[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 59 (Monday, May 9, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4648-S4651]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. BURNS:
S. 977. A bill to include claims for injuries and death due to
exposure during certain time periods form fallout emitted during the
Government's above-ground nuclear tests in Nevada that exposed
individuals who lived in the downwind affected area in the State of
Montana; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, in Montana, when someone does something to
hurt someone else, they make it right. Not just because it is the right
thing to do, but because in this State we shoot straight and take
responsibility for our actions that's why I'm working to bring some of
that Montana ethic to Washington to get the Federal Government to make
amends for actions that have caused too many Montanans great pain and
suffering.
Nuclear testing in Nevada during the 1950's threw blooms of
radioactive Iodine-131, I-131, high into the atmosphere. Those who were
affected are sometimes referred to as ``Down Winders'' because the wind
carried the poisonous iodine north to Montana where gravity finally
kicked in and the radioactive material settled to the ground. It
eventually got into the milk supply--one of the primary sources of
Iodine 131--and disproportionately affected milk drinkers. And who
drinks milk? Children and babies, who are the most vulnerable in
society.
Iodine-131 is absorbed by the thyroid--the organ of the body that
uses iodine to produce important hormones. It can take between 20 and
40 years, but eventually the damage caused by Iodine-131 manifests
itself as thyroid cancer. I've had cancer, and I understand the
physical, mental and emotional pain that follows this terrible disease.
I know the pain, and it is time that the government made right the harm
it has caused to people in my State of Montana.
In 1990, the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act or RECA was signed
into law. This measure provided financial compensation for victims
living downwind of the Nevada Test Site to the tune of $50,000 per
person. The law covered select counties in Nevada, Utah and Arizona.
Later, this Act was amended to include compensation for uranium miners
in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota,
Utah, Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas.
However, Montana, with 15 of the 25 counties with the highest dosage,
Meagher, Broadwater, Beaverhead, Jefferson, Powell, Judith Basin,
Madison, Fergus, Gallatin, Petroleum, Lewis and Clark, Blaine, Silver
Bow, Chouteau and Deer Lodge, single most affected county in the United
States, Meagher, is the only State in the affected region to receive no
RECA compensation at all. If that doesn't sound right, it's because
it's not.
Montanans have experienced unbelievably high rates of thyroid cancer.
Between 1989 and 2003, the national rate of thyroid cancer increased by
38 percent. In that same timeframe, Montana's rate increased by a
whopping 127 percent. And yet, Montana is the only State in the region
that is excluded from RECA. In 2000, the rate of reported thyroid
cancer in Montana was 17.5 times greater than the national rate. And
yet, Montana is the only State in the region that is excluded from
RECA.
On April 28, 2005, at the request of Congress, a report was released
by the National Academy of Sciences. The 500-page report confirms the
inadequacy of current RECA compensation. Most importantly, it supports
the fact that Montana was one of the worst affected States. The fact is
that folks in Montana were involuntarily subjected to increased risk of
injury and disease in order to serve the national security interests of
the United States. Moreover, they deserve our compassion and support. I
strongly encourage my colleagues to support the expansion of RECA to my
State of Montana.
______
By Mr. AKAKA:
S. 979. A bill to strengthen United States capabilities to secure
sealed sources of nuclear materials from terrorists; to the Committee
on Energy and Natural Resources.
Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Safe Storage
of Radiological Materials Act of 2005 to prevent sealed radioactive
sources, which can be used to create ``dirty bombs,'' from getting into
the hands of terrorists. This bill is similar to S. 1045, the Low-Level
Radioactive Waste Act, which I introduced in 2003.
Since September 11, 2001, the Congress has faced the challenge of
anticipating where the next attack on the United States will come from
and in what form it will come. It is important to weigh where to invest
precious security resources, knowing everything can't be protected.
Many vulnerabilities deserve serious attention. Some can be addressed
with relative ease.
Thousands of unwanted sealed radioactive sources are currently held
by the private sector, research institutions, and medical laboratories
where these sources are generally unprotected and accessible. An April
2003 report I requested from the Government Accountability Office, GAO,
entitled ``Nuclear Proliferation: DOE Action Needed to Ensure Continued
Recovery of Unwanted Sealed Radioactive Sources,'' stated that ``if
these sealed sources fell into the hands of terrorists, they could be
used as simple and crude but potentially dangerous radiological
weapons, commonly called dirty bombs.'' Most experts agree that it
would not require much scientific expertise or funding to cobble
together a dirty bomb from radioactive material. In other words, the
required materials are accessible and the assembly is relatively
rudimentary.
The GAO report focused on greater-than-class-C, GTCC, sealed sources.
GTCC radiological sources are the ``high end'' of the continuum of low-
level radioactive waste. Class A, B, and C wastes can generally be
disposed of at existing commercial disposal facilities. But wastes that
exceed the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's criteria for Class C, known
as greater-than-class-C wastes, are potent enough that they cannot be
disposed of at existing facilities. While GTCC wastes are not as
dangerous as high-level radioactive waste and therefore are not
considered the highest security priority, they are the most potent of
low level waste and necessitate progressively more stringent disposal
requirements.
The Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments of 1985, P.L. 99-
240, required the Department of Energy, DOE, to provide a facility for
disposing of all GTCC radioactive waste, including GTCC sealed sources
that are no longer utilized by their owners. GAO found that little to
no work had been done to designate a permanent disposal site. Although
DOE has said that the facility will be up and running by 2007, it seems
unlikely as they have only just begun the necessary environmental
impact statement process.
In 1999, DOE created the Off-Site Source Recovery Project, OSRP, to
recover unwanted GTCC sealed sources and temporarily house them at the
Department of Energy's Los Alamos National Laboratory. According to GAO
testimony before the Senate Energy Committee in September 2004,
approximately 10,000 GTCC sealed sources from about 160 sites across
the U.S. had been recovered to date. However, approximately 8,000
sources still remained in
[[Page S4649]]
insecure facilities at the time of the hearing.
The job is not done, but the National Nuclear Security Administration
(NNSA), the division within DOE responsible for the U.S. Radiological
Threat Reduction, USRTR, previously the OSRP, has made great strides.
Since I first introduced S. 1045, the Low Level Radioactive Waste Act,
in May 2003, the prioritization of off-site recovery of GTCC sources
has heightened. DOE received a $10 million supplemental for the program
in 2003 and the President's fiscal year 06 budget proposes funding the
USRTR at $12.75 million, up 69 percent from the fiscal year 05 enacted
level of $7.54 million.
Earlier this month, NNSA called to let me know it intended to remove
100 sources of cobalt-60, which is GTCC, from the University of Hawaii.
The University had been trying to get DOE, the owners of the
material, to dispose of the sources for years. The radioactive material
was used in an irradiator and loaned to the University back in the
1960s for agricultural research. I am grateful that NNSA stepped up its
recovery of unneeded radiological sources and helped to relieve the
burden of guarding potentially dangerous material from the University
administration.
The progress made by NNSA, while appreciated and laudable, is
nonetheless a first step. Without the designation of a permanent
disposal facility for GTCC waste, DOE will run out of temporary storage
space. The Department already encountered problems finding a place to
store strontium-90, cesium-137, and plutonium-239, all GTCC sources
that have unique storage requirements. A permanent disposal facility
that can accommodate all GTCC waste must be identified.
The Safe Storage of Radiological Materials Act of 2005 would require
DOE to report to Congress on the current situation and future plans for
disposal alternatives for GTCC radioactive waste and the cost and
schedule to complete an environmental impact statement and record of
decision on a permanent disposal facility for GTCC radioactive wastes.
My bill would also require DOE to provide Congress with a plan for the
short-term recovery of GTCC radioactive waste until a permanent
facility is available. This legislation parallels the recommendations
of the April 2003 GAO report, and I believe enactment of this bill is
critical to securing sealed sources of nuclear material.
Twenty years is too long to wait for an agency to do its job. I urge
my colleagues to support this important piece of legislation.
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. 979
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 ``Safe Storage of Radiological
Materials Act of 2005''.
SEC. 2. DISPOSAL OF CERTAIN LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE.
(a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
(1) according to the report of the National Commission on
Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, more than 2 dozen
terrorist groups, including al Qaeda, are pursuing chemical,
biological, radiological, and nuclear materials;
(2) according to the report of the National Commission on
Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, the United States
is a prime target for weapons made with chemical, biological,
radiological, and nuclear materials;
(3) the Department of Energy estimates that about 10,000
sealed sources of greater-than-Class C low-level radioactive
waste (as defined in section 61.55 of title 10, Code of
Federal Regulations) will become unwanted and will have to be
disposed of through the Department of Energy by 2010;
(4) the Department of Energy--
(A) does not have adequate resources or storage facilities
to recover and store all unwanted sources of greater-than-
Class C low-level radioactive waste; and
(B) has not identified a permanent disposal facility;
(5) a report by the Government Accountability Office
entitled ``Nuclear Proliferation: DOE Action Needed to Ensure
Continued Recovery of Unwanted Sealed Radioactive Sources''
states that ``[t]he small size and portability of the sealed
sources make them susceptible to misuse, improper disposal,
and theft. If these sealed sources fell into the hands of
terrorists, they could be used as simple and crude but
potentially dangerous radiological weapons, commonly called
dirty bombs.''; and
(6) the Government Accountability Office report further
states that ``[c]ertain sealed sources are considered
particularly attractive for potential use in producing dirty
bombs because, among other things, they contain more
concentrated amounts of nuclear material known as `greater-
than-Class-C material.' ''
(b) Responsibility for Activities To Provide Storage
Facility.--The Secretary of Energy shall provide to Congress
official notification of the final designation of an entity
within the Department of Energy to have the responsibility of
completing activities needed to provide a facility for safely
disposing of all greater-than-Class C low-level radioactive
waste.
(c) Reports and Plans.--
(1) Report on permanent disposal facility.--
(A) Plan regarding cost and schedule for completion of eis
and rod.--Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment
of this Act, the Secretary of Energy, in consultation with
Congress, shall submit to Congress a report containing an
estimate of the cost and a proposed schedule to complete an
environmental impact statement and record of decision for a
permanent disposal for greater-than-Class C radioactive
waste.
(B) Analysis of alternatives.--Before the Secretary of
Energy makes a final decision on the disposal alternative or
alternatives to be implemented, the Secretary of Energy
shall--
(i) submit to Congress a report that describes all
alternatives under consideration, including all information
required in the comprehensive report making recommendations
for ensuring the safe disposal of all greater-than-Class C
low-level radioactive waste that was submitted by the
Secretary to Congress in February 1987; and
(ii) await action by Congress.
(2) Short-term plan for recovery and storage.--
(A) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Energy shall submit
to Congress a plan to ensure the continued recovery and
storage of greater-than-Class C low-level radioactive sealed
sources that pose a security threat until a permanent
disposal facility is available.
(B) Contents.--The plan shall address estimated cost,
resource, and facility needs.
______
By Mr. NELSON of Florida:
S. 980. A bill to provide state and local governments with financial
assistance that will increase their ability and effectiveness in
monitoring convicted sex offenders by developing and implementing a
program using global positioning systems to monitor convicted sexual
offenders or sexual predators released from confinement; to the
Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I commend the leadership.
I rise to address the Senate on the subject of sexual predators. We
have certainly had our fill of these people who prey on children in the
State of Florida. The Nation has recently joined Florida in mourning
the deaths of two young girls murdered by registered sex offenders. In
March, an attacker walked in to--
Mr. INHOFE. Will the Senator yield for a question?
Mr. NELSON of Florida. Certainly.
Mr. INHOFE. Could I inquire as to how long you would like to address
the Senate in morning business.
Mr. NELSON of Florida. About 5 minutes.
I thank the distinguished Senator from Oklahoma. I know this is a
subject that he is quite concerned with. The Nation was gripped with
the news of this sexual predator who walked into the unlocked home of a
9-year-old, Jessica Lunsford, in Homossassa, FL, took her from her
bed--I want the Senator from Oklahoma to listen to the emotion in my
voice. He walked into her unlocked home, took her from her bed, raped
her, and then buried her alive. The man who is charged is a registered
sex offender, previously convicted of molesting a minor, but law
enforcement had lost track of him. In fact, he was living within 150
feet of Jessica Lunsford.
To add insult to injury, he was working at an elementary school.
Unfortunately, it did not stop there. About a month later, 13-year-
old Sarah Lunde was abducted from her home in Rushkin, FL, and she was
murdered. Her confessed killer is her mother's ex-boyfriend, who is
also a convicted sex offender.
In our State alone, we have over 30,000 registered sex offenders, and
there are more than 300,000 nationwide. The Bureau of Justice
Statistics has provided data showing that 70 percent of all the men in
prison for a sex crime were men whose victim was a child.
[[Page S4650]]
In 2003, the Justice Department published a report on recidivism
rates of sex offenders, and it has produced some disturbing statistics.
The Department of Justice tracked 9,691 male sex offenders released
from 15 State prisons, including Florida. They tracked them for a 3-
year period and found that 40 percent of the sex offenders who re-
offended did so within the first year, and within 3 years of their
release from prison, 5.3 percent of those sex offenders were rearrested
for another sex crime. Is this beginning to tell us a story? Half of
the sex offenders tracked in this study included men who molested
children, and within the first 3 years of their release from prison,
3.3 percent of these convicts were rearrested for another sex crime
against a child.
In the wake of the two recent tragedies in Florida, of Jessica
Lunsford and Sarah Lunde, the State legislature passed a law that will
provide tougher sentences for child sex offenders, and aid law
enforcement in effectively monitoring those sex offenders. This law
will require sex offenders, released back into our communities, to wear
a bracelet that will have a global positioning system track them.
I applaud the initiative by our State, and I believe now there ought
to be an appropriate Federal response to be supportive of the States
and local governments that want to address this problem. The technology
is there, but it is expensive. To be effective, tough laws on these
sexual predators of children must be properly funded, and I believe it
is worth properly funding them to protect our children.
Today I am introducing this bill, the Sexual Predator Effective
Monitoring Act, which will provide $30 million in grants to States that
establish programs under their State law to get tougher on child sex
offenders released back into a community and to get tougher on them
with more effective monitoring and tracking. This bill directs the
Attorney General to award grants to those States to assist them in
carrying out programs to outfit sexual offenders with an ankle bracelet
that will track them using global positioning systems.
In the first year, I am suggesting that this bill offer $10 million
in grants. In the second year, $20 million, and then we would have to
come back and readdress the issue. The Attorney General then would be
directed to issue a report so we could go on with future extension of
the bill. There are no silver bullets to stop these sexual predators
from preying on our children, but I believe tough laws, such as the new
Florida statute, are going to go a long way in preventing these sexual
offenders from reoffending.
Nine-year-old Jessica Lunsford's confessed rapist and murderer was
living only within 150 feet of her home, but law enforcement officers
did not know where he was because he failed to notify them of his
changed address. Law enforcement also did not know he was working in a
nearby elementary school, nor did the school know they had a registered
sex offender on school property.
GPS monitoring systems, when properly used, will assist law
enforcement in knowing where these child sex offenders are and
preventing them from going into restricted areas like elementary
schools. We owe it to our children to do all we can to make sure that
we keep them safe. That is why I am introducing this bill today.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 980
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 ``Sexual Predator Effective
Monitoring Act of 2005''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds that--
(1) in recent years we have seen multiple cases of
convicted sexual offenders serving probation abducting and
murdering young children;
(2) several states have begun the development and
implementation of outfitting convicted sexual offenders with
Global Positioning Systems to track their movements while on
probation;
(3) the employment of these devices will assist law
enforcement in tracking the movements and location of
probationers in real time to within 10 ft. of their location;
(4) Global Positioning System tracking will permit law
enforcement to ensure that convicted sex offenders do not go
to areas restricted according to the terms of their
probation;
(5) Global Positioning Systems will serve to deter sexual
predators from re-offending as they will know that their
movements are monitored and tracked by law enforcement; and
(6) in the event that a convicted sexual offender commits
an additional sex offense while on probation and monitored
with a Global Positioning System, the Global Positioning
System technology will aid law enforcement in the
investigation of these crimes by quickly determining the
location of sexual offenders within the area of the suspected
crime.
SEC. 3. SEXUAL PREDATOR MONITORING PROGRAM.
(a) Grants Authorized.--
(1) In general.--The Attorney General is authorized to
award grants and contracts to State and local governments to
assist such States and local governments in--
(A) carrying out programs to outfit sexual offenders with
electronic monitoring units; and
(B) the employment of law enforcement officials necessary
to carry out such programs.
(2) Duration.--The Secretary shall award grants under this
Act for a period not to exceed 3 years.
(b) Application.--
(1) In general.--Each State or local government desiring a
grant under this Act shall submit an application to the
Attorney General at such time, in such manner, and
accompanied by such information as the Attorney General may
reasonably require.
(2) Contents.--Each application submitted pursuant to
paragraph (1) shall--
(A) describe the activities for which assistance under this
Act is sought; and
(B) provide such additional assurances as the Attorney
General determines to be essential to ensure compliance with
the requirements of this Act.
SEC. 4. PROPORTIONAL SHARE.
The Attorney General shall ensure that each State with
eligible programs receives a proportional share of funding
under this Act based on the total number of eligible States
and the population of sex offenders to be monitored with
global positioning systems in those States.
SEC. 5. DEFINITION.
In this Act, the term ``sexual offender'' means an offender
18 years of age or older who commits a sexual offense against
a minor.
SEC. 6. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
(a) In General.--There are authorized to be appropriated
$10,000,000 for fiscal year 2006 and $20,000,000 for fiscal
year 2007 to carry out this Act.
(b) Report.--Not later than April 1, 2007, the Attorney
General shall report to Congress--
(1) assessing the effectiveness and value of this Act; and
(2) making recommendations for continuing funding and the
appropriate levels for such funding.
Mr. DeMINT. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Truth in
Employment Act, a bill I previously introduced in the House of
Representatives to stem the harm done to companies by salting, a union
tactic that is causing material economic damage to small businesses
everyday in this country.
There is a basic disagreement over the definition of salting. While
union supporters and the NLRB have defined the term as the ``placing of
union members on non-union job sites for the purpose of organizing,''
it has been widely documented that the true motivation of many salts is
simply to increase the cost of doing business for non-union
contractors, regardless of the wishes of the employer's bona fide
employees.
Salting is much more than someone seeking employment for the purpose
of union organizing. It is an attempt to interfere with business
operations, harass employees, and cause economic harm through illegal
activities and frivolous legal complaints against employers. Union
organizers who fail to convince employees to organize will use salting
to shut down non-union companies, often going to extreme lengths,
including preventing deliveries to job sites and destroying building
supplies.
In my own State of South Carolina, salting has resulted in the loss
of hundreds of jobs. In Sumter, South Carolina, the Yuasa Exide battery
plant was targeted by a union.
Union salts infiltrated the plant, and when employees there did not
unionize, the union retaliated by sabotaging product, causing work slow
downs, making verbal threats and threatening phone calls, and putting
nails in people's tires. Union leaders threatened to shut down the
plant and they did just that. Six hundred and fifty people were laid
off because the Yuasa Exide plant could not afford the increased cost
to
[[Page S4651]]
the business of defending itself and its employees from the union
salting campaign. Yuasa Exide, which was the first tenant in Sumter's
industrial park, had been there since 1965 and provided high-tech,
good-paying jobs in a rural area, was forced to close its doors because
of salting.
The impacts of salting are felt by many. Companies see increased
costs from having to defend themselves against labor relations
complaints as well as lost hours of productivity from having to fight
these charges. Consumers are impacted by salting when they experience
increased costs and higher prices. Moreover, Federal agencies spend
untold sums to investigate claims that are later found to be without
merit, forcing taxpayers to effectively subsidize union activity.
To put it bluntly, salting is a job killer. At a time when we are
working in Congress to enact policies which will spur job growth and
ensure future economic prosperity, salting abuses stand directly in the
way of these goals. We can no longer allow American jobs to suffer at
the hands of Washington labor bosses.
To prevent salting abuses from causing more harm to employers, I am
introducing the Truth in Employment Act which amends section 8(a) of
the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) to make clear that an employer
is not required to hire any person who seeks a job in order to promote
interests unrelated to those of the employer. This bill in no way
infringes upon any rights or protections otherwise accorded employees
under the NLRA. Employees will continue to enjoy their right to
organize. The bill merely seeks to alleviate the legal pressures
imposed upon employers to hire individuals whose overriding purpose for
seeking the job is to disrupt the employer's workplace or otherwise
inflict economic harm designed to put the employer out of business.
This bill in no way infringes upon any rights or protections otherwise
accorded employees under the NLRA, or any other employment statute.
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. 983
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 ``Truth in Employment Act of
2005''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds that:
(1) An atmosphere of trust and civility in labor-management
relationships is essential to a productive workplace and a
healthy economy.
(2) The tactic of using professional union organizers and
agents to infiltrate a targeted employer's workplace, a
practice commonly referred to as ``salting'' has evolved into
an aggressive form of harassment not contemplated when the
National Labor Relations Act was enacted and threatens the
balance of rights which is fundamental to our system of
collective bargaining.
(3) Increasingly, union organizers are seeking employment
with nonunion employers not because of a desire to work for
such employers but primarily to organize the employees of
such employers or to inflict economic harm specifically
designed to put nonunion competitors out of business, or to
do both.
(4) While no employer may discriminate against employees
based upon the views of employees concerning collective
bargaining, an employer should have the right to expect job
applicants to be primarily interested in utilizing the skills
of the applicants to further the goals of the business of the
employer.
SEC. 3. PURPOSES.
The purposes of this Act are--
(1) to preserve the balance of rights between employers,
employees, and labor organizations which is fundamental to
our system of collective bargaining;
(2) to preserve the rights of workers to organize, or
otherwise engage in concerted activities protected under the
National Labor Relations Act; and
(3) to alleviate pressure on employers to hire individuals
who seek or gain employment in order to disrupt the workplace
of the employer or otherwise inflict economic harm designed
to put the employer out of business.
SEC. 4. PROTECTION OF EMPLOYER RIGHTS.
Section 8(a) of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C.
158(a)) is amended by adding after and below paragraph (5)
the following:
``Nothing in this subsection shall be construed as requiring
an employer to employ any person who seeks or has sought
employment with the employer in furtherance of other
employment or agency status.''.
____________________