[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 35 (Wednesday, March 5, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3196-S3202]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  STATEMENTS ON SUBMITTED RESOLUTIONS

                                 ______
                                 

 SENATE RESOLUTION 74--TO AMEND RULE XLII OF THE STANDING RULES ON THE 
  SENATE TO PROHIBIT EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION IN THE SENATE BASED ON 
                           SEXUAL ORIENTATION

  Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself, Mr. Smith, Mr. Daschle, Ms. Landrieu, 
Mr. Breaux, Mr. Akaka, Mr. Biden, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Bayh, Mr. 
Durbin, Ms. Stabenow, Mr. Levin, Mr. Wyden, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Jeffords, 
Mr. Feingold, Mr. Lautenberg, Ms. Collins, Mr. Chafee, Mr. Harkin, Mr. 
Bingaman, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Sarbanes, Mr. Corzine, Mr. Leahy, Mr. 
Lieberman, Mr. Reed, Mr. Dayton, Mr. Nelson of Florida, Mr. Schumer, 
and Mrs. Clinton) submitted the following resolution; which was 
referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration:
       Resolved,

     SECTION 1. AMENDMENT TO THE STANDING RULES OF THE SENATE.

       Paragraph 1 of rule XLII of the Standing Rules of the 
     Senate is amended by striking ``or state of physical 
     handicap'' and inserting ``state of physical handicap, or 
     sexual orientation''.

  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today to submit a resolution to 
prohibit employment discrimination in the Senate based on sexual 
orientation.
  I would like to thank the Senator from Oregon, Mr. Smith, as well as 
my other colleagues who join me in introducing this resolution.
  The resolution would amend the Standing Rules of the Senate by adding 
``sexual orientation'' to ``race, color, religion, sex, national 
origin, age, or state of physical handicap'' in the antidiscrimination 
provision of rule 42, which governs the Senate's employment practices.
  By amending the current rule, it would forbid any Senate Member, 
officer, or employee from terminating, refusing to hire, or otherwise 
discriminating against an individual with respect to promotion, 
compensation, or any other privilege of employment, on the basis of 
that individual's sexual orientation.
  Senate employees currently have no recourse available to them should 
they become a victim of this type of employment discrimination.
  If the rules are amended, any Senate employee that encountered 
discrimination based on their sexual orientation would have the option 
of reporting it to the Senate Ethics Committee. The Ethics Committee 
could then investigate the claim and recommend discipline for any 
Senate Member, officer, or employee found to have violated the rule.
  Unfortunately, the Senate is already well behind other establishments 
of the U.S. Government in this area of antidiscrimination.
  By 1996, at least 13 Cabinet level agencies, including the 
Departments of Justice, Agriculture, Transportation, Health and Human 
Services, Interior, Housing and Urban Development, Labor, and Energy, 
in addition to the General Accounting Office, General Services 
Administration, Internal Revenue Service, the Federal Reserve System, 
Office of Personnel Management, and the White House had already issued 
policy statements forbidding sexual orientation discrimination.
  In 1998, Executive Order 13087 was issued to prohibit sexual 
orientation discrimination in the Federal executive branch, including 
civilian employees of the military departments and sundry other 
governmental entities.
  That Executive order now covers approximately 2 million Federal 
civilian

[[Page S3197]]

workers. Yet more than 4 years later, there are still employees of the 
Senate that are unprotected.
  In taking this step toward addressing discrimination, the Senate 
would join not only the executive branch, but also 308 Fortune 500 
companies, 23 State governments and 262 local governments that have 
already prohibited workplace discrimination based on sexual 
orientation.
  Currently, 65 Senators have already adopted written policies for 
their congressional offices indicating that sexual orientation is not a 
factor in their employment decisions.
  Now, I urge my colleagues to join me by making this policy universal 
for the Senate, rather than relying on a patchwork of protection that 
only covers some of the Senate's employees.
  Mr. SMITH. Mr. President, I rise today to join my colleague, Senator 
Feinstein in introducing a resolution to prohibit employment 
discrimination in the Senate based on sexual orientation.
  Senate rules currently prohibit employment discrimination based on 
race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, or state of physical 
handicap. I believe that it is time for us to add sexual orientation to 
that list.
  As a cosponsor of the Employment Nondiscrimination Act, I have stood 
behind the principle that employment discrimination against any person 
is hurtful to society as a whole, and if I am going to hold the private 
sector accountable for its actions, I should certainly promote the same 
principles in the U.S. Senate.
  It is important to note that the Senate is lagging behind the rest of 
the Federal Government in prohibiting employment discrimination based 
on sexual orientation. Since 1996, 13 Cabinet level agencies and the 
White House have had anti-discrimination policies, and in 1998, 
President Clinton issued an executive order prohibiting sexual 
orientation discrimination in the Federal Executive Branch, including 
civilians in the military. That executive order now covers 2 million 
Federal employees, but people who work in the Senate do not enjoy those 
same protections.
  Many of my colleagues already have written policies indicating that 
sexual orientation is not a factor in their employment decisions, and 
it is past time that we make this non-discrimination policy a part of 
the Standing Rules of the Senate. I want to thank my friend and 
colleague, Senator Feinstein, for her leadership in this issue, and 
urge my colleagues to support this important resolution.
                                 ______
                                 

 SENATE RESOLUTION 75--COMMEMORATING AND ACKNOWLEDGING THE DEDICATION 
AND SACRIFICE MADE BY THE MEN AND WOMEN WHO HAVE LOST THEIR LIVES WHILE 
                  SERVING AS LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS

  Mr. CAMPBELL (for himself, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Allard, Mr. 
Biden, Mr. Miller, Mr. Gregg, Mr. Dorgan, Mr. Lott, Mr. Daschle, Mr. 
Cochran, Mr. Nickles, Mr. Dayton, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Inhofe, Mr. Jeffords, 
Mr. Fitzgerald, Ms. Landrieu, and Mr. Durbin) submitted the following 
resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary:

                               S. Res. 75

       Whereas the well-being of all citizens of the United States 
     is preserved and enhanced as a direct result of the vigilance 
     and dedication of law enforcement personnel;
       Whereas more than 700,000 men and women, at great risk to 
     their personal safety, presently serve their fellow citizens 
     as guardians of peace;
       Whereas peace officers are on the front line in preserving 
     the right of the children of the United States to receive an 
     education in a crime-free environment, a right that is all 
     too often threatened by the insidious fear caused by violence 
     in schools;
       Whereas more than 145 peace officers across the Nation were 
     killed in the line of duty during 2002, well below the 
     decade-long average of 165 deaths annually, and a major drop 
     from 2001 when 230 officers were killed, including 72 
     officers in the September 11th terrorist attacks;
       Whereas a number of factors contributed to this reduction 
     in deaths, including better equipment and the increased use 
     of bullet-resistant vests, improved training, longer prison 
     terms for violent offenders, and advanced emergency medical 
     care;
       Whereas every year, 1 out of every 9 peace officers is 
     assaulted, 1 out of every 25 peace officers is injured, and 1 
     out of every 4,400 peace officers is killed in the line of 
     duty somewhere in America every other day; and
       Whereas on May 15, 2003, more than 15,000 peace officers 
     are expected to gather in Washington, D.C. to join with the 
     families of their recently fallen comrades to honor those 
     comrades and all others who went before them: Now, therefore, 
     be it
       Resolved, That the Senate--
       (1) recognizes May 15, 2003, as Peace Officers Memorial 
     Day, in honor of Federal, State, and local officers killed or 
     disabled in the line of duty; and
       (2) calls upon the people of the United States to observe 
     this day with appropriate ceremonies and respect.

  Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, today I am joined by the chairman and 
ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Senators Hatch and 
Leahy, along with 16 other Senators, in introducing this resolution to 
keep alive in the memory of all Americans the sacrifice and commitment 
of those law enforcement officers who lost their lives serving their 
communities. Specifically, this resolution would designate May 15, 
2003, as National Peace Officers Memorial Day.
  As a former deputy sheriff, I know first-hand the risks which law 
enforcement officers face every day on the frontlines protecting our 
communities. Currently, more than 850,000 men and women who serve this 
Nation as our guardians of law and order do so at a great risk. Every 
year, about 1 in 15 officers is assaulted, 1 in 46 officers is injured, 
and 1 in 5,255 officers is killed in the line of duty somewhere in 
America every other day. There are few communities in this country that 
have not been impacted by the words: ``officer down.''
  On September 11, 2001, 72 peace officers died at the World Trade 
Center in New York City as a result of a cowardly act of terrorism. 
This single act of terrorism resulted in the highest number of peace 
officers ever killed in a single incident in the history of this 
country. Before this event, the greatest loss of law enforcement in a 
single incident occurred in 1917, when nine Milwaukee police officers 
were killed in a bomb blast at their police station.
  In 2002, more than 145 Federal, State, and local law enforcement 
officers gave their lives in the line of duty, well below the decade-
long average of 165 deaths annually, and a major drop from 2001 when a 
total of 230 officers were killed. A number of factors contributed to 
this reduction including better equipment and the increased use of 
bullet-resistant vests, improved training, longer prison terms for 
violent offenders, and advanced emergency medical care. And, in total, 
more than 15,000 men and women have made the supreme sacrifice.
  The chairman of the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund, 
Craig W. Floyd, reminds us that ``a police officer is killed in the 
line of duty somewhere in America nearly every other day. More than 
800,000 officers put their lives at risk each and every day for our 
safety and protection. National Police Week and Peace Officers Memorial 
Day provide our Nation with an important opportunity to recognize and 
honor that extraordinary service and sacrifice.''
  On May 15, 2003, more than 15,000 peace officers are expected to 
gather in our Nation's Capital to join with the families of their 
fallen comrades who by their faithful and loyal devotion to their 
responsibilities have rendered a dedicated service to their 
communities. In doing so, these heroes have established for themselves 
an enviable and enduring reputation for preserving the rights and 
security of all citizens. This resolution is a fitting tribute for this 
special and solemn occasion.
  I urge my colleagues to join us in supporting passage of this 
important resolution.
                                 ______
                                 

   SENATE RESOLUTION 76--EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF THE SENATE THAT THE 
 POLICY OF PREEMPTION, COMBINED WITH A POLICY OF FIRST USE OF NUCLEAR 
WEAPONS, CREATES AN INCENTIVE FOR THE PROLIFERATION OF WEAPONS OF MASS 
  DESTRUCTION, ESPECIALLY NUCLEAR WEAPONS, AND IS CONSISTENT WITH THE 
                LONG-TERM SECURITY OF THE UNITED STATES

  Mr. DURBIN submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
the Committee on Foreign Relations:

                               S. Res. 76

       Whereas press reports show that the December 31, 2001 
     Nuclear Posture Review states that the United States might 
     use nuclear weapons to dissuade adversaries from

[[Page S3198]]

     undertaking military programs or operations that could 
     threaten United States interests;
       Whereas the Nuclear Posture Review, according to such 
     reports, goes on to state that nuclear weapons could be 
     employed against targets capable of withstanding non-nuclear 
     attack;
       Whereas the Nuclear Posture Review is further reported to 
     state that, in setting requirements for nuclear strike 
     capabilities, North Korea, Iraq, Iran, Syria, and Libya are 
     among the countries that could be involved in immediate, 
     potential, or unexpected contingencies;
       Whereas the September 17, 2002 National Security Strategy 
     of the United States of America states that ``[a]s a matter 
     of common sense and self-defense, America will act against 
     such emerging threats before they are fully formed,'' and 
     that ``[t]o forestall or prevent such hostile acts by our 
     adversaries, the United States will, if necessary, act 
     preemptively'';
       Whereas the December 2002 National Strategy to Combat 
     Weapons of Mass Destruction states that ``[t]he United States 
     will continue to make clear that it reserves the right to 
     respond with overwhelming force--including through resort to 
     all of our options--to the use of [weapons of mass 
     destruction] against the United States, our forces abroad, 
     and friends and allies'';
       Whereas United States nuclear policy, outlined in 1978 and 
     restated in 1995 and 2002, includes, in the context of 
     gaining other nations' support for the Treaty on the Non-
     Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, a ``negative security 
     assurance'' that the United States would not use its nuclear 
     force against a country that does not possess nuclear weapons 
     unless that country was allied with a nuclear weapons 
     possessor;
       Whereas the Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and 
     International Security, John Bolton, recently announced the 
     Administration's abandonment of the so-called ``negative 
     security assurance'' pledge to refrain from using nuclear 
     weapons against non-nuclear nations;
       Whereas reports about the Stockpile Stewardship Conference 
     Planning Meeting of the Department of Defense, held on 
     January 10, 2003, indicate that the United States is engaged 
     in the expansion of research and development of new types of 
     nuclear weapons;
       Whereas this expansion of nuclear weapons research covers 
     new forms of nuclear weaponry that threaten the limitations 
     on nuclear weapons testing that are established by the 
     unratified, but previously respected, Comprehensive Nuclear 
     Test-Ban Treaty;
       Whereas these policies and actions threaten to make nuclear 
     weapons appear to be useful, legitimate, first-strike 
     offensive weapons, rather than a force for deterrence, and 
     therefore undermine an essential tenet of nonproliferation; 
     and
       Whereas the cumulative effect of the policies announced by 
     the President is to redefine the concept of preemption, which 
     had been understood to mean the right of every state to 
     anticipatory self-defense in the face of imminent attack, and 
     to broaden the concept to justify a preventive war initiated 
     by the United States, even without evidence of an imminent 
     attack, in which the United States might use nuclear weapons 
     against non-nuclear states: Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that the 
     President's policy of preemption, combined with a policy of 
     first use of nuclear weapons, creates an incentive for 
     proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, especially 
     nuclear weapons, and is inconsistent with the long-term 
     security of the United States.
                                 ______
                                 

 SENATE RESOLUTION 77--EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF THE SENATE THAT ONE OF 
THE MOST GRAVE THREATS FACING THE UNITED STATES IS THE PROLIFERATION OF 
WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION, TO UNDERSCORE THE NEED FOR A COMPREHENSIVE 
     STRATEGY FOR DEALING WITH THIS THREAT, AND TO SET FORTH BASIC 
             PRINCIPLES THAT SHOULD UNDERPIN THIS STRATEGY

  Mr. DASCHLE (for himself, Mr. Lieberman, Mr. Biden, Mrs. Feinstein, 
Mr. Dodd, Mr. Durbin, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Reid, Mr. Akaka, 
Mr. Dorgan, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Carper, Mr. Feingold, Mr. 
Lautenberg, Mr. Reed, Mr. Rockefeller, Ms. Landrieu, Mr. Kennedy, and 
Mrs. Murray, Mr. Dayton, Mr. Nelson of Nebraska, Mrs. Clinton, Mr. 
Corzine, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Harkin, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Wyden, Mr. Kohl, Mr. 
Johnson, Mr. Jeffords, and Ms. Cantwell) submitted the following 
resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations:

                               S. Res. 77

       Whereas on September 17, 2002, President Bush stated that 
     ``[t]he gravest danger our Nation faces lies at the 
     crossroads of radicalism and technology. Our enemies have 
     openly declared that they are seeking weapons of mass 
     destruction, and evidence indicates that they are doing so 
     with determination'';
       Whereas on February 11, 2003, before the Select Committee 
     on Intelligence of the Senate, George Tenet, the Director of 
     Central Intelligence, testified that ``[w]e've entered a new 
     world of proliferation . . . Additional countries may decide 
     to seek nuclear weapons as it becomes clear their neighbors 
     and regional rivals are already doing so. The domino theory 
     of the 21st century may well be nuclear'';
       Whereas Robert S. Mueller, III, the Director of the Federal 
     Bureau of Investigation, stated on February 11, 2003, that 
     ``[m]y greatest concern is that our enemies are trying to 
     acquire dangerous new capabilities with which to harm 
     Americans. Terrorists worldwide have ready access to 
     information on chemical, biological, radiological, and 
     nuclear weapons via the internet'';
       Whereas the Treaty on Reduction and Limitation of Strategic 
     Offensive Arms, with Annexes, Protocols, and Memorandum of 
     Understanding, signed at Moscow on July 31, 1991 (START 
     Treaty) addresses a narrow aspect of the threat posed by 
     weapons of mass destruction--deployed strategic nuclear 
     weapons--and fails to address other aspects of the nuclear 
     threat as well as the threat posed by biological or chemical 
     weapons or materials;
       Whereas in a recent bipartisan report, former Senators 
     Warren Rudman and Gary Hart concluded that ``America remains 
     dangerously unprepared to prevent and respond to a 
     catastrophic terrorist attack on U.S. soil'';
       Whereas the United States Government last month raised the 
     terrorist threat level and, according to the Director of 
     Central Intelligence, did so in part ``because of threat 
     reporting from multiple sources with strong al Qaeda ties . . 
     .and to plots that could include the use of radiological 
     dispersion devices as well as poisons and chemicals'';
       Whereas shortly before the inauguration of President George 
     W. Bush, a bipartisan task force chaired by former Majority 
     Leader of the Senate Howard Baker and former White House 
     Counsel Lloyd Cutler reported that ``the most urgent unmet 
     national security threat to the United States today is the 
     danger that weapons of mass destruction or weapons-usable 
     material in Russia could be stolen and sold to terrorists or 
     hostile nation states and used against American troops abroad 
     or citizens at home'';
       Whereas other states of concern continue their drive to 
     acquire a weapons of mass destruction (WMD) capability as 
     evidenced by the observation of the Director of Central 
     Intelligence, in testimony before the Select Committee on 
     Intelligence of the Senate, that the intelligence community 
     has ``renewed concern over Libya's interest in WMD'';
       Whereas the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has 
     been told by Iran that it will not accept the strengthened 
     safeguard protocol of the Agency and is committed to 
     acquiring the ability to independently produce enriched 
     uranium;
       Whereas the Bush Administration has failed to begin direct 
     talks with North Korea in spite of the assessment of the 
     United States Government that North Korea may produce 
     sufficient additional nuclear material for six to eight 
     nuclear weapons within six months and the decision of North 
     Korea to expel IAEA inspectors from the Yongbyon complex, to 
     restart its nuclear reactor, to begin moving formerly secure 
     spent nuclear fuel rods, to leave the Treaty on the Non-
     Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, done at Washington, London, 
     and Moscow, July 1, 1968 (Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty or 
     NPT), and to test a new cruise missile;
       Whereas the December 2002 National Strategy to Combat 
     Weapons Of Mass Destruction states that ``[w]eapons of mass 
     destruction represent a threat not just to the United States, 
     but also to our friends and allies and the broader 
     international community. For this reason, it is vital that we 
     work closely with like-minded countries on all elements of 
     our comprehensive proliferation strategy.'';
       Whereas newspaper accounts of the December 2001 Nuclear 
     Posture Review state that the review concludes the United 
     States might use nuclear weapons to dissuade adversaries from 
     undertaking military programs or operations that could 
     threaten United States interests, that nuclear weapons could 
     be employed against targets able to withstand non-nuclear 
     attack, and that in setting requirements for nuclear strike 
     capabilities, North Korea, Iraq, Iran, Syria, and Libya are 
     among the countries that could be involved in immediate, 
     potential, or unexpected contingencies;
       Whereas the September 17, 2002, National Security Strategy 
     of the United States states that ``[a]s a matter of common 
     sense and self-defense, America will act against such 
     emerging threats before they are fully formed'' and ``[t]o 
     forestall or prevent such hostile acts by our adversaries, 
     the United States will, if necessary, act preemptively'';
       Whereas General John Shalikashvili, former chairman of the 
     Joint Chiefs of Staff, has stated that ``[a]ny activities 
     that erode the firebreak between nuclear and conventional 
     weapons or that encourage the use of nuclear weapons for 
     purposes that are not strategic and deterrent in nature would 
     undermine the advantage that we derive from overwhelming 
     conventional superiority'';
       Whereas the Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and 
     International Security implied the abandonment by the Bush 
     Administration of the so-called ``negative security

[[Page S3199]]

     assurance'' pledge to refrain from using nuclear weapons 
     against any non-nuclear nation unless that state was allied 
     with a possessor of nuclear weapons, a policy that had been 
     in place for 25 years and endorsed by successive Republican 
     and Democratic Administrations;
       Whereas documents recently made public from the Stockpile 
     Stewardship Conference Planning Meeting of the Department of 
     Defense held on January 10, 2003, indicate that the United 
     States is moving toward expansion of research and development 
     of new types of nuclear weapons and has sought repeal of the 
     ban on research and development of new low-yield nuclear 
     weapons;
       Whereas the United States remains dangerously vulnerable to 
     future terrorist attacks, and Bush the Administration has 
     failed to spend homeland security funds provided by Congress 
     and has repeatedly opposed efforts to increase funding for 
     such homeland security activities as State and local first 
     responders, border security, and food and water safety;
       Whereas the Bush Administration has repeatedly failed to 
     meet the funding benchmarks recommended by former Majority 
     Leader of the Senate Howard Baker and former White House 
     Counsel Lloyd Cutler for the nonproliferation programs of the 
     Department of Energy;
       Whereas notwithstanding the transformation of the strategic 
     environment after the tragic events of September 11, 2001, a 
     policy that moves toward the goal of the Nuclear 
     Nonproliferation Treaty, and away from the increased reliance 
     on and the importance of nuclear weapons, will serve to 
     further the United States goal of preventing the 
     proliferation of nuclear weapons; and
       Whereas in a discussion of the grave threat posed the 
     United States by weapons of mass destruction, President Bush 
     has stated that ``[h]istory will judge harshly those who saw 
     this coming danger but failed to act'': Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that the grave 
     threat posed by the proliferation of weapons of mass 
     destruction demands that the United States develop a 
     comprehensive and robust nonproliferation strategy, 
     including--
       (1) the establishment of a broad international coalition 
     against proliferation;
       (2) the prevention of the theft or diversion of chemical 
     weapons from existing stockpiles--
       (A) by greatly accelerating efforts to destroy such weapons 
     under the terms of the Chemical Weapons Convention in the 
     United States, Russia, and other nations; and
       (B) by strengthening and enforcing existing treaties and 
     agreements on the elimination or limitation of nuclear, 
     chemical, and biological weapons;
       (3) the termination of the proliferation of weapons of mass 
     destruction, and the systems to deliver such weapons, by the 
     reinforcement of the international system of export controls 
     and by the immediate commencement of negotiations on a 
     protocol to interdict shipments of such weapons and delivery 
     systems;
       (4) an engagement in direct and immediate talks with North 
     Korea, coordinated with United States regional allies, to 
     secure the peaceful end to the nuclear programs and long-
     range missile programs of North Korea;
       (5) the elimination of excess nuclear weapons in Russia, 
     and the security of nuclear materials in Russia and the 
     states of the former Soviet Union, by the end of the decade 
     in order to prevent the theft or sale of such weapons or 
     materials to terrorist groups or hostile states, including 
     for that purpose--
       (A) the provision of levels of funding for the 
     nonproliferation programs of the Department of Energy as 
     called for in the report of former Majority Leader of the 
     Senate Howard Baker and former White House Counsel Lloyd 
     Cutler; and
       (B) the provision of increased funding for the Cooperative 
     Threat Reduction (CTR) program of the Department of Defense;
       (6) the expansion of the Cooperative Threat Reduction 
     program to include additional states willing to engage in 
     bilateral efforts to reduce their nuclear stockpiles;
       (7) the provision of adequate funds for homeland security, 
     including the provision of funds to State, local, and tribal 
     governments to hire, equip, and train the first responders 
     required by such governments; and
       (8) the enhancement of the capability of the United States 
     and other nations to detect nuclear weapons activity by the 
     pursuit of transparency measures.
                                 ______
                                 

 SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 13--CONDEMNING THE SELECTION OF LIBYA TO 
  CHAIR THE UNITED NATIONS COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS, AND FOR OTHER 
                                PURPOSES

  Mr. LAUTENBERG (for himself, Mr. Smith, Mr. Kennedy, Mrs. Feinstein, 
and Mr. Corzine) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which 
was ordered held at the desk:

                            S. Con. Res. 13

       Whereas on January 20, 2003, Libya, a gross violator of 
     human rights and State sponsor of terrorism, was elected to 
     chair the United Nations Commission on Human Rights (the 
     ``Commission''), a body charged with the responsibility of 
     promoting universal respect for human rights and fundamental 
     freedoms for all;
       Whereas according to the rotation system that governs the 
     selection of the Executive Board of the Commission, 2003 was 
     designated as the year for the Africa Group to chair the 
     Commission, and the Africa Group selected Libya as its 
     candidate;
       Whereas South Africa's Democratic Alliance spokeswoman, 
     Dene Smuts, was quoted by the British Broadcasting 
     Corporation as saying that the Government of South Africa's 
     decision to support the election of Libya was an insult to 
     human rights and that African countries ``should have 
     supported a candidate of whom all Africans could be proud'';
       Whereas Amnesty International has repeatedly documented 
     that the human rights situation in Libya continues to 
     seriously deteriorate, with systematic occurrences of gross 
     human rights violations, including the extrajudicial 
     execution of government opponents and the routine torture, 
     and occasional resulting death, of political detainees during 
     interrogation;
       Whereas Human Rights Watch recently declared that ``[o]ver 
     the past three decades, Libya's human rights record has been 
     appalling'' and that ``Libya has been a closed country for 
     United Nations and nongovernmental human rights 
     investigators'';
       Whereas Human Rights Watch further asserted that ``Libya's 
     election poses a real test for the Commission,'' observing 
     that ``[r]epressive governments must not be allowed to hijack 
     the United Nations human rights system'';
       Whereas the Lawyers Committee for Human Rights urged that 
     ``the Government of Libya should not be entrusted by the 
     United Nations to lead its international effort to promote 
     human rights around the world'';
       Whereas Freedom House declared that ``[a] country [such as 
     Libya] with such a gross record of human rights abuses should 
     not direct the proceedings of the United Nation's main human 
     rights monitoring body'' because it would ``undermine the 
     United Nation's moral authority and send a strong and clear 
     message to fellow rights violators that they are in the 
     clear'';
       Whereas on November 13, 2001, a German court convicted a 
     Libyan national for the 1986 bombing of the La Belle disco 
     club in Berlin which killed two United States servicemen, and 
     the court further declared that there was clear evidence of 
     responsibility of the Government of Libya for the bombing;
       Whereas Libya was responsible for the December 21, 1988, 
     explosion of Pan American World Airways Flight 103 (``Pan Am 
     Flight 103'') en route from London to New York City that 
     crashed in Lockerbie, Scotland, killing 259 passengers and 
     crew and 11 other people on the ground;
       Whereas a French court convicted 6 Libyan government 
     officials in absentia for the bombing of UTA Flight 772 over 
     Niger in 1989;
       Whereas, in response to Libya's complicity in international 
     terrorism, United Nations Security Council Resolution 748 of 
     March 31, 1992, imposed an arms and air embargo on Libya and 
     established a United Nations Security Council sanctions 
     committee to address measures against Libya;
       Whereas United Nations Security Council Resolution 883 of 
     November 11, 1993, tightened sanctions on Libya, including 
     the freezing of Libyan funds and financial resources in other 
     countries, and banned the provision to Libya of equipment for 
     oil refining and transportation;
       Whereas United Nations Security Council Resolution 1192 of 
     August 27, 1998, reaffirmed that the measures set forth in 
     previous resolutions remain in effect and binding on all 
     Member States, and further expressed the intention of the 
     United Nations to consider additional measures if the 
     individuals charged in connection with the bombings of Pan Am 
     Flight 103 and UTA Flight 772 had not promptly arrived or 
     appeared for trial on those charges in accordance with 
     paragraph (8) of that Resolution;
       Whereas in January 2001, a three-judge Scottish court 
     sitting in the Netherlands found Libyan Abdel Basset al-
     Megrahi guilty of the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103, sentenced 
     him to life imprisonment, and said the court accepted 
     evidence that he was a member of Libya's Jamahariya Security 
     Organization, and in March 2002, a five-judge Scottish 
     appeals court sitting in the Netherlands upheld the 
     conviction;
       Whereas United Nations Security Council Resolutions 731, 
     748, 883, and 1192 demanded that the Government of Libya 
     provide appropriate compensation to the families of the 
     victims, accept responsibility for the actions of Libyan 
     officials in the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103, provide a full 
     accounting of its involvement in that terrorist act, and 
     cease all support for terrorism;
       Whereas Libya remains on the Department of State's list of 
     state-sponsors of terrorism;
       Whereas the United States found the selection of Libya to 
     chair the Commission to be an affront to international human 
     rights efforts and, in particular, to victims of Libya's 
     repression and Libyan-sponsored terrorism, and therefore 
     broke with precedent and called for a recorded vote among 
     Commission members on Libya's chairmanship;
       Whereas Canada and one other country joined the United 
     States in voting against Libya, with 17 countries abstaining 
     from the recorded vote among Commission members on Libya's 
     chairmanship of the Commission;
       Whereas the common position of the members of the European 
     Union was to abstain

[[Page S3200]]

     from the recorded vote on the selection of Libya as chair of 
     the Commission;
       Whereas 33 countries ignored Libya's record on human rights 
     and status as a country subject to United Nations sanctions 
     for the terrorist bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 and voted for 
     Libya to lead the Commission;
       Whereas the majority of the countries that voted for Libya 
     are recipients of United States foreign aid;
       Whereas the selection of Libya to chair the Commission is 
     only the most recent example of a malaise plaguing the 
     Commission that has called into question the Commission's 
     credibility as the membership ranks of the Commission have 
     swelled in recent years with countries that have a history of 
     egregious human rights violations;
       Whereas the challenge by the United States to the selection 
     of Libya is part of a broader effort to reform the 
     Commission, reclaim it from the oppressors, and ensure that 
     it fulfills its mandate;
       Whereas on January 20, 2003, Ambassador Kevin Moley, United 
     States Permanent Representative to the United Nations and 
     Other International Organizations in Geneva, emphasized that 
     the United States ``seek[s] to actively engage and strengthen 
     the moral authority of the Commission on Human Rights, so 
     that it once again proves itself a forceful advocate for 
     those in need of having their human rights protected'' and 
     that ``[w]e are convinced that the best way for the 
     Commission to ensure the ideals of the Universal Declaration 
     of Human Rights over the long-term is to have a membership 
     comprised of countries with strong human rights records at 
     home'';
       Whereas a majority of the 53 member states of the 
     Commission are participants in the Community of Democracies 
     and signed the Community of Democracies Statement on 
     Terrorism (the ``Statement on Terrorism'') on November 12, 
     2002, at the Second Ministerial Conference of the Community 
     of Democracies held in Seoul, South Korea (the ``Seoul 
     Ministerial''), calling upon democratic nations to work 
     together to uphold the principles of democracy, freedom, good 
     governance, and accountability in international 
     organizations;
       Whereas the Seoul Ministerial participants declared in the 
     Statement on Terrorism that they ``strongly denounced 
     terrorism as a grave threat to democratic societies and the 
     values they embrace[,] . . . reaffirmed that terrorism 
     constitutes a threat to international peace and security as 
     well as to humanity in general and indeed to the very 
     foundation on which democracies are built[,]'' and stated 
     that ``[t]he most recent terrorist attacks confirm that 
     international cooperation against terrorism will remain a 
     long-term effort and requires a sustained universal 
     commitment'';
       Whereas the United Nations sanctions against Libya, though 
     suspended, remain in effect; and
       Whereas Libya's continued status as an international outlaw 
     nation and its continued unwillingness to accept 
     responsibility for its terrorist actions provide ample 
     justification for barring Libya from consideration as a 
     candidate for membership in the United Nations Security 
     Council or any other United Nations entity or affiliated 
     agency: Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 
     concurring), That Congress--
       (1) strongly condemns the selection of Libya to chair the 
     United Nations Commission on Human Rights (the 
     ``Commission'');
       (2) commends the President for the principled position of 
     the United States in objecting to and calling for a vote on 
     Libya's chairmanship of the Commission;
       (3) commends countries that joined the United States in 
     objecting to Libya's selection as chair of the Commission;
       (4) expresses its dismay at the European Union countries' 
     common position of abstention on the critical vote over 
     Libya's chairmanship;
       (5) expresses its shock and dismay over the support 
     provided to Libya in its efforts to lead the Commission;
       (6) highlights its grave concern over the continuing 
     efforts of countries violating human rights and terrorist 
     countries to use international fora--
       (A) to legitimize their regimes; and
       (B) to continue to act with impunity;
       (7) calls on the President to raise United States 
     objections to such efforts during bilateral and multilateral 
     discussions and to direct pertinent members of the 
     President's Cabinet to do the same;
       (8) calls on countries at various stages of democratization 
     to--
       (A) demonstrate their commitment to human rights, 
     democracy, peace and security; and
       (B) support efforts to reform the Commission;
       (9) calls on the President to instruct the Secretary of 
     State to consult with the appropriate congressional 
     committees, within 60 calendar days after the adoption of 
     this resolution, regarding the priorities and strategy of the 
     United States for the 59th session of the Commission on Human 
     Rights and its strategy and proposals for reform of the 
     Commission;
       (10) calls on the President to issue an objection to the 
     continued suspension of United Nations sanctions against 
     Libya until the Government of Libya--
       (A) publicly accepts responsibility for the bombing of Pan 
     American World Airways Flight 103;
       (B) provides appropriate compensation to the victims of the 
     bombing; and
       (C) fully complies with all of the other requirements of 
     the United Nations sanctions imposed as a result of Libya's 
     orchestration of the terrorist attack on Pan American World 
     Airways Flight 103; and
       (11) calls on the Secretary of State to engage Member 
     States of the United Nations to support efforts to ensure 
     that states that are gross violators of human rights, 
     sponsors of terrorist activities, or subjects of United 
     Nations sanctions are not elected to--
       (A) leadership positions in the United Nations General 
     Assembly; or
       (B) membership or leadership positions on the United 
     Nations Commission on Human Rights, the United Nations 
     Security Council, or any other United Nations entity or 
     affiliate.

  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a resolution 
condemning the recent selection of Libya to chair the 59th session of 
the United Nations Commission on Human Rights. If it was not so tragic, 
this selection would be a joke. That session begins in just a few days, 
on March 17.
  Joining me as cosponsors are Senators Smith, Kennedy, Feinstein, and 
Corzine.
  The reason I say it would almost be a joke is that it is 
unconscionable that a human rights abuser such as Libya, and a country 
that has been the subject of United Nations sanctions because of its 
links to terrorist activities, would be selected to lead an 
international human rights organization. Talk about the fox in the 
chicken coop, this is an exact replication of what that old saw is. 
Libya has not even complied with the Commission's own recommendations 
on how to improve its own dismal human rights record.
  We are talking about a country that was responsible for downing a 
passenger airliner and the bombing of a discotheque in Europe.
  Libya's selection to the chairmanship undermines the credibility of 
this Commission and threatens the international community's 
responsibility to protect human rights. How can the Commission retain 
any credibility with Libya at the helm?
  I want to review Libya's human rights record over the past three 
decades, which Human Rights Watch characterizes as ``appalling.'' This 
record includes the abduction, forced disappearance, and assassination 
of political opponents. In Libya today, hundreds of people remain 
arbitrarily detained, and some have been so for over a decade. Human 
rights monitors have registered concern about the use of physical and 
psychological torture in detainment, leading to the deaths of some 
detainees.
  Additionally, the Libyan Government restricts freedom of speech, 
press, assembly, association, and religion.
  Does a government with such a record merit the chair of a Commission 
that was established in 1946, in the wake of the atrocities of World 
War II, specifically to protect the Universal Declaration of Human 
Rights? Libya should not chair this Commission. If anything, it should 
be under investigation by it.
  In 2000, after years of investigations and appeals, two Libyan 
intelligence officers were found guilty by Scottish judges in the 
attack on Pan Am flight 103, which killed 270 people, including 38 from 
New Jersey and citizens from over 20 other countries.
  Just as the international community was finally sentencing the 
Libyans responsible for this 1988 tragedy, and beginning to bring them 
to justice, General Qadhafi was planning Libya's ascent to lead the 
Commission on Human Rights. He gained the African nomination for chair 
against the wishes of many fellow African leaders, some of whom are 
making genuine strides toward improving their countries' human rights 
records.
  At the time, a spokeswoman from South Africa's opposition group, the 
Democratic Alliance, said:

       African countries should have supported a candidate of whom 
     all Africans could be proud.

  For the first time in the history of the Commission on Human Rights, 
the United States--appalled by the African Union's nomination of 
Libya--called for a vote. On January 20 of this year, only Canada and 
one other country joined the United States in voting against Libya's 
chairmanship. Many of the 33 countries that voted in favor of Libya are 
recipients of United States direct foreign assistance. Imagine, we are 
giving them aid, and these countries are supporting the chairmanship

[[Page S3201]]

of a country that is an abuser of human rights of the first order. Many 
of our European allies abstained from the vote.
  The resolution I am introducing with my colleagues, Senators Smith, 
Kennedy, Feinstein, and Corzine, condemns Libya's selection as chair. 
It asserts that the manipulation of the Commission by a gross human 
rights violator undermines the credibility of the body while 
legitimizing regimes that continue their oppressive activities.
  This resolution calls on countries throughout the world to renew 
their commitment to human rights. The resolution also calls on the 
President and the Secretary of State to object strongly to the United 
Nations' current suspension of its sanctions against Libya. These 
sanctions should remain in place until Libya complies with the 
requirements of multiple U.N. resolutions, one of which calls on Libyan 
leader Muammar Qadhafi to acknowledge responsibility for the 1988 Pan 
Am terrorism attack--something he has refused to do so far, despite the 
incontrovertible evidence.
  Finally, in this resolution, I call on the Secretary of State to work 
with other members of the United Nations to reform that Commission and 
to ensure that governments that violate human rights, sponsor terrorist 
activities, and are subject to U.N. sanctions cannot be elected to 
leadership positions in the Commission and other U.N. bodies in the 
future.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, it is a privilege to join with my 
colleague from New Jersey, Senator Lautenberg in expressing our deepest 
concern that Libya will chair the next session of the United Nations 
Human Rights Commission.
  We know that Libya has supported, trained, and harbored some of the 
most notorious terrorists in the world. Libya is on the Department of 
State's list of nations that sponsor terrorism. To allow Libya to chair 
the UN Human Rights Commission is a serious and shameful mistake.
  At this difficult time, the United Nations needs the highest possible 
credibility as it struggles to deal effectively with so many vital 
issues affecting nations throughout the world.
  In fact, Libya continues to be in violation of multiple United 
Nations resolutions. It still has not complied with Security Council 
Resolution 748 to `'accept complete responsibility for the actions of 
Libyan officials.''
  Libya still has not complied with the resolution to ``commit itself 
definitively to cease all forms of terrorist action and all assistance 
to terrorist groups and promptly, by concrete actions, demonstrate its 
renunciation of terrorism.'' We have received nothing concrete 
renouncing terrorism.
  The international community is still waiting for Libya to accept 
responsibility for the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103, a bombing 
that murdered 270 innocent persons, including 89 Americans and 13 from 
Massachusetts. Until September 11th, the Pan Am bombing had killed more 
Americans than any other terrorist atrocity in our history.
  Clearly, Libya should not have been appointed to chair an 
international human rights commission. Yet, in a secret ballot, 33 
countries voted in favor of Libya, 17 abstained, and only the United 
States and Canada voted against Libya.
  Fourteen years later, the families and the world community are still 
trying to find justice. We are still trying to hold Libya accountable 
for this atrocity, and we are still asking Libya to renounce terrorism 
and pay appropriate compensation to the victims' families.
  Colonel Qadhafi still has not acknowledged that he ordered the 
attack. The victims still have not been compensated. The Libyans are 
still demanding that international economic sanctions be lifted, and 
that the Libyan government receive a clean bill of health on terrorism 
before it provides compensation to the families.
  This choice of Libya should be a wakeup call for this administration. 
It shows the need for our own genuine participation in the UN--not the 
arrogant attitude the administration so often uses in its relations 
with other nations. We cannot expect to have good ties, even with our 
allies, if we do not treat them with respect.
  I urge the Senate to support this proposal that requests President 
Bush and Secretary of State Powell to object strongly to the UN's 
current suspension of sanctions against Libya and to work with other 
members of the UN to reform the Human Rights Commission. Terrorism 
deserves no support from any nation.
                                 ______
                                 

   SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 14--EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF CONGRESS 
   REGARDING THE EDUCATION CURRICULUM IN THE KINDGOM OF SAUDI ARABIA

  Mr. SMITH (for himself, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Corzine, Mr. Ensign, Mr. 
Feingold, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Santorum, Mr. Voinovich, and Mr. Wyden) 
submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to 
the Committee on Foreign Relations:

                            S. Con. Res. 14

       Whereas the terrorist attacks on the United States on 
     September 11, 2001, were carried out by 19 hijackers, 
     including 15 Saudi Arabian nationals;
       Whereas the Government of Saudi Arabia controls and 
     regulates all forms of education in public and private 
     schools at all levels;
       Whereas Islamic religious education is compulsory in public 
     and private schools at all levels in Saudi Arabia;
       Whereas the religious curriculum is written, monitored, and 
     taught by followers of the Wahhabi interpretation of Islam, 
     the only religious doctrine that the Government of Saudi 
     Arabia allows to be taught;
       Whereas rote memorization of religious texts continues to 
     be a central feature of much of the educational system of 
     Saudi Arabia, leaving thousands of students unprepared to 
     function in the global economy of the 21st century;
       Whereas the Government of Saudi Arabia has tolerated 
     elements within its education system that promote and 
     encourage extremism;
       Whereas some of the textbooks used in schools in Saudi 
     Arabia foster a combination of intolerance, ignorance, and 
     anti-Semitic, anti-American, and anti-Western views;
       Whereas these intolerant views make students in whom they 
     are instilled prime recruiting targets of extremist groups;
       Whereas extremism endangers the stability of the Kingdom of 
     Saudi Arabia and the Middle East region and threatens global 
     security;
       Whereas the events of September 11, 2001, have created an 
     urgent need to promote moderate voices in the Islamic world 
     as an effective way to combat extremism; and
       Whereas the Government of Saudi Arabia is currently 
     conducting a review of its education curriculum: Now, 
     therefore, be it
       Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 
     concurring), That the Congress--
       (1) supports the review by the Government of Saudi Arabia 
     of its education curriculum;
       (2) calls on the Government of Saudi Arabia to ensure that 
     such review is thorough, objective, and public;
       (3) requests the United States Representative to the United 
     Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization 
     (UNESCO) to--
       (A) address the issue of the educational curriculum reform 
     at the 2003 session of the UNESCO General Conference; and
       (B) encourage UNESCO to examine the educational system in 
     Saudi Arabia and monitor the progress of the efforts to 
     reform the curriculum; and
       (4) urges the Government of Saudi Arabia to reform its 
     education curriculum in a manner that promotes tolerance, 
     develops civil society, and encourages functionality in the 
     global economy.

  Mr. SMITH. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce an important 
resolution on behalf of myself and Mr. Schumer that brings to light 
pervasive messages of intolerance in Saudi Arabia's education 
curriculum and the need for reform of that curriculum. We are joined in 
this effort by Mr. Corzine, Mr. Ensign, Mr. Feingold, Mrs. Murray, Mr. 
Santorum, Mr. Voinovich, and Mr. Wyden.
  There have been recent studies that reveal that school textbooks in 
Saudi Arabia often foster anti-Semitic, anti-American, and anti-Western 
views. We might all recall that 15 of the 19 hijackers responsible for 
the September 11 terrorist attacks were Saudi Arabian nationals. It is 
absolutely critical that we and others in the United States work to 
ensure that radical doctrines and messages of hate are not present in 
any child's education, and that the values taught in Saudi Arabia's 
schools in particular do not turn innocent children into prime 
candidates to commit terrorist acts as adults.
  There is no question of who is responsible for any messages of hate 
that might appear in Saudi textbooks. The Saudi Arabian Government 
controls and regulates all forms of education in

[[Page S3202]]

public as well as in private schools. The religious curriculum is 
written, monitored, and taught by followers of the Wahhabi 
interpretation of Islam--the only religious doctrine the Government of 
Saudi Arabia allows to be taught.
  Our important resolution calls for Saudi Arabia to thoroughly review 
its education curriculum and to reform it in a manner that promotes 
tolerance, develops civil society, and encourages functionality in the 
global economy. It is in the interest of security and peace that we end 
any educational malpractice in Saudi Arabia that might lead to more 
tragedy and terror.
  Finally, the resolution also calls upon the United States 
Representative to UNESCO to urge that the U.N. body take up the 
textbook issue and monitor reform of the education curriculum in Saudi 
Arabia.
  Mr. President, I also urge my respected colleagues to join us in 
supporting this important legislation.
                                 ______
                                 

SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 15--COMMEMORATING THE 140TH ANNIVERSARY OF 
             THE ISSUANCE OF THE EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATION

  Mr. ALLEN submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
referred to the Committee on the Judiciary:

                            S. Con. Res. 15

       Whereas Abraham Lincoln, the sixteenth President of the 
     United States, issued a proclamation on September 22, 1862, 
     declaring that on the first day of January, 1863, ``all 
     persons held as slaves within any State or designated part of 
     a State the people whereof shall then be in rebellion against 
     the United States shall be then, thenceforward, and forever 
     free'';
       Whereas the proclamation declared ``all persons held slaves 
     within the insurgent States''--with the exception of 
     Tennessee, southern Louisiana, and parts of Virginia, then 
     within Union lines--``are free'';
       Whereas, for two and half years, Texas slaves were held in 
     bondage after the Emancipation Proclamation became official 
     and only after Major General Gordon Granger and his soldiers 
     arrived in Galveston, Texas, on June 19, 1865, were African-
     American slaves in that State set free;
       Whereas slavery was a horrendous practice and trade in 
     human trafficking that continued until the passage of the 
     Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution ending 
     slavery on December 18, 1865;
       Whereas the Emancipation Proclamation is historically 
     significant and history is regarded as a means of 
     understanding the past and solving the challenges of the 
     future;
       Whereas one hundred and forty years after President 
     Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation, African Americans have 
     integrated into various levels of society; and
       Whereas commemorating the 140th anniversary of the 
     Emancipation Proclamation highlights and reflects the 
     suffering and progress of the faith and strength of character 
     shown by slaves and their descendants as an example for all 
     people of the United States, regardless of background, 
     religion, or race: Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 
     concurring), That Congress--
       (1) recognizes the historical significance of the 140th 
     anniversary of the Emancipation Proclamation as an important 
     period in the Nation's history; and
       (2) encourages its celebration in accordance with the 
     spirit, strength, and legacy of freedom, justice, and 
     equality for all people of America and to provide an 
     opportunity for all people of the United States to learn more 
     about the past and to better understand the experiences that 
     have shaped the Nation.
                                 ______
                                 

SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 16--HONORING THE LIFE AND WORK OF MR. FRED 
                             McFEELY ROGERS

  Mr. SANTORUM submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
considered and agreed to:

                            S. Con. Res. 16

       Whereas Fred Rogers was born in Latrobe, Pennsylvania, in 
     1928;
       Whereas Fred Rogers earned a degree in music composition, 
     studied child development at the University of Pittsburgh, 
     attended Pittsburgh Theological Seminary, and was ordained a 
     Presbyterian minister;
       Whereas Fred Rogers created ``Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood'' in 
     1966, and hosted the program through the Public Broadcasting 
     Service (PBS) from 1968 through 2000;
       Whereas ``Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood'' is the longest-running 
     program on PBS;
       Whereas ``Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood'' was created and filmed 
     in Fred Rogers' hometown of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania;
       Whereas Fred Rogers' caring, genuine spirit reflects the 
     values shared by the people of southwestern Pennsylvania and 
     by so many neighborhoods throughout the country;
       Whereas ``Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood'' continues to be a 
     nurturing, educational program for children emphasizing the 
     value of every individual and helping children understand how 
     they fit into their families, communities, and country;
       Whereas Fred Rogers was appointed Chairman of the Forum on 
     Mass Media and Child Development of the White House 
     Conference on Youth in 1968;
       Whereas ``Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood'' won 4 Emmy Awards, 
     ``Lifetime Achievement'' Awards, and 2 George Foster Peabody 
     Awards;
       Whereas Fred Rogers won every major award in television for 
     which he was eligible;
       Whereas Fred Rogers was inducted into the Television Hall 
     of Fame in 1999;
       Whereas President George W. Bush awarded Mr. Rogers the 
     Presidential Medal of Honor in 2002;
       Whereas Fred Rogers was also a prolific songwriter and 
     author; and
       Whereas Fred Rogers was presented with over 40 honorary 
     degrees from colleges and universities: Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 
     concurring), That the Congress recognizes and honors Mr. Fred 
     McFeely Rogers for--
       (1) dedicating his career to the educational and 
     imaginative children's program ``Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood'';
       (2) the accomplishments of this influential program and the 
     emphasis it places on the value of each individual within his 
     or her community; and
       (3) the compassionate, moral example he set for millions of 
     American children for over 30 years.

     SEC. 2. TRANSMISSION OF ENROLLED RESOLUTION.

       The Secretary of the Senate shall transmit an enrolled copy 
     of this concurrent resolution to Mrs. Joanne Rogers.
                                 ______
                                 

 SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 17--ESTABLISHING A SPECIAL TASK FORCE TO 
RECOMMEND AN APPROPRIATE RECOGNITION FOR THE SLAVE LABORERS WHO WORKED 
            ON THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE UNITED STATES CAPITOL

  Mr. SANTORUM submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration:

                            S. Con. Res. 17

       Whereas the United States Capitol stands as a symbol of 
     democracy, equality, and freedom to the entire world;
       Whereas the year 2003 marks the 203d anniversary of the 
     opening of this historic structure for the first session of 
     Congress to be held in the new Capital City;
       Whereas slavery was not prohibited throughout the United 
     States until the ratification of the 13th amendment to the 
     Constitution in 1865;
       Whereas prior to that date, African American slave labor 
     was both legal and common in the District of Columbia and the 
     adjoining States of Maryland and Virginia;
       Whereas public records attest to the fact that African 
     American slave labor was used in the construction of the 
     United States Capitol;
       Whereas public records further attest to the fact that the 
     five-dollar-per-month payment for that African American slave 
     labor was made directly to slave owners and not to the 
     laborer; and
       Whereas African Americans made significant contributions 
     and fought bravely for freedom during the American 
     Revolutionary War: Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 
     concurring), That--
       (1) the Majority Leader of the Senate and the Speaker of 
     the House of Representatives shall establish a special task 
     force to include the Historian of the Senate, the Historian 
     of the House of Representatives, the Architect of the 
     Capitol, and the Librarian of Congress, to study the history 
     and contributions of these slave laborers in the construction 
     of the United States Capitol; and
       (2) such special task force shall produce a summary 
     document of the contributions of slave laborers and available 
     research for the public, and shall recommend to the Majority 
     Leader of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of 
     Representatives an appropriate recognition for these slave 
     laborers which could be displayed in a prominent location in, 
     or near, the United States Capitol.

                          ____________________