[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 20]
[Senate]
[Pages 28715-28720]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. DURBIN (for himself and Mr. Harkin):
  S. 1868. A bill to improve the safety of shell eggs; to the Committee 
on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.


                         egg safety act of 1999

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Egg Safety Act 
of 1999. This legislation would improve the safety of our nation's egg 
supply by granting USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) the 
authority to regulate and inspect shell eggs from farm to retail level, 
requiring labeling on egg cartons, requiring uniform expiration dating 
for all shell eggs, and prohibiting repackaging of eggs.
  Last year, I requested a report from the General Accounting Office 
(GAO) regarding the safety of our egg supply. On July 1 of this year, 
that report was released at a hearing before the Government Affairs 
Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, on which I serve. 
According to the report, the GAO found cracks, confusion and 
contradictions in our nation's efforts to protect consumers against 
contaminated eggs and egg products.
  Approximately 67 billion eggs are sold each year in the United 
States, with each American eating an average of 245 during that time. 
Eggs are a nutrient-dense food that plays an important part in most 
Americans' diets, either alone or as an ingredient in other foods. 
However, eggs, like any other perishable product, need to be handled 
with care. Perishable products will always have a degree of risk, but 
this risk is manageable.
  According to the Centers for Disease Prevention and Control (CDC), 
Salmonella enteriditis (SE), a bacteria commonly associated with raw or 
undercooked eggs, caused about 300,000 illnesses in 1997, resulting in 
between 115 and 230 deaths. According to the U.S. Department of 
Agriculture (USDA), the economic costs of food-borne illnesses related 
to eggs were estimated to be between $225 million and $3 billion in 
1996. Between 1985 and 1998, 81.7 percent of SE outbreaks were 
associated with eggs.
  In 1998, the Illinois Department of Public Health recorded 405 
reported cases and five deaths resulting from SE. Food-borne illness 
has struck in Illinois several times over the past decade, including a 
1990 outbreak of SE from bread pudding with 1,100 reported cases; a 
1993 outbreak of SE from pancakes with 22 reported cases; and a 1993 
outbreak of SE from bearnaise sauce with 13 reported cases.
  Make no mistake about it: our country has one of the safest egg 
supplies in the world. But we have the science and know-how to make it 
even safer. Eating French toast, Caesar salad, or any other foods that 
may include raw or undercooked eggs is a manageable risk that can be 
reduced even further. Make some common sense changes in our federal 
food safety efforts can protect consumers, families and the credibility 
of U.S. food products at home and abroad.
  How would putting all egg safety responsibilities within one agency 
make eggs safer? According to the GAO report, lack of coordination 
between the four federal agencies responsible for egg safety has 
resulted in gaps, inconsistencies and inefficiencies. For example, 
while one of those agencies, USDA, conducts daily inspections of plants 
where eggs are broken and made safe by pasteurization, another agency, 
Food and Drug Administration, rarely inspects egg farms or facilities 
where unbroken shell eggs are packed unless the agency is trying to 
trace an outbreak of illness.
  The absence of or inconsistent egg carton expiration dating laws can 
mislead consumers. Consumers may believe the expiration date accurately 
reflects the age of the egg. For example, when comparing carton dates, 
a consumer may be more likely to select eggs not graded by USDA because 
a later date on the carton seems to imply that those eggs are fresher. 
But the eggs with the later date may actually be the older ones. Under 
the USDA Agricultural marketing Service voluntary egg grading program, 
expiration dates are set at 30 days from the date the eggs were packed. 
However, some egg processors that do not participate in the voluntary 
program set their own expiration date or have no expiration date at 
all.

[[Page 28716]]

  The Egg Safety Act of 1999 would require uniform expiration dating 
for all shell eggs. No eggs packed for consumers could be older than 21 
days from the date of lay when packed, and they must carry an 
``expiration date'' or ``sell by date'' of no more than 30 days from 
the packing date.
  Repackaging or re-dating of eggs provides the wrong information to 
consumers. Both time and temperature safeguards are likely to be 
compromised in eggs that are repackaged. For example, repackaged eggs 
are re-washed in hot water which can lead to increased SE risk. Under 
the USDA Agricultural Marketing Service voluntary egg grading program, 
which includes 30 percent of shell eggs, repackaging is prohibited for 
eggs coming back from the retail level but allowed for eggs stored at 
the packaging plan. Industry has called for a prohibition on egg 
repackaging.
  While repackaging may not be a widespread practice, it should be 
completely prohibited. The Egg Safety Act of 1999 would prohibit eggs 
returned to the packer from grocery stores or other retail 
establishments from being repackaged as shell eggs intended for human 
consumption. These eggs could only be diverted for further processing 
as pasteurized egg products.
  The Egg Safety Act of 1999 would also grant FSIS the authority to 
regulate and inspect shell eggs from farm to retail level for the 
purpose of ensuring the protection of public health. The standard for 
inspection frequency would be ``continuous monitoring and verification 
of performance standards.'' The bill would also require FSIS to 
implement a ``Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point'' (HACCP) 
program for egg safety.
  The Egg Safety Act of 1999 would require labeling on egg cartons to 
warn consumers of the risk of illness associated with consuming raw or 
undercooked eggs. This labeling requirement would be in addition to the 
current ``keep refrigerated'' label which remains a requirement for all 
eggs.
  The Egg Safety Act of 1999 is supported by the Center for Science in 
the Public Interest, Consumers Union and Consumer Federation of 
America.
  Consumers should have the information they need and the assurance 
they deserve when buying eggs. They should be able to count on the fact 
that what they're putting on the table is as safe as possible. The Egg 
Safety Act of 1999 is one step toward ensuring that goal.
  Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to join me in cosponsoring this 
important legislation, to give people the assurance that the eggs they 
buy are safe.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BAUCUS:
  S. 1869. A bill to authorize the negotiation of a Free Trade 
Agreement with the Republic of Korea, and to provide for expedited 
congressional consideration of such an agreement; the Committee on 
Finance.


    united states-republic of korea free trade agreement act of 1999

  S. 1870. A bill to authorize the negotiation of a Free Trade 
Agreement with the Republic of Singapore, and to provide for expedited 
congressional consideration of such an agreement; to the Committee on 
Finance.


        united states-singapore free trade agreement act of 1999

  S. 1871. A bill to authorize the negotiation of a Free Trade 
Agreement with Chile, and to provide for expedited congressional 
consideration of such an agreement; to the Committee on Finance.


          united states-chile free trade agreement act of 1999

 Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President I rise to send three separate bills 
to the desk. I am introducing these three pieces of legislation because 
I am very concerned about the direction of U.S. trade policy. Since the 
end of World War II, America has maintained a strong domestic consensus 
on the importance of open markets, allowing us to lead the world into 
an era of unprecedented growth. That consensus is fraying at the edges. 
Divisions over the role of labor and the environment have helped to 
undermine it.
  These divisions have prevented us from re-instituting fast track 
negotiating authority, which lapsed nearly five years ago. While we 
hesitate, the rest of the world continues to move forward on economic 
integration. Regional trade arrangements in Europe, Latin America, and 
Asia put U.S. exporters at a competitive disadvantage. We lose overseas 
markets to foreign competitors who enjoy trade preferences for which 
our farmers, manufacturers and service providers are ineligible. In my 
home state of Montana, wheat exporters have lost their share of the 
Chilean market to Canadian farmers, who are not subject to the 11% 
Chilean import duty that Montana farmers face.
  If we cannot agree on a global fast-track bill, then we should 
institute fast-track authority for specific countries where we have 
strategic commercial and political interests. In doing so, we should 
choose countries which not only share our commitment to open markets, 
but also share our values for environmental quality and labor rights.
  I recently outlined some broad principles on trade and the 
environment in a statement here on the Senate floor. FTA's should be 
consistent with those principles. In addition to addressing the 
environment, they should also firmly support core labor standards.
  As to the countries, the bills I am introducing provide authority to 
negotiate bilateral free trade agreements with three important trading 
partners: Singapore, the Republic of Korea and Chile. Taken together, 
these three countries buy about $40 billion worth of U.S. goods 
annually.
  For a number of years, the United States has considered, informally 
or formally, negotiating FTA's with all three of them. Soon after 
signing NAFTA, we talked to Chile about acceding to it as the fourth 
NAFTA partner. Chile waited patiently for Congress to give the 
President negotiating authority. That authority never arrived. Since 
then, Chile has gone ahead and signed bilateral trade agreements with 
both Mexico and Canada.
  Similarly, we broached the notion of either an FTA or accession to 
NAFTA with Singapore several years ago. Of all the countries of East 
Asia, none is more committed to open markets than Singapore. 
Negotiating an FTA not only makes commercial sense, it also reinforces 
our engagement in the Pacific Basin.
  Finally, the Republic of Korea is a country which has made enormous 
economic and political progress in the past two decades. It is now in 
the midst of a very painful restructuring forced upon it by the Asian 
financial crisis. An FTA with Korea would lock in the gains--both 
economic and political--of the past, much as NAFTA did for Mexico. 
Recently, the Deputy U.S. Trade Representative said that an FTA with 
Korea was an interesting idea, but that the only way to get there was 
to resolve our bilateral trade disputes. I think that's backwards. FTA 
negotiations are a way to resolve these issues.
  The bills also establish a general policy framework for negotiating 
free trade agreements. They require that FTA's address the full range 
of issues, from guaranteeing national treatment and market access, to 
protecting intellectual property. They require that FTA's address 
electronic commerce, an area where the United States has a strong 
commercial interest. And hey require that FTA's address the labor and 
environmental issues.
  I entered the Senate not too many years after Congress passed the 
original fast-track legislation. At that time, the notion of 
``intellectual property'' was something novel. The idea that 
``intellectual property'' should be considered in trade negotiations 
was ridiculed. Many said that patents, copyrights and trademarks were 
domestic issues, and thus not appropriate subject for trade agreements. 
But the United States insisted that the world trading system address 
these issues. We put a lot of political capital behind it. Today, 
nobody questions the appropriateness of WTO rules for trade-related 
intellectual property rules.
  I firmly believe that in the near future, we will see the same result 
with trade-related labor and environmental issues. We cannot--and 
should not--avoid these issues. So the bills I am introducing require 
that FTA's address

[[Page 28717]]

trade aspects of labor and the environment.
  We must identify potential environmental consequences--both positive 
and negative--of trade agreements, and put in place mechanisms to deal 
with any adverse impacts. Similarly, we must reaffirm our commitment to 
core labor standards through a mechanism dealing with any adverse 
impacts that trade agreements have on labor markets.
  Mr. President, we need to send a strong signal to the rest of the 
world that the United States intends to continue its leadership of the 
global trading system. The Africa Trade Bill that we passed here this 
week was an excellent step in the right direction. We must continue to 
make progress on opening markets for American farmers, manufacturers 
and service providers. Negotiating bilateral free trade agreements with 
like-minded countries will support our multilateral negotiations in the 
WTO.
  Just as we negotiated NAFTA and the Uruguay round at the same time, 
we should pursue bilateral free trade agreements with Chile, Korea, and 
Singapore while we are negotiating the next round in the WTO.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. SESSIONS (for himself and Mr. Dodd):
  S. 1872. A bill to amend the Federal Credit Union Act with respect to 
the definition of a member business loan; to the Committee on Banking, 
Housing, and Urban Affairs.


                    faith based lending legislation

  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation 
with my colleagues, Senator Chris Dodd, which will support the work of 
over 600 religious organization based credit unions in the U.S. Many of 
these credit unions provide an essential source of financing for 
churches, religious schools, mission agencies, and related community 
projects such as homeless shelters, drug intervention facilities, and 
homes for abused women and children.
  Some of these credit unions rely on other credit unions to fund their 
loans to religious organizations through loan participation agreements. 
these loan participation agreements are classified as business loans 
and are counted against the member business loan caps that credit 
unions must abide by as a result of the Credit Union Membership Access 
Act signed into law last year. Consequently, the exemption for credit 
unions having a history of business lending contained in that act 
though well intended, doesn't solve the problem because religious 
organizations based CUs will not be able to sell loans to other credit 
unions who will have to count these faith based loans toward their 
business lending cap.
  The sale of loan participations is a necessary first step before any 
of these loans can be originated. the legislation I am introducing 
along with Senator Dodd will allow the approximately 600 religious 
organization based credit unions in America to exempt from loan 
participations those loans they originate to religious non-profit 
organizations. In doing so, our bill will assure a steady source of 
capital for these organizations and community based missions.
  Finally, Mr. President, I would like remind my colleagues that 
religious organization based credit unions enjoy a long history of safe 
lending and encourage them join Senator Dodd and me in passing this 
legislation. No other credit union program will do more to help the 
poor, the homeless, the disabled and those otherwise in need.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no object, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1872

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. MEMBER BUSINESS LOAN EXCEPTION.

       Section 107a(c)(1)(B) of the Federal Credit Union Act (12 
     U.S.C. 1757a(c)(1)(B)) is amended--
       (1) in clause (iv), by striking ``or'' at the end;
       (2) in clause (v), by striking the period and inserting ``; 
     or''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(vi) that is made to a nonprofit religious 
     organization.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. SESSIONS (for himself, Mr. Hutchinson, Mr. Warner, Mr. 
        Torricelli, Mr. Mack, Mr. Shelby, Mr. Nickles, Mr. Inhofe, Mr. 
        Thurmond, Mr. Ashcroft, Mr. McConnell, Mr. Roberts, Mr. Kohl, 
        Mr. Feingold, Mr. Cleland, Mr. Hollings, Mr. Bruaux, Mr. 
        Graham, Ms. Collins, Mr. Grams, Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. Enzi, Mr. 
        Murkowski, Mr. Gorton, Ms. Landrieu, Mr. Robb, and Mrs. 
        Lincoln):
  S. 1873. A bill to delay the effective date of the final rule 
regarding the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network; to the 
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.


       organ procurement and transplantation network legislation

  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I am proud today to join with Senators 
Tim Hutchinson, Warner, Torricelli, Mack, Shelby, Nickles, Inhofe, 
Thurmond, Ashcroft, McConnell, Roberts, Kohl, Feingold, Cleland, 
Hollings, Breaux, Graham, Collins, Grams, Lautenberg, Enzi, Murkowski, 
Gorton, Landrieu, Robb and Lincoln in introducing the Organ Donation 
Regulatory Relief Act of 1999.
  This legislation is designed to prevent an unprecedented Federal 
takeover of our Nation's organ transplant system by the Department of 
Health and Human Services. This act would nullify a highly 
controversial rule issued by the Secretary of Health and Human 
Services, Donna Shalala, that would give her sole authority to approve 
or disapprove organ allocation policies that are currently established 
by the private-sector transplant community throughout this country.
  This move by the administration would preempt Congress' role in 
encouraging a fair and equitable transplant system through the 
authorization of the National Organ Transplant Act. My bill would 
simply nullify the proposed HHS rule until such time as Congress passes 
amendments to the National Organ Transplant Act.
  This bill would preserve Congress' prerogative to consider changes or 
improvements to the current system while maintaining the private-sector 
role of thousands of patients, families, volunteers, and medical 
professionals that are now responsible for our organ transplant policy. 
It will allow Congress the time needed to consider new initiatives to 
encourage more organ donation which is the heart of our organ shortage 
problem.
  In my home State of Alabama, the University of Alabama-Birmingham, 
has one of the most effective and finest organ transplant centers in 
the world. It is the largest liver transplant facility in the world. I 
am extremely proud of their efforts. Let me just say this, this system 
has been built up carefully, utilizing State law and other laws. It 
works very effectively.
  I am very concerned that Federal Government policies have now been 
proposed that would upset this. It has not only upset the University of 
Alabama-Birmingham but transplant centers, and mainly university 
hospitals all over the country. And that is why we believe action needs 
to be taken at this time.
  I believe the current plan is fair and does a good job of acquiring 
and allocating organs for transplantation. For example, since the 
passage of the National Organ Transplant Act in 1984, the number of 
people receiving organs has increased annually, and the survival rate 
has improved steadily.
  A recent study by the Institute of Medicine came to the same 
conclusion:

       The committee found that the current system is reasonably 
     equitable for the most severely ill (Status 1) liver 
     patients, since the likelihood of receiving a transplant is 
     similar across organ procurement organizations for these 
     patients.

  The Institute of Medicine study contradicted the underlying rationale 
in some numbers that I believe were unwisely interpreted. They underlie 
this rationale for the controversial ``rule'' on organ allocation that 
has been proposed by the Department of Health and Human Services.

[[Page 28718]]

  In a careful analysis of 68,000 liver patient records, the Institute 
of Medicine panel said:

       . . . the ``overall median waiting time'' that patients 
     wait for organs--the issue that seems to have brought the 
     committee to the table in the first place--is not a useful 
     statistic for comparing access to or equity of the current 
     system of liver transplantation, especially when aggregated 
     across all categories of liver transplant patients.

  HHS has maintained that reducing regional differences in waiting 
times was the primary goal of their new rule on organ allocation. The 
HHS rule is a solution in search of a problem and would only inhibit 
the continual improvements made by the transplant community since the 
passage of NOTA 15 years ago.
  The HHS policy is also shortsighted in its wholesale preemption of 
State laws regarding organ transplantation. Many of the beneficial 
policies that have served to improve organ procurement and donation are 
based on State laws, such as the organ donor checkoff on driver's 
licenses, and the HHS preemption fails to recognize that fact.
  This year's Labor-HHS appropriations bill provided for a 3-month 
moratorium on the implementation of the rule from the time of its 
enactment. But, unfortunately, this may not and probably will not 
provide adequate time for Congress to consider this very complicated 
issue in the context of amendments to the National Organ Transplant 
Act.
  That is why it is necessary, indeed, imperative. And that is why 26 
Senators have signed on to this legislation in such a short period of 
time. It is imperative that we nullify the rule so that these life-and-
death issues can be considered without fear of a clock running out on 
ways to improve the current system and provide the gift of life to so 
many Americans.
  Hospitals and the physicians who operate in those hospitals are the 
key to the success of the organ transplant program. They receive phone 
calls at all hours of the night, and they go out and retrieve those 
organs from people who have been killed. And they have to do it under 
short periods of time. If they are going to do that simply to send off 
the organs to some hospital of which they are not committed personally 
or to patients of which they are not serving, they will not be as 
effective in retrieving the organs. Not as many people will benefit and 
not as many people will have their lives saved as a result.
  I believe that HHS' actions are unwise. It reminds me of that old 
adage: If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
  We do not have and have not seen a real complaint from the citizens 
of America over the operation of our organ transplant system. This has 
been created by unelected bureaucrats here in Washington, and it is not 
healthy, in my view.
  But there will be a full opportunity, if this bill is passed, to 
allow the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, of which I 
am a member, to hold hearings and review the facts in order to develop 
the best transplant program we possibly can. If we can improve the 
system, I say let's do it. But let's be sure we do not break something 
that is not broken already.
  So I thank the outstanding work of several of my colleagues on this 
important issue, including Senators Tim Hutchinson, John Warner, Robert 
Torricelli, and Senator Don Nickles, the assistant majority leader. 
Without their leadership, this legislation could not have come to 
fruition.
  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. 1873

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. NULLIFICATION AND REQUIREMENT FOR FURTHER 
                   RULEMAKING.

       (a) Limitation.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, the final rule relating to the Organ Procurement and 
     Transplantation Network, promulgated by the Secretary of 
     Health and Human Services and published in the Federal 
     Register on April 2, 1998 (63 Fed. Reg. 16296 et. seq. adding 
     part 121 to title 42, Code of Federal Regulations) and 
     amended on October 20, 1999 (64 Fed. Reg. 56649 et seq.)), 
     shall have no force or legal effect.
       (b) No Implementation or Authority.--The Secretary of 
     Health and Human Services shall not implement or exercise 
     further regulatory authority with respect to the Organ 
     Procurement and Transplantation Network, as well as 
     regulatory authority under sections 1102, 1106, 1138, and 
     1871 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1302, 1306, 1320b-
     8, and 1395hh), prior to the date of enactment of amendments 
     to reauthorize and revise part H of title III of the Public 
     Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 273 et seq.).
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. GRAHAM (for himself, Mr. Bingaman, and Mrs. Feinstein):
  S. 1874. A bill to improve academic and social outcomes for youth and 
reduce both juvenile crime and the risk that youth will become victims 
of crime by providing productive activities conducted by law 
enforcement personnel during non-school hours; to the Committee on the 
Judiciary.


 introduction of the police athletic league (pal) youth enrichment act 
                                of 1999

 Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I am extremely pleased to join with 
my distinguished colleagues, Senator Bingaman and Senator Feinstein, in 
introducing the Police Athletic League (PAL) Youth Enrichment Act of 
1999. This legislation is designed to reduce both juvenile crime and 
the risk that youth will become victims of crime. By providing 
productive activities during non-school hours in communities across 
this country, we can provide the healthy environment that our young 
people deserve. Outside the home, there is no safer place in any 
community than a school, a playground, a community center, or a park 
where law enforcement personnel are coordinating the activities.
  The Police Athletic League actually started back in the 1910's. A 
group of New York youth tossed a rock through a shopkeeper's window. 
That rock pioneered a new approach to juvenile delinquency prevention. 
Lieutenant Ed Flynn used that incident to create the Police Athletic 
League--an organization that makes police officers into role models and 
friends rather than enemies. PAL brings cops and kids together in 
activities where mutual trust and respect can be built. It is a 
statement to young people, particularly in less advantaged 
neighborhoods, that the community cares about them. It extends a hand 
of friendship to children--boys, girls, young men and women--who do not 
have many opportunities.
  Mr. President, there is clearly a direct link between crime 
prevention and PAL participation. Young people who are idle have the 
potential to be drawn into crime. In Baltimore, the PAL centers have 
cut juvenile crime by 30 percent and decreased juvenile victimization 
by 40 percent. In El Centro, California, PAL has reduced juvenile crime 
and gang activity in the HUD Housing Development by 64 percent.
  PAL, staffed by police officers, has numerous success stories of 
helping to shape the lives of individuals. In my own state of Florida, 
former PAL kid Ed Tobin is now a successful attorney. Steve Colin is a 
well known radio station personality in Miami Beach. In Jacksonville, 
23 Sheriff's Officers were PAL kids. Derrick Alexander of the Cleveland 
Browns and Shawn Jefferson of the New England Patriots were both PAL 
kids.
  Our legislation seeks to expand services of current chapters and 
provide seed money for 50 new chapters per year for the next 5 years 
(2000-2004). New chapters will offer programs providing a combination 
of mentoring assistance; academic assistance; recreational and athletic 
activities; technology training; and drug, alcohol, and gang prevention 
activities. This list is by no means exhaustive. PAL centers also offer 
health and nutrition counseling; cultural and social programs; conflict 
resolution training, anger management, and peer pressure training; job 
skill preparation activities; and Youth PAL conferences or Youth 
Forums.
  PAL currently has 320 chapters serving over 3,000 communities with a 
network of 1,700 facilities. Today, they mentor and serve more than one 
and half million young people, ages 6 to 18, throughout the United 
States, the U.S.

[[Page 28719]]

Virgin Islands, and Puerto Rico. In my home state, the Miami-Dade PAL 
serves over 13,000 youth annually, and Jacksonville serves over 12,000. 
We know, however, that many areas are still undeserved by PAL chapters.
  Law enforcement, community organizations, and local governments 
strongly support this bill. Mr. President, this investment in our youth 
will pay for itself many times over in reduced crime and law 
enforcement costs. I urge all my colleagues to support the passage of 
this much needed legislation. Together with the Police Athletic League, 
we can fill playgrounds instead of prisons.
 Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I rise today to join with Senator 
Graham in introducing the ``Police Athletic League Youth Enrichment Act 
of 1999.''
  The Police Athletic League (PAL) is a national organization that has 
been teaming up law enforcement with our nation's youth for the past 55 
years. New Mexico is fortunate to have a statewide PAL program. The New 
Mexico PAL provides New Mexico's youth with a variety of after-school 
and summer activities. Last year, the New Mexico PAL provided hundreds 
of New Mexico kids with alternatives to getting into trouble. For these 
reasons, I am very proud to introduce the PAL Youth Enrichment Act with 
Senator Graham.
  In New Mexico, the PAL chapter has ten sites around the state: Santa 
Fe, Albuquerque, Gallup, Tohatchi, Bloomfield, Roswell, Dona Ana 
County, Clovis, Lordsburg and the Pueblo of Cochiti. The goal of the 
New Mexico PAL is to provide recreational, educational and cultural 
activities for at-risk youth ages five to eighteen with the intent of 
reducing negative behaviors and promoting healthy behavioral patterns. 
PAL aims to build self-esteem and resiliency in youth and provide 
positive alternatives to alcohol, drug use, delinquent behavior and 
violence. The New Mexico PAL sponsors sporting leagues throughout the 
year, participates in Sports Days during the summer, sponsors a one-
week summer camp and offers ongoing mentoring opportunities for youth.
  The PAL volunteers not only play sports with the youth, but they 
fight for the youth. In Albuquerque, the PAL chapter aided in 
preserving the use of a baseball field for the youth sporting leagues.
  Last summer the New Mexico PAL held several Youth Sports Days that 
attracted between 40 and 150 kids in each community. In August, I 
attended the Youth Sports Day in Santa Fe. The daylong event provided 
the younger kinds in the community with a variety of sporting events, 
prizes and lunch. The kids and parents interacted with the law 
enforcement officers in a setting that allowed them to see the officers 
as community members, mentors and leaders.
  The New Mexico PAL also sponsors a week long summer camp, Camp 
Courage, each year at the Cochiti Lake. It is a reward camp for kids 
that have said ``no'' to antisocial behavior. More than one hundred 
kids participate in this program annually. Because a camp requires a 
lower adult child ratio, the local FBI agents, DEA agents and the 
National Guard joined with the local police and sheriffs in organizing 
a week of intense sporting activities. They also offered themselves as 
mentors and reachers for the youth. The commitment of these law 
enforcement officers to the youth of New Mexico is truly admirable.
  After seeing what the New Mexico PAL has accomplished, I have come to 
be a great supporter of PAL. I now want other communities around the 
nation to be able to benefit from the same programs and services and 
for more New Mexico communities to be able to start PAL programs. As I 
see it, a police officer's duty is primarily to protect a community. I 
look at PAL as law enforcement's way of helping protect the health of 
our kids--both the physical well being and the mental well being.
  The PAL Youth Enrichment Act will enable existing PAL to expand their 
services and provide seed money for new PAL in distressed communities, 
including many Native American communities. The goal is to provide seed 
money for fifty new chapters each year for the next five years. By 
providing $16 million annually for new and existing PAL, youth around 
the country will benefit from a combination of academic assistance; 
mentoring assistance; recreational and athletic activities; technology 
training; drug, alcohol, and gang prevention activities; health and 
nutrition counseling; cultural and social programs, conflict resolution 
training; anger management; peer pressure training; and job skill 
preparation classes.
  Although PAL chapters consist of local law enforcement, they do not 
receive direct funding from the law enforcement agencies, and instead 
rely on the efforts of volunteers and fund-raising proceeds. Because of 
this funding situation, in 1977 I urged Congress to appropriate funds 
for the New Mexico PAL. In 1998 I succeeded in getting $1 million 
appropriated through the Commerce-Justice-State Appropriations bill for 
the New Mexico PAL program to expand the PAL services to communities 
around the State and to greatly enhance the current programs it 
offered. This money has enabled the New Mexico PAL to carry out its 
summer programs, its Camp Courage, and many other new activities. It 
also has allowed them to expand the program to tribal communities in 
northwest New Mexico, with the cooperation of the tribal police in 
those areas. The PAL Youth Enrichment Act will provide the funding 
needed to continue programs like the New Mexico PAL and will give other 
states the incentive to start up PAL programs in distressed 
communities.
  Kids need healthy alternatives to crime and assistance in dealing 
with their anger. Athletics and recreational activities like dancing 
and drama greatly improves one's well being--both physically and 
mentally--and give teens an outlet for their energy and anger. PAL's 
sports and recreational activities also help kids learn the importance 
of teamwork and help boost their self-esteem when they accomplish more 
than they thought possible.
  Many folks do not realize it but the PALs have produced some great 
athletes over the years. New Mexico is proud of its native son, Danny 
Romero Jr., a former two-time world boxing champion and an alumnus of 
the New Mexico PAL program. According to Danny's father, the PAL 
philosophy taught his son life skills that he could no have learned any 
where else and kept him out of trouble.
  Mr. President, I encourage the Senate to take up and pass this 
worthwhile legislation that expands a program with proven positive 
results. Just ask the 1.5 million children in more than 3,000 
communities that the PAL program over the past 55 years has served. The 
PAL programs will change our youth's attitude toward police, will 
provide a variety of alternatives to criminal behavior and will 
positively influence a child's mental and physical well-being. I hope 
that my Senate colleagues will join me in supporting this important 
legislation
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DODD (for himself and Mr. Rockefeller):
  S. 1876. A bill to amend the High-Performance Computing Act of 1991 
to require a report to Congress; to the Committee on Health, Education, 
Labor, and Pensions.


                 science and educational networking act

 Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I am pleased to rise today to 
introduce the Science and Educational Networking Act with my colleague 
from West Virginia, Senator Rockefeller. This legislation is a 
companion bill to legislation introduced in the other body by one of my 
Connecticut colleagues, John Larson and cosponsored by 49 other 
members.
  Very simply, the Science and Educational Networking Act charts a 
course for the future for our schools and for education technology. 
Just as we cannot imagine schools and learning without books and 
pencils, computers and technology have become today a critical element 
in education. But like other tools, technology has its limits. Teachers 
must be trained to use technology in their teaching. Curriculum must 
incorporate and utilize technology. Students must have access

[[Page 28720]]

to computers. Classroom technology must be connected, integrated and of 
high quality.
  This legislation focuses specifically on this last element in the 
equation--the quality of the technology in our classrooms. Computers in 
and of themselves are amazing machines. But what is more powerful than 
their simple computing capacity is the connections students can make 
with them. From accessing the collection of museums and libraries to 
``chatting'' with students from across the globe, computers have 
incredible potential to enrich our children's education. But in too 
many schools this potential goes unrealized because of outdated, 
inadequate or non-existent equipment and slow connections to the 
Internet.
  Since the enactment and implementation of the e-rate, we have made 
substantial progress toward meeting our goal of connecting all schools 
and classrooms to the Internet. Since 1994, the percentage of schools 
with access to the Internet has more than doubled from 35 percent to 89 
percent and the percentage of classrooms with access has risen from 3 
percent to 51 percent. Gaps however remain. High income communities are 
more likely to have Internet access than low income schools with over 
60 percent of classrooms in wealthier communities having Internet 
access compared to under 40 percent of low income classrooms.
  Further limiting the benefit of the Internet and the World Wide Web 
is the actual capacity of a school's connection. Most schools are 
connected over regular telephone loans--although in many states even 
this is a problem. In my home state of Connecticut, four in five school 
districts report inadequate classroom access to telephone lines. And 
frankly, a regular telephone line just is not enough--trying to use the 
Internet with a regular telephone line can be frustratingly slow as 
data quickly overloads the capacity of these lines designed for 
telephones not computers. Students need access to high speed, large 
bandwidth capacity. Without these connections, it is like requiring our 
students to make their way only on the back roads rather than on the 
freeway.
  High speed, large bandwidth connections, which are rare except in 
some of our nation's technological hubs, substantially increase the 
quality and capacity of Internet connections. The effect of these 
better connections is immediate--entering, searching and accessing the 
Web and the information it contains is faster and much more efficient. 
Much more important, in my view, is what this increased capacity will 
do for distance learning opportunities in our elementary and secondary 
schools. High speed, large bandwidth connections offer the potential of 
real-time, two-way video and audio interactions over the Net. This is 
where the promise of distance learning comes to fruition when students 
in a remote location or several remote locations participate in real 
time classroom activities.
  This legislation will move us toward this promising goal. It will 
bring together leading experts in government to assess the capacity of 
our schools in this area, to explore the digital divide, to examine 
ways to better utilize this technology in schools and to report to 
Congress on how we can help schools meet these challenges.
  Mr. President, this is an important first step if we are to make the 
promise of the Internet a reality for our children and schools. I ask 
that the bill be printed in the Record.
  The bill follows:

                                S. 1876

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Science and Educational 
     Networking Act''.

     SEC. 2. REPORT TO CONGRESS.

       Section 103 of the High-Performance Computing Act of 1991 
     (15 U.S.C. 5513) is amended by redesignating subsections (b), 
     (c), and (d) as subsections (c), (d), and (e), respectively, 
     and by inserting after subsection (a) the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(b) Report to Congress.--
       ``(1) Requirement.--The Director of the National Science 
     Foundation shall submit to Congress, not later than December 
     31, 2001, a report that addresses the issues described in 
     paragraph (3) and includes recommendations to address the 
     issues identified in the report.
       ``(2) Consultation.--In preparing the report under 
     paragraph (1), the Director of the National Science 
     Foundation shall consult with the National Aeronautics and 
     Space Administration, the National Institute of Standards and 
     Technology, and such other Federal agencies and other 
     education entities as the Director of the National Science 
     Foundation considers appropriate.
       ``(3) Issues.--The report shall--
       ``(A) identify the current status of high-speed, large 
     bandwidth capacity access to all public elementary and 
     secondary schools and libraries in the United States;
       ``(B) identify how high-speed large bandwidth capacity 
     access to the Internet to such schools and libraries can be 
     effectively utilized within each school and library;
       ``(C) consider the effect that specific or regional 
     circumstances may have on the ability of such institutions to 
     acquire high-speed, large bandwidth capacity to achieve 
     universal connectivity as an effective tool in the education 
     process; and
       ``(D) include options and recommendations for the various 
     entities responsible for elementary and secondary education 
     to address the challenges and issues identified in the 
     report.''.

                          ____________________