[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 153 (Wednesday, November 7, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11552-S11562]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PROTECTING THE SITES HONORING THOSE WHO PROTECT US
Mr. CAMPBELL. Madam President, today, 4 days before Veterans Day, I
introduce legislation that would recognize and protect the sanctity of
veterans' memorials. Currently, there is no comprehensive Federal law
to protect veterans' memorials, which is why I am introducing the
Veterans' Memorial Preservation and Recognition Act of 2001.
My bill would prohibit the desecration of veterans' memorials,
provide for repairs of veterans memorials and permit guide signs to
veterans' cemeteries on Federal-aid highways.
Under this legislation, someone who willfully desecrates any type of
monument commemorating those in the Armed Forces on public property
would be fined or put in jail. The violator would be subject to a civil
penalty in addition to the fine, equal to the cost of repairing the
damage.
The funds generated by these penalties would then go into a Veterans'
Memorial Restoration Fund, established by the Secretary of Veterans'
Affairs, to make those monies available for the repair of the damaged
memorials. But the vandals won't be the only ones contributing to the
fund; individuals and veterans' organizations could also make donations
and get a charitable contribution deduction. In essence, this would be
a new way to provide for the repair of veterans' memorials without any
new appropriation or providing other Federal funding.
The second part of this bill would permit states to place
supplemental guide signs for veterans' cemeteries on Federal-aid
highways. These veterans' cemeteries deserve recognition; by allowing
signs to be posted, we pay our respect to these sites by offering
direction to them. It is my goal to make these important sites easily
accessible.
Our veterans, living and lost, are a reminder of our unity. Those who
served in our Armed Services are more than just symbols of freedom and
justice in the midst of conflict and during times of peace.
They are real people, integral to our entire population, who enrich
our day-to-day lives with their proud service, with their personal
accounts of war, their organizations of service, and their expressions
of deep-down American pride. Not only have we lost many of these brave
men and women in conflict, but we lose thousands of them forever each
year as the veteran population ages. We have to honor their sacrifices
by protecting the sites that recognize them.
It is a shame that there is no comprehensive federal law to protect
veterans' memorials.
Sometimes they are the only tangible reminders we have of courageous
service to this country. We can easily read about those brave Americans
who served in war, but it's not always easy to gather more than just
hard facts from newspapers or history books. Being in the presence of a
statue or memorial structure can evoke a deeper response. We can walk
around it, sometimes we can touch it, and oftentimes we can see the
names of each brave American who died in conflict.
Madam President, the timing of this bill is appropriate. This Sunday,
November 11, we will recognize Veterans' Day, which informally began as
a series of memorial gestures to celebrate the end of World War I in
1918. Three years later, on the eleventh hour of the eleventh day of
the eleventh month, an unknown American soldier of the war was buried
on a hillside in Arlington Cemetery, overlooking the Potomac River.
This site became a summit of veneration for Americans everywhere.
Similarly, at Westminster Abbey in England and the Arc de Triomphe in
France, an unknown soldier was buried in each of these places of
highest honor.
These three memorial sites are symbols of our reverence; it is only
appropriate that we do everything we can to preserve sites like these
across America.
There are hundreds of veterans' memorials, on public property, here
in the United States. From nationally-known places such as Iwo Jima, to
smaller sites such as the Colorado Veterans' Memorial across from the
capitol in Denver, each is a site where we go to heal and to remember.
As a veteran myself, I am committed to seeing that not a single one is
stripped of its dignity.
I encourage my colleagues to work together for swift consideration of
this timely and important legislation. I have the support of several
veterans' organizations, who have offered words of encouragement for
this bill. These Americans know, firsthand, the concept of service.
Let's honor what they and thousands of others have done to preserve our
freedom.
Madam President, I thank the Chair and ask unanimous consent that
letters of support from the American Legion, Rolling Thunder, Inc., and
the Paralyzed Veterans of America be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the letters were ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
The American Legion,
Washington, DC, November 6, 2001.
Hon. Ben Nighthorse Campbell,
U.S. Senate, Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Campbell: On behalf of the 2.9 million members
of The American Legion, I would like to express full support
for the Veterans' Memorial Preservation and Recognition Act.
We applaud your efforts to prohibit the desecration of
veterans' memorials, and to permit guide signs to veterans
cemeteries on federal highways.
[[Page S11553]]
The American Legion recognizes the need to preserve the
sanctity and solemnity of veterans' memorials. These historic
monuments serve not only to honor the men and women of the
nation's armed services, but to educate future generations of
the sacrifices endured to preserve the freedoms and liberties
enjoyed by all Americans.
Once again, The American Legion fully supports the
Veterans' Memorial Preservation and Recognition Act. We
appreciate your continued leadership in addressing the issues
that are important to veterans and their families.
Sincerely,
Steve A. Robertson,
Director, National
Legislative Commission.
____
Rolling Thunder, Inc.,
Neshanic Station, NJ, November 5, 2001.
Senator Ben ``Nighthorse'' Campbell,
Russell Senate Office Building,
Washington, DC.
Honorable Ben Campbell: I am sending this letter in support
of Bill, ``Veterans Memorial Preservation and Recognition Act
of 2001.
Rolling Thunder National and our members are in full
support of this bill. Those who destroy and deface any
Veterans Memorial should be punished and made to pay full
restitution for the damages they have caused. Many Americans
have fought and died for the freedom of all Americans and
their Memorials should be honored and respected by all.
I thank you for your help and support to all American
Veterans.
Sincerely,
Sgt., Artie Muller,
National President.
____
Paralyzed Veterans of America,
Washington, DC, November 5, 2001.
Hon. Ben Nighthorse Campbell,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Campbell: On behalf of the Paralyzed Veterans
of America (PVA) I am writing to offer our support for the
``Veterans' Memorial Preservation and Recognition Act of
2001.''
Memorials to the men and women who have served this Nation,
in times of war and in times of peace, are tokens of our
gratitude for their service, and their sacrifice. They are
tangible reminders of our past, and an inspiration for our
future. For this reason they are well worth protecting and
preserving. This legislation addresses both of these goals.
Again, thank you for introducing the ``Veterans' Memorial
Preservation and Recognition Act of 2001.''
Sincerely,
Richard B. Fuller,
National Legislative Director.
______
By Mr. HELMS:
S. 1645. A bill to provide for the promotion of democracy and rule of
law in Belarus and for the protection of Belarus' sovereignty and
independence; to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
Mr. HELMS. Madam President, on top of the mayhem and slaughter in New
York and at the Pentagon in Washington last September, a travesty
against democracy occurred, again, in Belarus. Aleksandr Lukashenka,
the dictator controlling this country, stole through intimidation and
repression, the presidential elections that took place on September 9.
Tragic as the events in our own country were and as serious an
undertaking as the war against terrorism will continue to be, we must
not overlook the brutality and injustice of a regime such as the one
led by Lukashenka, especially in the heart of Europe.
For this reason, I am introducing today the Belarus Democracy Act of
2001, the purpose of which is to support the people in Belarus who are
struggling, often at great peril to their lives, to revive democracy,
and to reconsolidate their country's declining independence and
sovereignty.
Democracy has been crushed in Belarus by a fanatical dictatorship
that can only be described as a brutal throwback to the Soviet era.
Aleksandr Lukashenka is an authoritarian obsessed with recreating the
former Soviet Union, which he believes he will ultimately lead. Because
of Lukashenka, Belarus has emerged as a dark island of repression,
censorship, and command economy in a region of consolidating
democracies.
Belarus has tragically become the Cuba of Europe. Nonetheless, the
people of Belarus have not succumbed to Lukashenka. Independent
newspapers struggle to publish. The leadership of the parliament he
unconstitutionally dismissed refuses to concede legitimacy to his sham
regime. Scores of non-governmental organizations fight to promote the
rule of law and to protect fundamental human rights. The vibrancy of
Belarus's struggling civil society has been made evident by the
``Freedom Marches'' that have attracted literally tens of thousands of
Belarusians to the streets of Minsk and countless other anti-Lukashenka
demonstrations elsewhere in Belarus.
Their agenda is the promotion of a free, independent, democratic and
Western-oriented Belarus, a sharp contrast to Lukashenka's efforts to
reanimate the former Soviet Union.
This is an agenda not without risk. Those who have dared to take a
stand against Lukashenka have disappeared. Yuri Zakharenko disapproved
soon after he resigned his post as Lukashenka's Minister of Interior
and began working with the opposition. Opposition leader Victor Gonchar
and his colleague, Anatoly Krasovsky, vanished just hours after
Lukashenka, in a drooling rage broadcast on state television, called
upon his henchmen to crackdown on the ``opposition scum.''
Other opposition leaders such as Andrei Klimov, have been imprisoned
under harsh conditions simply for expressing their opposition to
Lukashenka's regime.
This regime has tried to crush opposition marches with truncheon-
wielding riot police. The independent press and non-governmental
organizations promoting democracy, rule of law and human rights in
Belarus are subject to constant government harassment, intimidation,
arrests, fines, beatings, and murder. Dmitry Zavadsky, a cameraman for
Russian television, known for his critical reporting of the Lukashenka
regime, disappeared under mysterious circumstances.
If passed, this bill will impose sanctions against the Lukashenka
regime. It will deny international assistance to his government. It
will freeze Belarusian assets in the United States. It will prohibit
trade with the Lukashenka government and businesses owned by that
government. It will also deny officials of the Lukashenka government
the right to travel to the United States.
And, if Lukashenka continues to surrender Belarusian sovereignty,
this bill will strip his government of the diplomatic properties it
currently enjoys in the United States. Indeed, if he is successful in
his warped effort to recreate the Soviet Union, the Government of
Belarus will sadly have no need for these properties.
This bill supports our Nation's vision of Europe that is democratic,
free and undivided. That vision will never be fulfilled as long as
Belarus suffers under the tyranny of Aleksandr Lukashenka. It is our
moral and strategic interest to support those fighting for democracy
and freedom in Belarus and the return of their country to the European
community of free states.
To ignore this struggle for democracy and freedom and to turn an
indifferent eye upon Lukashenka's effort to reconstruct the former
Soviet Union would be a grave error. Not only would it be immoral, it
would be strategically shortsighted.
Allowing Moscow to reabsorb a state that was once independent and
democratic would only whet Moscow's appetite to restore the old Soviet
borders. That would set a precedent that would only jeopardize the
security of Ukraine, Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia. Indulging
antiquated Russian imperial pretensions would also undercut the
prospects for democratic reform in Russia.
For these reasons the Belarus Democracy Act of 2001 authorizes $30
million in assistance to restore and strengthen the institutions of
democratic government in Belarus. It specifically urges the President
of the United States to furnish assistance to political parties in
Belarus committed to those goals.
It expands the resources available to support radio broadcasting into
Belarus that will facilitate the flow of uncensored information to the
people of Belarus.
The September elections in Belarus were stained by the Lukashenka
regime's cruel suppression of democratic and human rights. Let the
Belarus Democracy Act be America's response to Europe's last dictator,
Aleksandr Lukashenka.
I ask unanimous consent 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. 1645
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
[[Page S11554]]
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Belarus Democracy Act of
2001''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds that--
(1) the United States has a vital interest in the
consolidation and strengthening of the independence and
sovereignty of the Republic of Belarus and its integration
into the European community of democracies;
(2) the United States supports the promotion of democracy,
the rule of law, and respect for human rights in Belarus;
(3) in November 1996, Belarusian President Aleksandr
Lukashenka orchestrated an illegal and unconstitutional
referendum that enabled him to impose upon the Belarusian
people a new constitution, abolish the old parliament, the
13th Supreme Council, replace it with a rubber stamp
legislature, and extend his term office to 2001;
(4) in May 1999, the Belarusian opposition challenged
Lukashenka's illegal extension of his presidential term by
staging alternative presidential elections and these
elections were met with repression;
(5) the Belarusian opposition has organized peaceful
demonstrations against the Lukashenka regime in cities and
towns throughout Belarus, including the Freedom I March of
October 17, 1999, the Freedom II March of March 15, 2000, and
the Chernobyl Way March of April 26, 2000, each of which took
place in Minsk and involved tens of thousands of Belarusians;
(6) the Lukashenka regime has responded to these peaceful
marches with truncheon-swinging security personnel, mass
arrests, extended incarcerations, and beatings;
(7) Andrei Klimov, a member of the last democratically
elected Parliament in Belarus remains imprisoned under harsh
conditions for his political opposition to Lukashenka;
(8) Victor Gonchar, Yuri Krasovsky, and Yuri Zakharenka,
who have been leaders and supporters of the opposition, have
disappeared under mysterious circumstances;
(9) former Belarus government officials, including four
police investigators, have come forward with credible
allegations and evidence that top officials of the Lukashenka
regime were involved in the murders of opposition figures
Yury Zakharenka, Victor Gonchar, Anatol Krasovsky, Dmitry
Zavadsky, and scores of other people.
(10) the Lukashenka regime systematically harasses and
persecutes the independent media and actively suppresses
freedom of speech and expression;
(11) Dmitry Zavadsky, a cameraman for Russian public
television, known for his critical reporting of the
Lukashenka regime, disappeared under mysterious
circumstances;
(12) the Lukashenka regime harasses the autocephalic
Belarusian Orthodox Church, the Roman Catholic Church,
evangelical churches, and other minority groups;
(13) Lukashenka advocates and actively promotes a merger
between Russia and Belarus, and initiated negotiations and
signed December 8, 1999, the Belarus-Russia Union Treaty even
though he lacks the necessary constitutional mandate to do
so;
(14) the Belarusian opposition denounces these intentions
and has repeatedly called upon the international community to
``unambiguously announce the nonrecognition of any
international treaties concluded by Lukashenka'';
(15) the United States, the European Union, the NATO
Parliamentary Assembly, the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly, and
other international bodies continue to recognize the 13th
Supreme Council as the legal Belarusian Parliament;
(16) the parliamentary elections of October 15, 2000,
conducted by Aleksandr Lukashenka were illegitimate and
unconstitutional;
(17) these elections were plagued by violent human rights
abuses committed by his regime, including the harassment,
beatings, arrest, and imprisonment of members of the
opposition;
(18) these elections were conducted in the absence of a
democratic election law;
(19) the presidential election of September 2001 was
fundamentally unfair and featured significant and abusive
misconduct by the regime of Aleksandr Lukashenka, including--
(A) the harassment, arrest, and imprisonment of opposition
leaders;
(B) the denial of opposition candidates equal and fair
access to the dominant state-controlled media;
(C) the seizure of equipment and property of independent
nongovernmental organizations and press organizations and the
harassment of their staff and management;
(D) voting and vote counting procedures that were not
transparent; and
(E) a campaign of intimidation directed against opposition
activists, domestic election observation organizations,
opposition and independent media, and a libelous media
campaign against international observers; and
(20) the last parliamentary election in Belarus deemed to
be free and fair by the international community took place in
1995 and from it emerged the 13th Supreme Soviet whose
democratically and constitutionally derived authorities and
powers have been usurped by the authoritarian regime of
Aleksandr Lukashenka.
SEC. 3. ASSISTANCE TO PROMOTE DEMOCRACY AND CIVIL SOCIETY IN
BELARUS.
(a) Purposes of Assistance.--The assistance under this
section shall be available for the following purposes:
(1) To assist the people of Belarus in regaining their
freedom and to enable them to join the international
community of democracies.
(2) To restore and strengthen institutions of democratic
government in Belarus.
(3) To encourage free and fair presidential and
parliamentary elections in Belarus, conducted in a manner
consistent with internationally accepted standards and under
the supervision of internationally recognized observers.
(4) To sustain and strengthen international sanctions
against the Lukashenka regime in Belarus.
(b) Authorization for Assistance.--To carry out the
purposes of subsection (a), the President is authorized to
furnish assistance and other support for the activities
described in subsection (c) and primarily for indigenous
Belarusian political parties and nongovernmental
organizations.
(c) Activities Supported.--Activities that may be supported
by assistance under subsection (b) include--
(1) democratic forces, including political parties,
committed to promoting democracy and Belarus' independence
and sovereignty;
(2) democracy building;
(3) radio and television broadcasting to Belarus;
(4) the development and support of nongovernmental
organizations promoting democracy and supporting human rights
both in Belarus and in exile;
(5) the development of independent media working within
Belarus and from locations outside of Belarus and supported
by nonstate-controlled printing facilities;
(6) international exchanges and advanced professional
training programs for leaders and members of the democratic
forces in skill areas central to the development of civil
society; and
(7) the development of all elements of democratic
processes, including political parties and the ability to
conduct free and fair elections.
(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--
(1) In general.--There is authorized to be appropriated to
the President $30,000,000 for the fiscal year 2002.
(2) Availability of funds.--Amounts appropriated pursuant
to paragraph (1) are authorized to remain available until
expended.
SEC. 4. AUTHORIZED FUNDING FOR RADIO BROADCASTING IN AND INTO
BELARUS.
(a) In General.--The purpose of this section is to augment
support for independent and uncensored radio broadcasting in
and into Belarus that will facilitate the dissemination of
information in a way that is not impeded by the government of
Lukashenka.
(b) Allocation of Funds.--Not less than $5,000,000 made
available under section 3 shall be available only for
programs that facilitate and support independent broadcasting
into and in Belarus on AM and FM bandwidths, including
programming from the Voice of America and RFE/RL,
Incorporated.
(c) Reporting on Radio Broadcasting to and in Belarus.--Not
later than 120 days after the date of enactment of this Act,
the Secretary of State shall submit to the Committee on
Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Committee on
International Relations of the House of Representatives a
report on how funds allocated under subsection (b) will be
used to provide AM and FM broadcasting that covers the
territory of Belarus and delivers to the people of Belarus
programming free from censorship of the government of
Lukashenka.
SEC. 5. SANCTIONS AGAINST THE LUKASHENKA REGIME.
(a) Applications of Measures.--The sanctions described in
this section and sections 6, 8, and 9, shall apply with
respect to Belarus until the President determines and
certifies to the appropriate congressional committees that
the Government of Belarus has made significant progress in
meeting the conditions described in subsection (b).
(b) Conditions.--The conditions referred to in subsection
(a) are the following:
(1) The release of all those individuals who have been
jailed for their political views.
(2) The withdrawal of politically motivated legal charges
against all opposition figures.
(3) The provision of a full accounting of those opposition
leaders and journalists, including Victor Gonchar, Yuri
Krasovsky, Yuri Zakharenka, and Dmitry Zavadsky, who have
disappeared under mysterious circumstances, and the
prosecution of those individuals who are responsible for
those disappearances.
(4) The cessation of all forms of harassment and repression
against the independent media, nongovernmental organizations,
and the political opposition.
(5) The implementation of free and fair presidential and
parliamentary elections.
(c) International Financial Institutions.--The Secretary of
the Treasury shall instruct the United States executive
directors of the international financial institutions to
oppose, and vote against, any extension by those institutions
of any financial assistance (including any technical
assistance or grant) of any kind to the Government of
Belarus, except for loans and assistance that serve basic
human needs.
(d) International Financial Institutions Defined.--In this
section, the term international financial institution
includes the
[[Page S11555]]
International Monetary Fund, the International Bank for
Reconstruction and Development, the International Development
Association, the International Finance Corporation, the
Multilateral Investment Guaranty Agency, and the European
Bank for Reconstruction and Development.
SEC. 6. BLOCKING BELARUSIAN ASSETS IN THE UNITED STATES.
(a) Blocking of Assets.--All property and interests in
property, including all commercial, industrial, or public
utility undertakings or entities, that are owned in whole or
in part by the Government of Belarus, or by any member of the
senior leadership of Belarus, that are in the United States,
that hereafter come within the United States, or that are or
hereafter come within the possession or control of United
States persons, including their overseas branches, are hereby
blocked.
(b) Exercise of Authorities.--The Secretary of the
Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State, shall
take such actions, including the promulgation of regulations,
orders, directives, rulings, instructions, and licenses, and
employ all powers granted to the President by the
International Emergency Economic Powers Act, as may be
necessary to carry out subsection (a).
(c) Prohibited Transfers.--Transfers prohibited under
subsection (b) include payments or transfers of any property
or any transactions involving the transfer of anything of
economic value by any United States person to the Government
of Belarus, or any person or entity acting for or on behalf
of, or owned or controlled, directly or indirectly, by that
government, or to any member of the senior leadership of
Belarus.
(d) Payment of Expenses.--All expenses incident to the
blocking and maintenance of property blocked under subsection
(a) shall be charged to the owners or operators of such
property, which expenses shall not be met from blocked funds.
(e) Prohibitions.--The following shall be prohibited as of
the date of enactment of this Act:
(1) The exportation to any entity owned, controlled, or
operated by the Government of Belarus, directly or
indirectly, of any goods, technology, or services, either--
(A) from the United States;
(B) requiring the issuance of a license for export by a
Federal agency; or
(C) involving the use of United States registered vessels
or aircraft, or any activity that promotes or is intended to
promote such exportation.
(2) The performance by any United States person of any
contract, including a financing contract, in support of an
industrial, commercial, or public utility operated,
controlled, or owned by the Government of Belarus.
(f) Exceptions.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
this section, this section does not apply to--
(1) assistance provided under section 3 or 4 of this Act;
(2) those materials described in section 203(b)(3) of the
International Emergency Economic Powers Act relating to
informational materials; or
(3) materials being sent to Belarus as relief in response
to a humanitarian crisis.
(g) Statutory Construction.--Nothing in this Act prohibits
any contract or other financial transaction with any private
or nongovernmental organization or business in Belarus.
SEC. 7. DENYING ENTRY INTO THE UNITED STATES TO BELARUSIAN
OFFICIALS.
It is the sense of Congress that the President should use
his authority under section 212(f) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(f)) to suspend the entry into
the United States of any alien who--
(1) holds a position in the senior leadership of the
Government of Belarus; or
(2) is a spouse, minor child, or agent of a person
inadmissible under paragraph (1).
SEC. 8. PROHIBITION ON STRATEGIC EXPORTS TO BELARUS.
No computers, computer software, goods intended to
manufacture or service computers, no technology intended to
manufacture or service computers, or any other goods or
technology may be exported to or for use by the Government of
Belarus, or by any of the following entities of that
government:
(1) The military.
(2) The police.
(3) The prison system.
(4) The national security agencies.
SEC. 9. PROHIBITION ON LOANS AND INVESTMENT.
(a) United States Government Financing.--No loan, credit
guarantee, insurance, financing, or other similar financial
assistance may be extended by any agency of the United States
Government (including the Export-Import Bank and the Overseas
Private Investment Corporation) to the Government of Belarus.
(b) Trade and Development Agency.--No funds made available
by law may be available for activities of the Trade and
Development Agency in or for Belarus.
(c) Third Country Action.--Congress urges the Secretary of
State to encourage all other countries, particularly European
countries, to suspend any of their own programs providing
support similar to that described in subsection (a) or (b) to
the Government of Belarus, including the rescheduling of
repayment of the indebtedness of that government under more
favorable conditions.
(d) Prohibition on Private Credits.--No United States
person may make or approve any loan or other extension of
credit, directly or indirectly, to the Government of Belarus
or to any corporation, partnership, or other organization
that is owned, operated, or controlled by the Government of
Belarus.
SEC. 10. DENIAL OF GSP.
(a) Finding.--Congress finds that the Government of Belarus
has failed to respect internationally recognized worker
rights.
(b) Denial of GSP Benefits.--Congress approves the decision
of the United States Government to deny tariff treatment
under title V of the Trade Act of 1974 (the Generalized
System of Preferences (GSP)) to Belarus.
SEC. 11. MULTILATERAL SANCTIONS.
It is the sense of Congress that the President should
continue to seek to coordinate with other countries,
particularly European countries, a comprehensive,
multilateral strategy to further the purposes of this Act,
including, as appropriate, encouraging other countries to
take measures similar to those described in this Act.
SEC. 12. OWNERSHIP AND USE OF DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR
PROPERTIES.
It is the sense of Congress that, if an undemocratic and
illegitimate Government of Belarus, enters into a union with
the Russian Federation that results in the loss of
sovereignty for Belarus, the United States should immediately
withdraw any and all privileges and immunities under the
Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations enjoyed by the
personnel and property of the Government of Belarus and
demand the immediate departure of such personnel from the
United States.
SEC. 13. REPORTS.
(a) In General.--Not later than 90 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, and every year thereafter, the
President shall submit a report to the appropriate
congressional committees reporting on--
(1) assistance and commerce received by Belarus from other
foreign countries during the previous 12-month period;
(2) the sales of weapons and weapons-related technologies
from Belarus during that 12-month period;
(3) the relationship between the Lukashenka regime and the
Government of the Russian Federation; and
(4) the personal assets and wealth of Aleksandr Lukashenka
and other senior leaders of the Government of Belarus.
(b) Report Elements.--Each report required by subsection
(a) shall, for the period covered by the report, contain, to
the extent such information is known--
(1) a description of all assistance, including humanitarian
assistance, provided to the Government of Belarus by foreign
governments and multilateral institutions;
(2) a description of Belarus' commerce with foreign
countries, including the identification of Belarus' chief
trading partners and the extent of such trade;
(3) a description of joint ventures completed, or under
construction by foreign nationals involving facilities in
Belarus; and
(4) an identification of the countries that purchase or
have purchased, arms or military supplies from Belarus or
that have come into agreements with the Belarus Government
that have a military application, including--
(A) a description of the military supplies, equipment, or
other material sold, bartered, or exchanged between Belarus
and such countries; and
(B) a listing of the goods, services, credits, or other
consideration recieved by the Belarus government in exchange
for military supplies, equipment, or material.
SEC. 14. SENSE OF CONGRESS.
Congress hereby--
(1) expresses its support to those in Belarus seeking--
(A) to promote democracy and the rule of law, to
consolidate the independence and sovereignty of Belarus; and
(B) to promote its integration into the European community
of democracies;
(2) expresses its grave concern about the disappearances of
Victor Gonchar, Yuri Krasovsky, Yuri Zakharenka, Dmitry
Zavadsky, and other members of the opposition and press;
(3) calls upon Lukashenka's regime to cease its persecution
of political opponents and to release those, including Andrei
Klimov, who have been imprisoned for opposing his regime;
(4) calls upon the Lukashenka regime to respect the basic
freedoms of speech, expression, assembly, association,
language, and religion;
(5) calls upon Lukashenka to allow parliamentary and
presidential elections to be conducted that are free, fair,
and fully meet international standards;
(6) calls upon the Government of Russia, the State Duma,
and the Federation Council to end its support, including
financial support, to the Lukashenka regime and to fully
respect the sovereignty and independence of the Republic of
Belarus;
(7) calls upon the Government of Belarus to resolve the
continuing constitutional and political crisis through free,
fair, and transparent elections, including, as called for by
the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe
(OSCE), of which Belarus is a member--
(A) respect for human rights;
(B) an end to the current climate of fear;
(C) opposition and meaningful access to state media;
[[Page S11556]]
(D) modification of the electoral code to make the code
more democratic;
(E) engaging in genuine talks with the opposition; and
(F) permitting real power for the parliament.
(8) calls upon other governments to refuse to use as
diplomatic residences or for any other purpose properties
seized by the Lukashenka regime from the Belarusian political
opposition;
(9) calls upon the international community, including the
Government of Russia, to refuse to ratify or accept any
treaty signed by Aleksandr Lukashenka or any other official
of his government.
(10) commends the democratic opposition in Belarus for
their commitment to freedom, their courage in the face of
Lukashenka's brutal repression, and the unity and cooperation
their various political parties and nongovernmental
organizations demonstrated during the October 2000
parliamentary elections and the October 2001 presidential
elections and calls upon the democratic opposition of Belarus
to sustain that unity and cooperation as part of the effort
to bring an end to Lukashenka's dictatorship.
SEC. 15. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Senior leadership of belarus.--The term ``senior
leadership of Belarus'' includes--
(A) the President, Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Ministers,
government ministers, and deputy ministers of Belarus;
(B) the Governor of the National Bank of Belarus;
(C) officials of the Belarus Committee for State Affairs
(BKGB), the police, and any other organ of repression;
(D) any official of the Government of Belarus involved in
the suppression of freedom in Belarus, including judges and
prosecutors;
(E) any official of the Government of Belarus directly
appointed by Aleksandr Lukashenka; and
(F) officials of the presidential administration.
(2) United states.--The term ``United States'' means the
States of the United States, the District of Columbia, and
any commonwealth, territory, dependency, or possession of the
United States.
(3) United states person.--The term ``United States
person'' means any United States resident or national (other
than an individual resident outside the United States and
employed by other than a United States person), any domestic
concern (including any permanent domestic establishment of
any foreign concern) and any foreign subsidiary or affiliate
(including any permanent foreign establishment) of any
domestic concern which is controlled in fact by such domestic
concern, as determined under regulations of the President.
______
By Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself and Mr. Domenici):
S. 1646. A bill to identify certain routes in the states of Texas,
Oklahoma, Colorado, and New Mexico as part of the Ports-to-Plains
Corridor, a high priority corridor on the National Highway System; to
the Committee on Environmental and Public Works.
Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, I rise today to introduce legislation
that will enhance the future economic vitality of communities in Union
and Colfax Counties and throughout all of Northeastern New Mexico. By
improving the transportation infrastructure, I believe this legislation
will also help promote tourism across all of northern New Mexico.
The bill we are introducing today completes the designation of the
route for the Ports-to-Plains High Priority Corridor, which runs 1,000
miles from Laredo, Texas, to Denver, CO. I am honored to have my
colleague, Senator Domenici, as a cosponsor of the bill.
I continue to believe strongly in the importance of highway
infrastructure for economic development in my State. Even in this age
of the new economy and high-speed digital communications, roads
continue to link our communities together and to carry the commercial
goods and products our citizens need. Safe and efficient highways are
especially important to citizens in the rural parts of New Mexico.
It is well known that regions with four-lane highways will more
readily attract out-of-state visitors and new jobs. Travelers prefer
the safety of a four-lane highway rather than sharing a two-lane road
with a large number of semi tractor-trailer rigs.
In 1998, Congress identified the Ports-to-Plains corridor between the
border with Mexico to Denver, CO, as a High Priority Corridor on the
National Highway System. This designation arose in part as a result of
the North American Free Trade Agreement. Under NAFTA, commercial border
traffic is already increasing, and the Ports-to-Plains corridor was
considered to be centrally situated to serve international trade and
promote economic development along its entire route. Congress had
previously designated a parallel route, the Camino Real Corridor,
including Interstate Highway 25 through central New Mexico, as a high
priority corridor; this corridor runs from the Mexican border at El
Paso, TX, through Albuquerque and Denver, and on to the Canadian
border.
Last year, a comprehensive study was undertaken to determine the
feasibility of creating a second continuous four-lane highway along the
proposed Ports-to-Plains High Priority corridor. Alternative highway
alignments for the trade corridor were developed and evaluated. The
study was conducted under the direction of a steering committee
consisting of the State departments of transportation in Texas, New
Mexico, Oklahoma, and Colorado. The Ports-to-Plains feasibility study
was completed and a final report circulated earlier this year.
With the results of the feasibility study in hand, representatives of
the four State highway departments met on July 30 to reach consensus on
the preferred designation for the northern portion of the Ports-to-
Plains corridor between Dumas, TX, and Denver, CO. The four
representatives agreed to recommend designating the route north of
Dumas, TX, along U.S. Highway 287 through Boise City, OK, to Limon, CO,
and then along Interstate 70 to Denver. They also recommended including
the route from Dumas, TX, along U.S. Highway 87 through Clayton, NM, to
Raton in the corridor.
I am pleased the four States were able to come to a unified consensus
on the route for the Ports-to-Plains corridor. I ask unanimous consent
that a letter from the directors of the four State highway departments
to the Federal Highway Administration summarizing the four-State
consensus recommendation be printed in the Record at the conclusion of
my remarks.
I do believe the consensus recommendation is a good result for all
four States in the region. Both New Mexico and Texas plan to upgrade
their portion of the corridor to the full four lanes envisioned in the
feasibility study for the Ports-to-Plains trade corridor. Indeed, the
State of Texas will soon begin construction that will four-lane its
portion of Highway 87 from Dumas to the New Mexico State line.
Meanwhile, Colorado plans to develop it's portion as a super-two-lane
highway at a cost of $537 million. The estimated cost to four-lane New
Mexico's 81 miles of the corridor between Clayton and Raton is $185
million.
I do believe that once Highway 87 has been upgraded to four lanes
between Dumas and Raton, the route will act as a magnet for out-of-
state visitors to the year-round tourist attractions throughout
northern New Mexico. Tourists in particular will prefer the safety and
a convenience of a four-lane highway.
Congress designated the southern portion of the Ports-to-Plains
corridor last year. Now the feasibility study has been completed and
all four States are in unanimous agreement on the preferred route for
the northern portion. The time to act is now. Congress should move
quickly to confirm the four-state consensus of the Ports-to-Plains
Trade Corridor by passing our bill. I look forward to working with the
Chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, Senator
Jeffords and the Ranking Member, Senator Smith, to confirm the four
states' recommendation with this non-controversial, bipartisan
legislation.
Once the route is established, I am committed to working to help
secure the funding required to complete the four-lane upgrade as soon
as possible. I do believe the four-lane upgrade of Highway 87 is vital
to economic development for the communities of Raton and Clayton and
throughout all of northeast New Mexico.
I again thank Senator Domenici for cosponsoring the bill, and I hope
all Senators will join us in support of this important legislation.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill and the previously
referenced letter be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
S. 1646
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
[[Page S11557]]
SECTION 1. IDENTIFICATION OF PORTS-TO-PLAINS HIGH PRIORITY
CORRIDOR ROUTES.
Section 1105(c)(38) of the Intermodal Surface
Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (105 Stat. 2032; 114
Stat. 2763A-201) is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (A), by redesignating clauses (i)
through (viii) as subclauses (I) through (VIII),
respectively;
(2) by redesignating subparagraph (A) as clause (i);
(3) by striking ``(38) The'' and inserting ``(38)(A) The'';
(4) in subparagraph (A) (as designated by paragraph (3))--
(A) in clause (i) (as redesignated by paragraph (2))--
(i) in subclause (VII) (as redesignated by paragraph (1)),
by striking ``and'' at the end;
(ii) in subclause (VIII) (as redesignated by paragraph
(1)), by striking the period at the end and inserting ``;
and''; and
(iii) by adding at the end the following:
``(IX) United States Route 287 from Dumas to the border
between the States of Texas and Oklahoma, and also United
States Route 87 from Dumas to the border between the States
of Texas and New Mexico.''; and
(B) by adding at the end the following:
``(ii) In the State of Oklahoma, the Ports-to-Plains
Corridor shall generally follow United States Route 287 from
the border between the States of Texas and Oklahoma to the
border between the States of Oklahoma and Colorado.
``(iii) In the State of Colorado, the Ports-to-Plains
Corridor shall generally follow--
``(I) United States Route 287 from the border between the
States of Oklahoma and Colorado to Limon; and
``(II) Interstate Route 70 from Limon to Denver.
``(iv) In the State of New Mexico, the Ports-to-Plains
Corridor shall generally follow United States Route 87 from
the border between the States of Texas and New Mexico to
Raton.''; and
(5) by striking ``(B) The corridor designation contained in
paragraph (A)'' and inserting the following:
``(B) The corridor designation contained in subclauses (I)
through (VIII) of subparagraph (A)(i)''.
____
Department of Transportation
September 21, 2001.
C.D. Reagan,
Division Administrator, Federal Highway Administration,
Austin, TX.
Dear Mr. Reagan: We are pleased to inform you that we have
finalized the preferred designation for the Ports-to-Plains
Corridor.
This letter confirms the consensus reached by the states of
Colorado, New Mexico, Oklahoma and Texas on July 30, 2001,
whereby the northern portion of the Ports-to-Plains Corridor
would be formally designated as routes from Dumas, Texas on
U.S. 287 to I-70 at Limon, Colorado and then to Denver,
Colorado, and U.S. 87 from Dumas, Texas to Raton, New Mexico.
We submit these routes formally as representing the states
agreed unified designation for the Ports-to-Plains Corridor
north of Dumas, Texas and request that you submit our
recommendation to the appropriate congressional committees.
Thank you for your strong consideration of this issue.
Sincerely,
Thomas E. Norton,
Colorado Executive Director, DOT.
Michael W. Behrens,
Texas Executive Director, DOT.
Pete Rahn,
New Mexico Executive Director, DOT.
Gary M. Ridley,
Oklahoma Executive Director, DOT.
______
By Ms. CANTWELL (for herself and Mrs. Murray):
S. 1649. A bill to amend the Omnibus Parks and Public Lands
Management Act of 1996 to increase the authorization of appropriations
for the Vancouver National Historic Reserve and for the preservation of
Vancouver Barracks; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Ms. CANTWELL. Madam President, I am introducing legislation today
that will reauthorize Federal participation in the historic
preservation efforts of one of the most historically significant sites
in the Pacific Northwest, the Fort Vancouver National Historic Reserve.
The Historic Reserve is rich in cultural and historic national
significance, pre-dating the arrival of Lewis and Clark through the
mid-20th century. For more than 10,000 years, Native American groups
inhabited the prairies along the Columbia River that include the site
of present-day Vancouver and the historic reserve.
Located on the great American waterway, the Columbia River, the
Vancouver National Historic Reserve site became the base of Columbia
region operations for the Hudson's Bay Trading Company in the early
19th century. As my colleagues know, Hudson's Bay was the powerful
British fur trading company that vied for control of the trapping
industry in Western lands of the present-day United States, even before
political control of those lands were established. At its peak, the
company built an enormous network through the region, with Fort
Vancouver as the administrative headquarters and supply depot for the
hundreds of employees at dozens of posts in the region.
Fort Vancouver became a trade center for the Western territories,
with goods arriving frequently from Europe and the Hawaiian Islands and
large quantities of furs and other natural resource products returned
to London. The Fort came to serve as a hub for numerous other
developing industries, including sawmills, dairies, shipbuilders,
fishers and tanneries. In essence, Fort Vancouver truly served as a
historic foundation for the development of the entire Pacific Northwest
region.
But this history of the trapping industry is not the only significant
aspect of this site. The Fort also served as the Northwest's military
administrative headquarters beginning in 1849. The United States Army
continuously occupied the Vancouver Barracks at the historic reserve
site for 150 years. In the 1920's, the Army created a small airfield
for the Army Air Corps, which is now the site of the oldest operating
airfield in the Nation, Pearson Airfield. In the 1930's, the Fort was
used as a training camp for those participating in the Civilian
Conservation Corps' reforestation program. And, during World War II,
General George C. Marshall presided over the Barracks and resided on
Officer's Row.
Thanks to the wisdom, respect for history, and foresight of numerous
individuals including Representative Russell Mack, the esteemed
chairwoman of the House Interior Appropriations Subcommittee, Julia
Butler Hansen, Congressman Don Bonker, and Congresswoman Jolene
Unsoeld, among many others, the tremendous resources of the site have
been protected for future generations.
President Truman signed legislation in 1948 that first authorized for
Fort Vancouver National Monument. The act allowed the War Assets
Administration to transfer surplus property in Vancouver Barracks to
the Secretary of the Interior. On June 30, 1954, the National Monument
was officially established and the nearly 60 acres of the Vancouver
Barracks were transferred to the National Park Service. Finally, the
site was designated as a National Historic Site in 1961.
In 1996, the expanded, 366-acre Vancouver National Historic Reserve
was established to protect all of the historically significant
historical areas within adjacent to the barracks. The reserve includes
Fort Vancouver, the Vancouver Barracks, Officers' Row, Pearson Field,
the Water Resources Education Center, and portions of the Columbia
River waterfront. The sites serve as an enormously significant resource
in Southwest Washington.
The restoration of the barracks alone is an enormously important
project to stimulate the economic revitalization of Vancouver. Last
year, Congress authorized the transfer of the 16 buildings that
comprise the West Barracks to the City of Vancouver, and the partners
involved in this tremendous project have devised a Cooperative
Management Plan that identifies $40 million in necessary spending to
replace failing infrastructure and rehabilitate the 16 buildings to the
standards established under the National Historic Preservation Act.
The Partner's Cooperative Management Plan for the Historic Reserve
calls for the Barracks to be reused primarily for historic
preservation, education, and other forms of public use. But the
location of the site near the heart of Vancouver and the potential for
drawing additional economic activity back to the city make this vitally
important for Southwest Washington.
The public-private partnership plan for the Barracks has also
developed a cost-sharing plan between federal, state, and private
sources to locate the necessary funds and perform the renovation during
the next four to six years. While we at the Federal level have
contributed to the project in recent years, the State of Washington and
the City of Vancouver have also committed significant resources, and
the Vancouver National Historic Reserve Trust has initiated aggressive
efforts to raise funds quickly. I have
[[Page S11558]]
worked this year, and my colleague Senator Murray has successfully
worked this year and in years past, to obtain those critical federal
dollars for the project.
However, I believe that more can and should be done to keep this
project moving ahead. We must never forget our cultural, political, and
economic heritage, and our historic resources help educate and remind
us of those origins. That is why we have come together to introduce
this legislation that will authorize additional federal spending on the
project.
I look forward to working with Senator Murray and others on the
Appropriations Committee to move this legislation quickly and
continuing progress on this significant project for the Pacific
Northwest and our Nation.
______
By Mr. CLELAND:
S. 1650. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to change
provisions regarding emergencies; to the Committee on Health,
Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. CLELAND. Madam President, the events of the past month have
presented the agencies of the Federal Government with a challenge like
none we have ever seen. The anthrax attacks in Florida, New York, New
Jersey, and Washington have placed unprecedented demands on both the
public health and law enforcement arms of the Federal Government. Yet,
in spite of the fact that the men and women of the Federal Government
have never before encountered circumstances like these, I am pleased to
say that, by and large, their response has been exceptional, and I
would like to thank them for their courageous efforts. However, as
might be expected, this latest trial has exposed a number of weaknesses
in our bioterrorism response mechanism which we must now act swiftly to
remedy.
The Federal response to the anthrax crisis has revealed some
uncertainty with regard to the precise roles assigned to each of the
several Federal agencies with responsibilities in such situations and
with regard to coordination between these agencies and the
dissemination of public information. For example, while the CDC took
the lead in testing anthrax samples from Florida, the anthrax samples
found in New York and Washington were collected by the FBI and sent,
not to the CDC, but to DoD labs for testing. By sending these samples
to different facilities, not only are we duplicating services, but,
more importantly, we run the risk of critical results not being
expeditiously reviewed by the appropriate health officials thereby
unacceptably increasing the response time in what is quite literally a
life and death situation.
I believe the uncertainty that has prevailed as to the proper role of
the CDC in a bioterrorist incident, particularly vis-a-vis law
enforcement agencies, is largely due to ambiguity in present statutes
and regulations. Presidential Decision Directive 39 of 1995 clearly
designates the FBI as the overall lead federal agency for domestic
terrorism incidents. At the same time, per last year's Public Health
Threats and Emergencies Act, P.L. 106-505, if the Secretary of Health
and Human Services determines, after consulting with the Director of
the CDC, that a public health emergency exists, the Secretary is
authorized to take such action as may be appropriate to respond to the
public health emergency, including conducting and supporting
investigations into the cause, treatment, or prevention of a disease.
Further, the Federal Response Plan designates HHS as the primary
federal agency for the medical and public health response to
emergencies. So it seems that, under current law and regulation, the
FBI is the lead agency in the event of a terrorist attack, and HHS has
significant authority to act in the event of a public health emergency.
But if a terrorist attack is also a public health emergency, as has
been the case of late, it is not readily evident who is in charge.
Clearly, both the FBI and the CDC have essential roles in such a
situation. These roles are distinct but do occasionally overlap,
necessitating a clarification of how precisely the agencies are to
coordinate with one another in a bioterrorism crisis.
While the law enforcement and public health response to terrorist
attacks are both vital, in the event of a public health emergency, the
unique life and death health ramifications of such an attack mandate,
in my view, that public health experts take the lead role in
investigating and treating the attack. Bioterrorism is a new arena for
us all, including the CDC and in such uncharted territory nothing we do
can guarantee that no mistakes will be made. However, with adequate
funding and armed with their training and expertise, the public health
experts of the CDC constitute our best defense against this emerging
threat. Therefore, the measure I am introducing today will clarify the
role of the CDC and minimize the problems caused by bureaucratic
infighting over agency roles, thereby preventing time from becoming an
additional enemy.
Law enforcement agencies and the CDC have equally important, but
separate, roles in the event of a terrorist attack involving
biological, chemical, or radiological weapons. Such an attack allows us
absolutely no room for confusion over these roles, however, as
evidenced by the tragic results of the current anthrax attacks. While I
am eagerly awaiting further definition of the role of the new Office of
Homeland Security and I will support giving it the necessary authority
to get the job done, the American people cannot afford any delay in
eliminating existing uncertainties in the federal response to
bioterrorism.
My Public Health Emergencies Accountability Act is an attempt to
eliminate the confusion of the current system and address the immediate
threats stemming from this uncertainty. In proposing this measure, I am
building upon current law by clarifying the role of the CDC when acting
during a public health emergency. Furthermore, my measure is consistent
with the proposed Kennedy-Frist Bioterrorism Preparedness Act and
builds on our work in last year's Public Health Threats and Emergencies
Act. We have already had to endure the consequences of the current
confusion over the important, but distinct, roles of public health and
law enforcement in responding to terrorist attacks. It is our
responsibility to act immediately to rectify this situation in order to
assure public health, safety, and security.
The Public Health Emergencies Accountability Act changes current law
in several ways. First, it redefines ``public health emergency'' to
include chemical and radiological attacks, in addition to bioterrorism,
and to make suspected as well as proven such attacks eligible for
emergency designation. Second, as under last year's Public Health
Threats and Emergencies Act, the Secretary of HHS, acting in
consultation with CDC, is given the authority to determine the
existence of a public health emergency, and to respond to such an
emergency by making grants and conducting investigations. My measure
provides additional authority for the Secretary and CDC in these cases
to take the lead in ``directing the response of other Federal
departments and agencies'' and in ``disseminating necessary
information'' to the general public. Third, the time period of the
emergency is to be set by the Secretary and is not to exceed 180 days,
but may be extended by the Secretary after notification of Congress and
other Federal agencies.
Finally, and most importantly, the determination of a public health
emergency by the Secretary of HHS, in consultation with CDC, is made
the defining action in clarifying who should take the lead role in
handling a biological, chemical or radiological attack. Thus, when it
is determined that a given situation does not rise to the level of a
public health emergency, law enforcement will assume the lead position.
On the other hand, when the Secretary of HHS has identified and
declared a public health emergency, public health and the CDC will take
the leading role. In either case, my proposal mandates that the lead
agency keep all other relevant authorities, including the Congress,
fully and currently informed. If there is one message that emerges time
and time again about shortcomings in the Federal Government's current
response to terrorism, especially bioterrorism, it is that the relevant
Federal agencies don't talk to each another soon enough or completely
enough. The Public Health Emergencies Accountability Act will put an
end to that.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the
Record.
[[Page S11559]]
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 1650
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SEC. 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Public Health Emergencies
Accountability Act''.
SEC. 2. AMENDMENT TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE ACT.
Part B of title III of the Public Health Service Act (42
U.S.C. 243 et seq.) is amended by striking section 319 and
inserting the following:
``SEC. 319. PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCIES.
``(a) Emergencies.--If the Secretary determines, after
consultation with the Director of the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention and other public health officials as
may be necessary, that--
``(1) a disease or disorder presents a public health
emergency; or
``(2) a detected or suspected public health emergency,
including significant outbreaks of infectious diseases or
terrorist attacks involving biological, chemical, or
radiological weapons, otherwise exists,
the Secretary may take such action as may be appropriate to
respond to the public health emergency, including making
grants and entering into contracts and, acting through the
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, conducting and
supporting investigations into cause, treatment, or
prevention of a disease or disorder as described in
paragraphs (1) and (2), directing the response of other
Federal departments and agencies with respect to the safety
of the general public and Federal employees and facilities,
and disseminating necessary information to assist States,
localities, and the general public in responding to a disease
or disorder as described in paragraphs (1) and (2).
``(b) Determination.--A determination of an emergency by
the Secretary under subsection (a) shall supersede all other
provisions of law with respect to actions and
responsibilities of the Federal Government, but in all such
cases the Secretary shall keep the relevant Federal
departments and agencies, including but not limited to the
Department of Justice, the Federal Bureau of Investigation,
the Office of Homeland Security, and the committees of
Congress listed in subsection (f), fully and currently
informed.
``(c) Full Disclosure.--In cases involving, or potentially
involving, a public health emergency, but where no
determination of an emergency by the Secretary, under the
provisions of subsection (a), has been made, all relevant
Federal departments and agencies, including but not limited
to the Department of Justice, the Federal Bureau of
Investigation, the Office of Homeland Security, shall keep
the Secretary and the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention and the committees of Congress listed in
subsection (f), fully and currently informed.
``(d) Public Health Emergency Fund.--
``(1) In general.--There is established in the Treasury a
fund to be designated as the ``Public Health Emergency Fund''
to be made available to the Secretary without fiscal year
limitation to carry out subsection (a) only if a public
health emergency has been declared by the Secretary under
such subsection. There is authorized to be appropriated to
the Fund such sums as may be necessary.
``(2) Report.--Not later than 90 days after the end of each
fiscal year, the Secretary shall prepare and submit to the
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions and the
Committee on Appropriations of the Senate and the Committee
on Commerce and the Committee on Appropriations of the House
of Representatives a report describing--
``(A) the expenditures made from the Public Health
Emergency Fund in such fiscal year; and
``(B) each public health emergency for which the
expenditures were made and the activities undertaken with
respect to each emergency which was conducted or supported by
expenditures from the Fund.
``(e) Supplement Not Supplant.--Funds appropriated under
this section shall be used to supplement and not supplant
other Federal, State, and local public funds provided for
activities under this section.
``(f) Emergency Declaration Period.--A determination by the
Secretary under subsection (a) that a public health emergency
exists shall remain in effect for a time period specified by
the Secretary but not longer than the 180-day period
beginning on the date of the determination. Such period may
be extended by the Secretary if the Secretary determines that
such an extension is appropriate and notifies the Committee
on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate and
the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate and the
Committee on Commerce of the House of Representatives and the
Committee on Appropriations of the House of
Representatives.''.
______
By Mr. DORGAN (for himself, Mr. Brownback, and Mr. Conrad):
S. 1651. A bill to establish the United States Consensus Council to
provide for consensus building process in addressing national public
policy issues, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Governmental
Affairs.
Mr. DORGAN. Madam President, today I am introducing legislation that
would create the United States Consensus Council. This council would be
a non-profit, quasi-governmental entity that would serve both the
legislative and executive branches of government. Its role would be to
build agreements among stakeholders primarily on legislative issues
where there are diverse and conflicting views and bring these
agreements back to Congress or other decision-makers for action.
Leaders from the Administration and the Congress have worked together
in recent weeks to respond to the terrorist attacks against our
country. This has shown the benefit of working across party lines to
develop consensus on a variety of policy issues. At a time when the
Nation is unified and focused on these unprecedented challenges, the
Consensus Council can help institutionalize this spirit of comity. The
Council can provide ongoing support to Congress by bringing
stakeholders to the table to resolve a wide range of difficult national
issues.
The North Dakota Consensus Council in my home State serves as a model
for this national proposal. In North Dakota, the Consensus Council has
helped to find common ground on the use of grasslands in the western
part of the State, the structure of judgeships across the State, and
flood mitigation efforts in the Red River Valley. By bringing together
all of the interested parties, the North Dakota Consensus Council was
able to find solutions to problems that had previously seemed
unsurmountable. Washington, DC, is ripe with opportunity for the same
kind of consensus building and mediation. We can not only build on the
experience of consensus building in North Dakota, but similar successes
in Montana, Florida, Oregon and many other States.
The United States Consensus Council would bring people together and
then help to develop recommendations. These recommendations would be
advisory, subject to normal legislative or regulatory processes. The
board of directors would be appointed by the President and the
bipartisan Congressional leadership. The council would remain neutral
on substantive policy matters.
The Council would focus primarily on issues that Congressional
leaders and the White House have agreed are appropriate. These could be
issues that are contentious or deadlocked, or they could be emerging
issues where mediation could help to prevent later polarization.
The Council's role will be to design and conduct processes that lead
to common ground on effective public policy for a particular issue. The
Council could be called upon to convene key stakeholders in face-to-
face meetings over time to build agreements on complex issues.
The legislation authorizes $5 million for the first year and would
also allow private contributions to the Council. The Council would not
be a part of the Federal Government and its employees would not be
considered Federal workers.
I have long been a supporter of building consensus and finding ways
to reach compromise. I believe that this legislation could help the
Congress and the administration to find that middle ground. There are
so many important issues that get deadlocked in Washington, and this
approach will help to break that logjam. Recent weeks have shown that
it can be done. I hope that this bill will allow it to happen more
often. I look forward to working with my colleagues on both sides of
the aisle to move this bill through the process.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of this bill be printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 1651
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 ``United States Consensus
Council Act of 2001''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.
(a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
(1) throughout the Nation there is increasing success in
the use of collaborative and consensus-building approaches to
address critical public policy issues at the national, State,
and local levels;
(2) there is a need for a national Council that can promote
and conduct consensus-
[[Page S11560]]
building processes that primarily address legislative policy
issues of national importance;
(3) such a Council may enroll specific stakeholders, both
public and private, to build agreements that ultimately may
be implemented by Congress, Federal agencies, or other
policymaking bodies;
(4) such a Council will strive to create public policy
agreements that integrate differing perspectives into highest
common denominator solutions;
(5) the establishment of such a Council is an appropriate
investment by the people of this Nation in a capacity that
works in cooperation with Congress, the executive branch, and
others and complements current public policymaking processes
on selected issues;
(6) the existence of such a Council could contribute
especially to resolving differences on contentious policy
issues, preventing polarization on emerging policy issues and
addressing issues of complexity that involve multiple parties
and perspectives;
(7) the establishment of such a Council may contribute
significantly to a renewed sense of civility and respect for
differences, while at the same time promoting vigorous
interchange and open communications among those with
differing points of view; and
(8) the Council may become a repository of wisdom and
experience on public policy collaboration and consensus-
building that can be shared with public and private sector
policymakers and the public in the interest of promoting more
effective public policy and the increased use of
collaborative processes.
(b) Purpose.--The purpose of this Act is to establish an
independent, nonprofit, national Council to serve the people
and the Government by constructing an adjunct to the existing
legislative and regulatory process that seeks to produce
consensus on Federal policy issues through collaborative
processes open to key stakeholders.
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act, the term--
(1) ``Board'' means the Board of Directors of the Council;
(2) ``Council'' means the United States Consensus Council
established under this Act; and
(3) ``Director'' means an individual appointed to the Board
of Directors of the Council.
SEC. 4. UNITED STATES CONSENSUS COUNCIL.
(a) Establishment.--There is established the United States
Consensus Council.
(b) Status; Restrictions.--The Council is an independent
nonprofit corporation and shall be treated as an organization
described under 170(c)(2)(B) of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986. The Council does not have the power to issue any shares
of stock or to declare or pay any dividends. The Council is
not an agency or instrumentality of the United States.
(c) Establishment of or Affiliation With a United States
Consensus Council Foundation.--As determined by the Board,
the Council may establish or affiliate with a nonprofit legal
entity which is capable of receiving, holding, expending, and
investing public or private funds for purposes in furtherance
of the Council under this Act. Such legal entity may be
designated as the ``United States Consensus Council
Foundation''.
(d) Trade Name and Trademark Rights; Vested Rights
Protected; Condition for Use of Federal Identity.--
(1) In general.--The Council has the sole and exclusive
right to use and to allow or refuse others the use of the
terms ``United States Consensus Council'' and ``United States
Consensus Council Foundation'' and the use of any official
United States Consensus Council emblem, badge, seal, and
other mark of recognition or any colorable simulation
thereof.
(2) United states references.--The Council may use ``United
States'' or ``U.S.'' or any other reference to the United
States Government or Nation in its title or in its corporate
seal, emblem, badge, or other mark of recognition or
colorable simulation thereof in any fiscal year only if there
is an authorization of appropriations, or appropriations, for
the Council for such fiscal year provided by law.
SEC. 5. POWERS AND DUTIES.
(a) District of Columbia Nonprofit-Corporate Powers.--The
Council may exercise the powers conferred upon a nonprofit
corporation by the District of Columbia Nonprofit Corporation
Act (D.C. Code, sec. 29-301 et seq.) consistent with this
Act.
(b) Description of Specific Activities.--
(1) In general.--Acting through the Board, the Council
may--
(A) promote and advance programs based on consensus
building as a complement to the current deliberative
processes employed by Congress and the executive branch;
(B) enter into formal and informal relationships with other
institutions, public and private, for purposes not
inconsistent with this Act;
(C) receive referrals from Congress, the President,
executive departments, agencies, private groups, or
organizations that request the Council's expertise in
building a consensus on a particular public policy issue;
(D) coordinate with, make referrals to and receive
referrals from, other consensus-building instrumentalities of
the United States, including the United States Institute for
Environmental Conflict Resolution or the Federal Mediation
and Conciliation Service; and
(E) develop and apply assessment plans for the purpose of
reviewing such referrals.
(2) Consensus-building process.--Acting through the Board,
the Council may, for each consensus-building process--
(A) consider such factors as issue complexity, cost,
ripeness, likelihood of participation by key stakeholders,
and any other relevant indices that may assist the Council in
determining whether to accept a referral;
(B) identify any appropriate facilitator for the
negotiation process;
(C) identify the key stakeholders involved or interested in
the outcome of a particular issue, including those
individuals who have the authority to implement the Council's
recommendations;
(D) develop and publish a common set of facts to inform and
assist consensus-building processes;
(E) establish ground rules, including matters related to
confidentiality, representation of counsel, and ex parte
communications;
(F) work to promote consensus among the stakeholders by
methods such as negotiation, discussion, meetings, and any
other process of dispute resolution;
(G) build and construct agreements among stakeholders;
(H) draft, present, and submit recommendations to the
legislative, executive, or judicial body with oversight of
the particular issue; and
(I) provide training and technical assistance in response
to the request of a department, agency, or instrumentality of
the Government to investigate, examine, study, and report on
any issue within the Council's competence.
(3) Other activities.--The Council also may engage in any
other activity consistent with its mission.
(c) General Authority.--The Council may do any and all
lawful acts necessary or desirable to carry out the
objectives and purposes of this Act.
(d) Guidelines for Council Operations.--As necessary, the
Council shall develop guidelines, through its bylaws or
otherwise, to address--
(1) policies relating to personal service contracts;
(2) standards to ensure that the Council, its Directors,
employees, and agents, avoid conflicts of interest that may
arise;
(3) fundraising policies, donor development programs, and
matters related to the acceptance of private donations;
(4) the duties and responsibilities of the Council, its
Board, officers, employees, and agents; and
(5) the establishment of advisory committees, councils, or
other bodies, as the efficient administration of the business
and purposes of the Council may require.
(e) Administrative Services From General Services
Administration.--The Council may obtain administrative
support services from the Administrator of General Services
and use all sources of supply and services of the General
Services Administration on a reimbursable basis.
SEC. 6. BOARD OF DIRECTORS.
(a) Vested Powers.--The powers of the Council shall be
vested in a Board of Directors unless otherwise specified in
this Act.
(b) Appointments.--The Board of Directors shall consist of
16 voting members as follows:
(1) Eight individuals, including private citizens, State or
local employees, or officers or employees of the United
States, appointed by the President, except that no more than
4 of such individuals may share the same political party
affiliation.
(2) Two individuals, including private citizens, State or
local employees, Senators, or officers or employees of the
United States, appointed by the Majority Leader of the
Senate.
(3) Two individuals, including private citizens, State or
local employees, Senators, or officers or employees of the
United States appointed by the Minority Leader of the Senate.
(4) Two individuals, including private citizens, State or
local employees, Members of the House of Representatives, or
officers or employees of the United States appointed by the
Speaker of the House of Representatives.
(5) Two individuals, including private citizens, State or
local employees, Members of the House of Representatives, or
officers or employees of the United States appointed by the
Minority Leader of the House of Representatives.
(c) Term of Office: Commencement and Termination, Interim
and Remainder Service, Limitation.--
(1) Term of office.--Directors appointed under subsection
(b) of this section shall be appointed to 4-year terms, with
no Director serving more than 2 consecutive terms except
that--
(A) as designated by the President, the terms of 4 of the
Directors initially appointed under subsection (b)(1) shall
be 2 years, subject to appointment to no more than 2
additional 4-year terms in the manner set forth in this
section;
(B) as designated by the Speaker of the House of
Representatives, the terms of the 2 Directors initially
appointed under subsection (b)(4) shall be 2 years, subject
to appointment to no more than 2 additional 4-year terms in
the manner set forth in this section; and
(C) as designated by the Minority Leader of the House of
Representatives, the terms of
[[Page S11561]]
the 2 Directors initially appointed under subsection (b)(5)
shall be 2 years, subject to appointment to no more than 2
additional 4-year terms in the manner set forth in this
section.
(2) Interim service.--Any Director appointed to the Board
may continue to serve until his or her successor is
appointed.
(3) Remainder service.--Any Director appointed to the Board
to replace a Director whose term has not expired shall be
appointed to serve the remainder of that term.
(4) President of council.--The President of the Council
shall serve as a nonvoting Director of the Board.
(d) Qualifications.--A demonstrated interest in the mission
of the Council or expertise in consensus building may be
considered in appointments made under this section.
(e) Removal From Office.--A Director may be removed by a
process to be determined by the Council's bylaws.
(f) Meetings; Notice in Federal Register.--Meetings of the
Board shall be conducted pursuant to the Council's bylaws,
except as provided in the following:
(1) Meetings; quorum.--The Board shall meet at least
semiannually. A majority of the Directors in office shall
constitute a quorum for any Board meeting.
(2) Open meetings.--All official governing meetings of the
Board shall be open to public observation and shall be
preceded by reasonable public notice. Notice in the Federal
Register shall be deemed to be reasonable public notice for
purposes of the preceding sentence. In exceptional
circumstances, the Board may close those portions of a
meeting, upon a majority vote of Directors present and with
the vote taken in public session, which are likely to
disclose information or that may adversely affect any ongoing
proceeding or activity or to disclose information or matters
exempted from public disclosure under subsection (c) of
section 552b of title 5.
(g) Compensation.--Directors shall be compensated at a rate
not to exceed the daily equivalent of the rate payable for a
position at level IV of the Executive Schedule under section
5315 of title 5, United States Code, for each day during
which they are engaged in the performance of the duties of
the Council. The Directors shall not be employees of the
United States.
(h) Travel Expenses.--While away from home or regular place
of business in the performance of duties for the Board, a
Director may receive reasonable travel, subsistence, and
other necessary expenses.
SEC. 7. OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES.
(a) Appointment, Compensation, and Status of President of
Council and Other Officers.--There shall be a President who
shall be appointed by the Board. The President shall be the
chief executive officer of the Council and shall carry out or
cause to be carried out the functions of the Council subject
to the supervision and direction of the Board.
(1) Compensation of president of the council.--The
President of the Council shall be compensated at an annual
rate of pay not to exceed the rate payable for a position at
level II of the Executive Schedule under section 5313 of
title 5, United States Code.
(2) Assignment of federal officers or employees to the
council.--The Council may request the assignment of any
Federal officer or employee to the Council by an appropriate
executive department, agency, or congressional official or
Member of Congress and may enter into an agreement for such
assignment, if the affected officer or employee agrees to
such assignment and such assignment causes no prejudice to
the salary, benefits, status, or advancement within the
department, agency, or congressional staff of such officer or
employee.
(3) Personnel.--The President of the Council, with the
approval of the Board, may appoint and fix the compensation
of such additional personnel as determined necessary. The
President and employees of the Council shall not be employees
of the United States.
(4) Compensation for services or expenses; prohibition on
loans to council directors and personnel.--
(A) In general.--No part of the financial resources,
income, or assets of the Council or of any legal entity
created by the Council shall inure to any agent, employee,
officer, or Director or be distributable to any such person
during the life of the corporation or upon dissolution or
final liquidation. Nothing in this section may be construed
to prevent the payment of reasonable compensation for
services or expenses to the Directors, officers, employees,
and agents of the Council in amounts approved in accordance
with this Act.
(B) Loans.--The Council shall not make loans to its
Directors, officers, employees, or agents.
SEC. 8. PROCEDURES AND RECORDS.
(a) Monitoring and Evaluation of Programs.--The Council
shall monitor and evaluate and provide for independent
evaluation if necessary of programs supported in whole or in
part under this Act to ensure that the provisions of this Act
and the bylaws, rules, regulations, and guidelines
promulgated under this Act are adhered to.
(b) Accounts of Receipts and Disbursements; Financial
Reports.--The Council shall keep correct and complete books
and records of accounts, including separate and distinct
accounts of receipts and disbursements of Federal funds. The
Council's annual financial report shall identify the use of
such funding and shall present a clear description of the
full financial situation of the Council.
(c) Minutes of Proceedings.--The Council shall keep minutes
of the proceedings of its Board and of any committees having
authority under the Board.
(d) Record and Inspection of Required Items.--
(1) In general.--The Council shall keep a record of--
(A) the names and addresses of its Directors, copies of
this Act, and any other Act relating to the Council;
(B) all Council bylaws, rules, regulations, and guidelines;
(C) required minutes of proceedings;
(D) all applications and proposals and issued or received
contracts and grants; and
(E) financial records of the Council.
(2) Inspection.--All items required by this subsection may
be inspected by any Director or any agent or attorney of a
Director for any proper purpose at any reasonable time.
(e) Audits.--The accounts of the Council shall be audited
annually in accordance with generally accepted auditing
standards by independent certified public accountants or
independent licensed public accountants, certified or
licensed by a regulatory authority of a State or other
political subdivision of the United States. The audit shall
be conducted at the place or places where the accounts of the
Council are normally kept. All books, accounts, financial
records, files, and other papers, things, and property
belonging to or in use by the Council and necessary to
facilitate the audit shall be made available to the person or
persons conducting the audit, and full facilities for
verifying transactions with the balances or securities held
by depositories, fiscal agents, and custodians shall be
afforded to such person or persons.
(f) Report to Congress; Copies for Public.--The Council
shall provide a report to the President and to each House of
Congress not later than 6 months following the close of the
fiscal year for which the audit is made. The report shall set
forth such statements of the Council's activities for the
prior year. The report shall be made available to the public.
SEC. 9. FUNDING.
(a) Authorization of Appropriations.--
(1) In general.--For the purpose of carrying out this Act,
there are authorized to be appropriated $5,000,000 for fiscal
year 2002 and such sums as may be necessary for succeeding
fiscal years.
(2) Availability.--Funds appropriated under the authority
of paragraph (1) shall remain available until expended.
(b) Transfer of Unobligated Funds; Reports of Use of Funds
to Congress and President.--The Board may transfer to the
legal entity authorized to be established under section 4(c)
any funds not obligated or expended from appropriations to
the Council for a fiscal year, and such funds shall remain
available for obligation or expenditure for the purposes of
such legal entity without regard to fiscal year limitations.
Any use by such legal entity of appropriated funds shall be
reported to each House of Congress and to the President.
SEC. 10. DISSOLUTION OR LIQUIDATION.
Upon dissolution or final liquidation of the Council, all
income and assets appropriated by the United States to the
Council, but not any other funds, shall revert to the United
States Treasury.
______
By Mr. SANTORUM (for himself and Mr. McCain);
S. 1652. A bill to amend the Agricultural Market Transition Act to
convert the price support program for sugarcane and sugar beets into a
system of solely recourse loans and to provide for the gradual
elimination of the program; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition,
and Forestry.
Mr. SANTORUM. Madam President, I rise today to introduce the Sugar
Program Reform Act. This bill is a continuation of my ongoing efforts
to bring needed reform to Federal agriculture programs that have
perpetuated Federal control over prices and production.
While the 1996 farm bill modernized Federal agriculture policy for
some commodities, the sugar program, however, only realized minor
reforms. As a result, trade opportunities for other agriculture
producers have been hampered, and Americans have been twice affected,
both as consumers and taxpayers.
A GAO report released in June 2000, presents information suggesting
the Federal sugar program is not serving consumers and taxpayers well.
That report, an update to a 1993 report on the same matter, estimated
that the sugar program resulted in net losses to the U.S. economy of
about $700 million in 1996, and about $900 million in 1998. Moreover,
it found that the primary beneficiaries of the sugar program's higher
prices are domestic sugar beet and cane producers who were estimated to
receive benefits of about $800 million in 1996 and nearly $1 billion in
1998.
In terms of trade opportunities, the sugar program harms other
agricultural producers by slowing efforts to
[[Page S11562]]
open foreign markets for American farm products. As long as the United
States uses restrictive sugar import quotas to stiffle trade, these
counties have a ready excuse not to drop their own trade barriers.
The Sugar Program Reform Act, which I am pleased to introduce with
Senate McCain, will finally bring major change to the sugar program. It
will accomplish that goal by: reducing support prices and ending them
after 2004; requiring that loans be repaid ending sugar processors'
ability to turn over surplus sugar to the government instead of
repaying the amounts they have borrowed; and assuring adequate
supplies, requiring that import quotas be administered to maintain
prices at no more than the price support level established by Congress.
When the Senate considers legislation to reauthorize farm programs, I
look forward to a spirited debate on the necessity of reforming
policies that have not served the best interests of taxpayers or the
agricultural community at large.
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. 1652
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 ``Sugar Program Reform Act''.
SEC. 2. RECOURSE LOANS FOR PROCESSORS OF SUGARCANE AND SUGAR
BEETS AND REDUCTION IN LOAN RATES.
(a) Gradual Reduction in Loan Rates.--
(1) Sugarcane processor loans.--Section 156(a) of the
Agricultural Market Transition Act (7 U.S.C. 7272(a)) is
amended by striking ``equal to 18 cents per pound for raw
cane sugar.'' and inserting the following: ``, per pound for
raw cane sugar, equal to the following:
``(1) In the case of raw cane sugar processed from the 1996
through 2000 crops, $0.18.
``(2) In the case of raw cane sugar processed from the 2001
crop, $0.17.
``(3) In the case of raw cane sugar processed from the 2002
crop, $0.16.
``(4) In the case of raw cane sugar processed from the 2003
crop, $0.15.
``(5) In the case of raw cane sugar processed from the 2004
crop, $0.14.''.
(2) Sugar beet processor loans.--Section 156(b) of the
Agricultural Market Transition Act (7 U.S.C. 7272(b)) is
amended by striking ``equal to 22.9 cents per pound for
refined beet sugar.'' and inserting the following: ``, per
pound of refined beet sugar, that reflects--
``(1) an amount that bears the same relation to the loan
rate in effect under subsection (a) for a crop as the
weighted average of producer returns for sugar beets bears to
the weighted average of producer returns for sugarcane,
expressed on a cents per pound basis for refined beet sugar
and raw cane sugar, for the most recent 5-year period for
which data are available; and
``(2) an amount that covers sugar beet processor fixed
marketing expenses.''.
(b) Conversion to Recourse Loans.--Section 156(e) of the
Agricultural Market Transition Act (7 U.S.C. 7272(e)) is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``only'' after ``this
section''; and
(2) by striking paragraph (2) and inserting the following:
``(2) National loan rates.--Recourse loans under this
section shall be made available at all locations nationally
at the rates specified in this section, without adjustment to
provide regional differentials.''.
(c) Conversion to Private Sector Financing.--Section 156 of
the Agricultural Market Transition Act (7 U.S.C. 7272) is
amended--
(1) by redesignating subsection (i) as subsection (j);
(2) by inserting after subsection (h) the following:
``(i) Conversion to Private Sector Financing.--
Notwithstanding any other provision of law--
``(1) no processor of any of the 2005 or subsequent crops
of sugarcane or sugar beets shall be eligible for a loan
under this section with respect to the crops; and
``(2) the Secretary may not make price support available,
whether in the form of loans, payments, purchases, or other
operations, for any of the 2005 and subsequent crops of sugar
beets and sugarcane by using the funds of the Commodity
Credit Corporation or other funds available to the
Secretary.''; and
(3) in subsection (j) (as redesignated by paragraph (1))--
(A) by striking ``subsection (f)'' and inserting
``subsections (f) and (i)''; and
(B) by striking ``2002'' and inserting ``2004''.
(d) Termination of Marketing Quotas and Allotments.--
(1) Termination.--Part VII of subtitle B of title III of
the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 (7 U.S.C. 1359aa et
seq.) is repealed.
(2) Conforming amendment.--Section 344(f)(2) of the
Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 (7 U.S.C. 1344(f)(2)) is
amended by striking ``sugar cane for sugar, sugar beets for
sugar,''.
(e) Other Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Price support for nonbasic agricultural commodities.--
(A) Designated nonbasic agricultural commodities.--Section
201(a) of the Agricultural Act of 1949 (7 U.S.C. 1446(a)) is
amended by striking ``milk, sugar beets, and sugarcane'' and
inserting ``and milk''.
(B) Other nonbasic agricultural commodities.--Section 301
of the Agricultural Act of 1949 (7 U.S.C. 1447) is amended by
inserting ``(other than sugarcane and sugar beets)'' after
``title II''.
(2) Powers of commodity credit corporation.--Section 5(a)
of the Commodity Credit Corporation Charter Act (15 U.S.C.
714c(a)) is amended by inserting ``(except for the 2005 and
subsequent crops of sugarcane and sugar beets)'' after
``agricultural commodities''.
(3) Section 32 activities.--Section 32 of the Act of August
24, 1935 (7 U.S.C. 612c), is amended in the second sentence
of the first paragraph by inserting ``(other than sugarcane
and sugar beets)'' after ``commodity'' the last place it
appears.
(f) Assurance of Adequate Supplies of Sugar.--Section 902
of the Food Security Act of 1985 (7 U.S.C. 1446g note; Public
Law 99-198) is amended by striking subsection (a) and
inserting the following:
``(a) In General.--Beginning with the quota year for sugar
imports that begins after the 2000/2001 quota year, the
President shall use all authorities available to the
President as may be necessary to enable the Secretary of
Agriculture to ensure that adequate supplies of raw cane
sugar are made available to the United States market at
prices that are not greater than the higher of--
``(1) the world sugar price (adjusted to a delivered
basis); or
``(2) the raw cane sugar loan rate in effect under section
156 of the Agricultural Market Transition Act (7 U.S.C.
7272), plus interest.''.
____________________