Clearly a great deal is being done to get the banking industry ready
for the Year 2000. More than any other sector of our economy, financial
institutions are being held accountable for performance and Year 2000
goals and timetables. However, it is not clear how well some of the
other critical infrastructures are doing. We have a highly inter-
dependent economy at home and abroad. Financial institutions are
critically dependent on power and telecommunications infrastructures to
deliver services to customers. A serious Year 2000 problem in any
infrastructure industry will quickly become a Year 2000 problem for
other industries.
We cannot let that happen. As with the banking industry, we need
clear goals and measures for each critical infrastructure to build
confidence that each is fixing the most important problems and each is
achieving these goals in a timely fashion.
It was to address this concern that my colleague the gentleman from
New York (Mr. LaFalce) and I introduced the National Year 2000
Readiness Act to require the President's Year 2000 Conversion Council
to assess the status of the nation's critical infrastructures and to
develop a national strategy to make sure these infrastructures are up
and operating when we get to January 2000. Unfortunately, the chairman
of the President's Conversion Council had objections to aspects of this
initiative. I disagreed with the council chairman's objections and am
pleased that despite these objections, the spirit of the critical
infrastructure initiatives is incorporated in a strong sense of
Congress language in this bill. I would like, however, to take a moment
to address the council chairman's objections because I believe it goes
to the character of leadership and would like to read a portion of a
letter I received from the council chairman which represents one of the
starkest denials of public accountability I have seen in my 20 years in
Congress. The sentence reads:
I think it unwise at this time for Congress to indicate that it and
Executive Branch assume direct responsibility for failures in the
private sector. That is not the precise purpose of our legislation, but
administration concerns reveal a lot. It wants to avoid at all cost
accountability for a problem that has huge public ramifications.
Mr. Speaker, we have here a contrast of two styles of leadership,
that of the gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella) on the one hand
along with Mr. Bennett in the Senate, and the other we have the
President's representative who wants to avoid the establishment of
potentially embarrassing public accountability. Leadership obligations
should not and cannot be ducked. This bill, while modest in scope, is
designed to establish greater private sector awareness and public
sector accountability for a profound problem. I urge my colleagues to
give it their unanimous support.
Mr. BARCIA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio
(Mr. Kucinich), who has expended a great amount of time and energy on
this issue and who also is the ranking member on the Subcommittee on
Government Management, Information and Technology.
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague the gentleman
from Michigan (Mr. Barcia) for recognizing me and also thank my
counterpart, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Government Management
and Information Technology, the gentleman from California (Mr. Horn),
for the many long hours that we have worked together on this matter.
Chairman Horn has been exemplary in his willingness to carry this issue
forward on behalf of the American people as well as, of course, the
gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella), the
[[Page H10722]]
gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Leach) and the other Members of Congress who
have been very concerned about this. So I am pleased to join my
colleagues today in supporting H.R. 4756, the Year 2000 Preparedness
Act of 1998.
{time} 1300
This legislation represents a measured but effective step in the
continuing efforts of Congress and the Clinton Administration to
prepare for the Year 2000 computer problem.
I am also pleased at the bipartisan fashion in which this bill was
developed. The Y2K problem is a serious threat to our economy and could
have a large impact on the government and the private sector. We have
heard the discussions throughout the last year about the potential
impacts on communications, on utilities, on transportation, on finance.
Safety, public services, consumer products all could be affected. If we
are to solve the Y2K problem, it must be done in a bipartisan fashion.
It must not, cannot, become purely political.
The next 15 months will be a challenge to the government, the public
sector and the private sector, and we need to work together
cooperatively in a manner analogous to the networking which computer
systems allow.
Our ability to meet the Y2K task, Mr. Speaker, is not just a
technical challenge, it is a social one, which requires us, perhaps as
never before, to work together for the common good; together, not just
as Democrats and Republicans, but as Americans, concerned that our
country be prepared for the Year 2000.
In a sense, the Y2K problem represents a crisis in linear thinking,
in the reliance of our society on boolean algorithms to design our
world, a placing of our technical inventions superior to the slower
human systems, instead of the old fashion reliance on the American
heart, of people working together, of human interaction, of cooperative
pursuits as one Nation.
As the new millennium dawns, Y2K gives us a new opportunity to review
questions of how our society is structured, of what is important, of
what is essential to our Nation, to our families and to ourselves. As
we grapple with Y2K, perhaps we will also grapple with the dichotomized
thinking which creates the conflict which slows a fast resolution not
only of our technical problems, but of our social, political and
economic ones as well.
So as we enter a new millennium, we are challenged to shift not only
our clocks and our computers, but our thinking, the way we look at the
world and the way we look at each other. We are challenged to create
new thinking which leaps over the prophesies of doom, which are often
self-fulfilling, and create a new epic which is all-fulfilling for the
social, economic and political progress of every human being.
So as we move forward with this legislation, I would like to thank my
colleagues, the gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella), the gentleman
from Michigan (Mr. Barcia), the gentleman from California (Mr. Horn)
and the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Leach) for their hard work on this
legislation.
I would like to thank John Koskinen for his efforts to help shape the
final bill. Because Mr. Koskinen and my colleagues in Congress were
able to compromise and work together, the result is a solid piece of
legislation which will help the Clinton administration solve the Y2K
problem, to at least get a good start towards resolving it.
The Clinton Administration has been working hard on the Y2K problem
to prevent damage to our economy, and I support this bill because I
believe it will help them do that. The legislation contains new
provisions that will assist the Small Business Administration in
reaching out to small businesses and helping them to solve Y2K
problems.
It also requires the Secretary of Commerce to develop consumer
awareness to inform and educate consumers as to the potential Y2K
problem. By educating our consumers and assisting small businesses,
this legislation will go a distance towards helping prevent long-term
Y2K problems.
We have much to do in order to solve Y2K before January 1, 2000. This
legislation is a beginning. I thank the Speaker and the Members of
Congress for their participation on it.
Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Ohio (Mr.
Kucinich) not only for his statement, but for the kind of passion he
has shown with regard to solving this particular problem.
Mr. Speaker, I am very happy to yield four minutes to the gentleman
from California (Mr. Horn), who not only chairs the Subcommittee on
Government Management, Information and Technology, but is my cochair on
the Year 2000 Computer Problem, and as one who has created the
agencies, the professorial facet of Mr. Horn comes through in his
precision.
Mr. HORN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Maryland
(Chairman Morella) and the gentleman from Iowa (Chairman Leach), and
the ranking Members, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Barcia), the
gentleman from New York (Mr. LaFalce) and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr.
Kucinich).
This is truly a bipartisan effort. It is nonpartisan. It is the old
story of the city manager movement. Garbage is not Democrat or
Republican, it simply has to be removed from the streets, and that is
exactly the way we have all worked together on this.
I particularly appreciate the input made by Assistant to the
President John Koskinen, who is coordinating this effort within the
Executive Branch. This legislation is designed to be helpful, not just
to add another report. Afterall, we just rid ourselves of 132 of them a
few minutes ago.
Let me note a few findings that the Subcommittee on Government
Management, Information and Technology found in its report that was
approved by the full committee last week and will be printed this week.
The Federal Government is not on track to complete necessary Year
2000 preparations before January 1, 2000. Some state and local
governments are lagging in Year 2000 repairs and in many cases lack
reliable information on their Year 2000 status. The Year 2000 status of
basic infrastructure services--including electricity,
telecommunications, water and sewage--is largely unknown. Embedded
microchips are difficult to find, difficult to test, and can lead to
unforeseen failures. These are just a few of many findings that one
could note.
Let me tell you why this is urgent. Some people say, ``Oh, well, it
isn't a serious matter. We will struggle through it,'' and so forth and
so on. One ambassador of a very progressive country in Europe told me
that two months ago. He is just wrong. On January 1, 2000, they will
wake up in his country and find they have great difficulties.
Let me tell you what we already know. In terms of our staff and the
General Accounting Office that has been so helpful on this, the
Subcommittee on Government Management, Information and Technology of
the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight projects that four
departments and agencies will not be ready at the current rate of
progress for the 21st Century. One will not conform until the year
2023. That is the Agency for International Development. The Department
of Justice and the Department of Education will not conform until 2030.
That is unacceptable.
Let me tell you about the NORAD blackout. NORAD is the North American
Air Defense Command. The potential problem was demonstrated by a
simulated test in 1993. Out of curiosity, the technicians rolled the
dates up to January 1, 2000. The result was a total system blackout.
Vendor information--private software vendors cannot always be relied
on--and an audit report of the Department of Defense Inspector General
noted ``because vendor claims on the compliance of commercial off-the-
shelf products can be incomplete or erroneous, the information may have
little real value to system management and technical staff.''
Then we get into the Russian situation. I am delighted to see that
Secretary of Defense Cohen has been working with the Russians on this,
and it is so right that he does, because there are great difficulties
with a lot of their missiles and with a lot of their launchers because
of the embedded chips they use. We need to share with them how we are
dealing with Year 2000 conformity to make sure there are no errors.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Maryland (Chairman Morella)
for yielding me time. This is a worthwhile measure, and it ought to
[[Page H10723]]
be approved overwhelmingly by the House.
Mr. BARCIA. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, the American people are counting on all of us to correct
the Year 2000 computer problem. By working with the President and by
passing this bill, I think we can begin to move toward achieving that
goal. We only have 450 days left before January 1, 2000. So I urge my
colleagues to support this important bipartisan, nonpartisan House Year
2000 task force legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella) that the House suspend the
rules and pass the bill, H.R. 4756, as amended.
The question was taken.
Mr. BARCIA. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a
quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not
present.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 5, rule I, and the
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be
postponed.
The point of no quorum is considered withdrawn.
____________________