[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 5]
[Senate]
[Pages 6080-6087]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. BURNS (for himself, Mr. Dorgan, Mr. Wyden, and Mr. 
        Baucus):
  S. 2476. A bill to amend the Communications Act of 1934 in order to 
prohibit any regulatory impediments to completely and accurately 
fulfilling the sufficiency of support mandates of the national 
statutory policy of universal service, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.


                     universal service support act

  Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Universal 
Service Support Act, a bill that will spur increased access to 
communications services for rural America. Just a few short years ago, 
we took the dramatic step of reshaping our nation's communications 
policy by passing the Telecommunications Act of 1996. A significant 
element of that initiative was the codification of a reconstituted 
policy of universal service, which guarantees all Americans with the 
ability to access to quality communications services.
  Nevertheless, a significant impediment to the fulfillment of this 
national policy exists. There currently exist two regulatory caps that 
are limiting the amount of support that can be directed to high-cost 
infrastructure deployment initiatives that are covered under the 1996 
Act.
  The regulatory caps were first instituted in 1994 at a time when a 
significant number of communications infrastructure acquisitions were 
taking place. This was in the days prior to the 1996 Act, which 
initiated competition and deregulation into the communications 
industry. Many of the acquisitions of that time involved the rural 
exchanges of large incumbent local exchange carriers that were 
divesting themselves of properties deemed to be unprofitable or 
otherwise undesirable. The entities purchasing such exchanges were 
generally the small rural cooperative and commercial systems that have 
served large portions of the nation's rural areas for years.
  The Federal Communications Commission instituted these caps because 
the acquiring carriers were seeking support for these newly acquired 
exchanges in order to upgrade them to the standards of the day. 
Generally this meant that universal service support was being sought 
and approved for areas which had never before received such support. 
The FCC was concerned that the level of support might escalate and in 
response it imposed both a cap on individual areas and also on the 
overall support channeling through the system. While waivers to the 
caps were occasionally granted, for all intents and purposes growth of 
universal service support other than for the addition of new lines was 
effectively halted.
  However, shortly thereafter the 1996 Act was enacted, which radically 
changed this nation's telecommunications landscape. The Act envisioned 
an evolving universal service support system which would help ensure 
the deployment of advanced services. The regulatory caps are at odds 
with this policy and must be repealed.
  We cannot permit regulatory policies that are so clearly inconsistent 
with statutory policy to stand unchallenged. A national, statutory 
policy dedicated to universal communications service exists, and we can 
no longer allow inappropriate regulatory actions to undermine its 
intent. I urge my colleagues to join me in moving this initiative 
forward to passage prior to the end of this Congress.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. GRASSLEY (for himself and Mr. Breaux):
  S. 2477. A bill to amend the Social Security Act to provide 
additional safeguards for beneficiaries with representative payees 
under the Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance program or the 
Supplemental Security Income program; to the Committee on Finance.


              SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFICIARIES PROTECTION ACT

  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation 
which would make Social Security beneficiaries, who had their benefits 
misused by organizational representative payees, whole. While most 
people receive their Social Security and Supplemental Security Income 
benefit payments directly, others must have assistance in money 
management. Benefits, totaling over $25 billion, to these people are 
paid through representative payees who receive and manage the payments 
on behalf of the beneficiaries. Representative payee responsibilities 
include, but are not limited to, frequently monitoring the 
beneficiary's current well-being for food, shelter, clothing, medical 
care, and personal needs; informing the Social Security Administration 
of changes in the representative payee's own circumstances that would 
affect the performance of representative payee services; reporting 
events to the Social Security Administration that may affect the 
beneficiary's entitlement or amount of benefits; and submitting an 
annual accounting to SSA reporting about benefits received, used, and 
conserved.
  Currently, about 6.5 million Social Security and Supplemental 
Security Income program beneficiaries rely on representative payees to 
manage their monthly benefits. SSA usually looks for a payee among the 
beneficiary's family and friends. For others, those traditional 
networks of support are not available, and SSA relies on state, local, 
or community sources to fill the need. Family members serve as 
representative payees for about 88 percent of the beneficiaries 
requiring them. 45,050 organizations, such as institutions, government 
agencies, financial organizations, and qualified fee-for-service 
organizations, serve as payees for the other 12 percent, totaling 
750,570 beneficiaries.
  As Chairman of the Special Committee on Aging, I am especially 
concerned about the 795,060 beneficiaries, age 62 and over, who are 
served by representative payees. With the retirement of the baby boomer 
generation on the horizon, the number of institutions, such as nursing 
homes, serving as payees stands to increase dramatically. Therefore, 
addressing this matter now is all the more urgent.
  The majority of representative payees provide much-needed help to 
beneficiaries without abusing this responsibility. A minority of payees 
misuse

[[Page 6081]]

their position. SSA's Office of the Inspector General (OIG) has 
recently investigated several instances of misuse by organizational 
representative payees. One such investigation served as the subject of 
a recent ``20/20'' television news program segment. In this segment, 
several elderly Social Security beneficiaries accused Greg Gamble, of 
the Aurora Foundation, a former organizational payee, of using their 
benefits for his own purposes. On March 14, 2000, Mr. Gamble entered a 
guilty plea in federal court of embezzlement of Social Security funds. 
As part of the plea agreement, Mr. Gamble agreed to make restitution to 
SSA in the amount of $303,314.00. Although this is only one example of 
misuse, SSA's OIG has just begun investigating several instances of 
misuse. Since FY 1998, it has identified about $8 million in SSA 
representative payee fraud loss. SSA's OIG expects the number of misuse 
cases to increase as SSA increases its review of organizational 
representative payee records.
  When any payee has been determined to have misused an individual's 
benefits, SSA reassigns another payee to the beneficiary. 
Unfortunately, SSA can reissue the benefits only in cases where 
negligent failure on SSA's part to investigate or monitor the payee 
resulted in the misuse. In virtually all other cases, the individual 
loses his or her funds unless SSA can obtain restitution, through civil 
processes, of the misused benefits from the payee. If SSA is able to 
recover the misused amount, it may take years to do so. In the 
meantime, the beneficiary has lost the amount misused and may be 
temporarily inconvenienced, by not having money to pay rent, utilities, 
or food, until a new payee is assigned.
  In order to prevent misuse of benefits in the future, and to provide 
better accountability of benefits to beneficiaries, I am introducing 
the ``Social Security Beneficiaries Protection Act,'' along with my co-
sponsor and Special Committee on Aging Ranking Member Senator Breaux. 
This bipartisan bill:
  (1) gives SSA the authority to re-issue benefits misused by 
organizational payees on its own determination (presently, benefits are 
only re-issued when a court finds that SSA negligently failed to 
investigate/monitor the payee);
  (2) requires non-governmental organizational payees to be bonded and 
licensed (presently, there is a bonding or licensing requirement);
  (3) requires fee forfeiture when payees misuse benefits;
  (4) gives SSA overpayment recovery authority for benefits misused by 
non-governmental payees; and
  (5) extends civil monetary penalty authority to SSA (of not more than 
$5,000 per violation for misuse offenses).
  I urge my fellow Senators to support Senator Breaux and me in 
ensuring that our Nation's most vulnerable citizens, senior citizens 
and the disabled, will receive every dollar of benefits to which they 
are entitled.
  I would also like to remind everyone that the Senate Special 
Committee on Aging is holding a hearing on misuse of benefits by Social 
Security organizational representative payees Tuesday, May 2, 2000, at 
10:00 a.m. in 562 Dirksen.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. AKAKA (for himself and Mr. Graham):
  S. 2478. To require the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a theme 
study on the peopling of America, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.


                THE PEOPLING OF AMERICA THEME STUDY ACT

  Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, America is truly unique in that we are all 
immigrants to the United States, coming from different regions--whether 
from Asia, across the Bering Sea, or from islands in the Pacific Ocean, 
or Mexico, Europe or many other regions of the world. The prehistory 
and the history of this Nation are inextricably linked to the mosaic of 
migrations, immigrations and cultures that has resulted in the peopling 
of America. Americans are all travelers from other regions, continents 
and islands.
  We need a better understanding of this coherent and unifying theme in 
America. With this in mind, I am introducing, along with my colleague 
Senator Graham, a bill authorizing the National Park Service to conduct 
a theme study on the peopling of America.
  The purpose of the study is to provide a basis for identifying, 
interpreting and preserving sites related to the migration, immigration 
and settling of America. The peopling of America is the story of our 
Nation's population and how we came to be the diverse set of people 
that are today. The peopling of America will acknowledge the diverse 
set of people that we are today. The peopling of America will 
acknowledge the first migrants who settled the North American 
continent, the Pacific Islands, and the lands that later became the 
United States of America. The original peoples came across the Bering 
Sea from Asia, or they arrived at our Pacific Islands across thousands 
of miles of ocean from the South Pacific and Micronesia. The peopling 
of America continued as Spanish, Portuguese, French, Dutch and English 
laid claim to lands and opened the floodgates of European migration and 
the involuntary migration of slaves from Africa.
  This was just the beginning. America has been growing and changing 
ever since. The growth and change can be characterized as the movement 
of groups of people across external and internal boundaries, the 
strength within their cultures, and the diffusion of cultural ways 
through the United States. The strength of American culture is in our 
diversity and rests on a comprehensive understanding of the peopling of 
America.
  The theme study I am proposing will authorize the Secretary of the 
Interior to identify regions, areas, districts, structures and cultures 
that illustrate and commemorate key events or decisions in the peopling 
of America, and which can provide a basis for the preservation and 
interpretation of the peopling of America. It includes preservation and 
education strategies to capture elements of our national culture and 
history such as immigration, migration, ethnicity, family, gender, 
health, neighborhood, and community. In addition, the study will make 
recommendations regarding National Historic Landmark designations and 
National Register of Historic Places nominations, as appropriate. The 
study will also facilitate the development of cooperative programs with 
educational institutions, public history organizations, State and local 
governments, and groups knowledgeable about the peopling of America.
  Mr. President, as we enter a new century of hope and opportunity, it 
is incumbent on us to reflect on the degree to which the development of 
the United States owes to our population diversity. Looking back, we 
understand that our history, and our very national character, is 
defined by the grand, entangled progress of people to, and across the 
American landscape--through exploration, colonization, the slave trade, 
traditional immigration, or internal migration--that gave rise to the 
rich interactions that make the American experience unique.
  We embody the culture and traditions that our forebears brought from 
other places and shores, as well as the new traditions and cultures 
that we adopted or created anew upon arrival. Whether we settled in the 
rangelands and agrarian West, the industrialized Northeast, the small 
towns of the Midwest, or the genteel cities of the South, our forebears 
inevitably formed relationships with peoples of other backgrounds and 
cultures. Our rich heritage as Americans is comprehensible only through 
the stories of our various contituent cultures, carried with us from 
other lands and transformed by encounters with other cultures.
  All Americans were originally travelers from other lands. Whether we 
came to this country as native peoples, English colonists or African 
slaves, or as Mexican ranchers, or Chinese merchants, the process by 
which our nation was peopled transformed us from strangers from 
different shores into neighbors unified in our inimitable diversity--
Americans all. It is essential for us to understand this process, not 
only to understand who and where we are, but also to help us understand 
who

[[Page 6082]]

we wish to be and where we should be headed as a nation. As the 
caretaker of some of our most important cultural and historical 
resources, from Ellis Island to San Juan Island, from Chaco Canyon to 
Kennesaw Mountain, the National Park Service is in a unique position to 
conduct a study that can offer guidance on this fundamental subject.
  Currently we have only one focal point in the National Park system 
that celebrates the peopling of America with any significance. Ellis 
Island is part of the Statute of Liberty National Monument. Ellis 
Island welcomed over 12 million immigrants between 1892 and 1954, an 
overwhelming majority of whom crossed the Atlantic from Europe. Ellis 
Island celebrates these immigrant experiences through their museum, 
historic buildings, and memorial wall. Immensely popular as it is, 
Ellis Island is focused on Atlantic immigration and thus reflects the 
experience only of those groups--primarily Eastern and Southern 
European--who were processed at the island during its active period, 
1892 to 1954.
  Not all immigrants and their descendants can identify with Ellis 
Island. Tens of millions of other immigrants traveled to our great 
country through other ports of entry and in different periods of our 
Nation's history and prehistory. Ellis Island only tells part of the 
American story. There are other chapters, just as compelling, that must 
be told.
  On the west coast, Angel Island Immigration Station, tucked in San 
Francisco Bay, was open from 1910 to 1940 and processed hundreds of 
thousands of Pacific Rim immigrants through its portals. An estimated 
175,000 Chinese immigrants and more than 20,000 Japanese made the Long 
Pacific passage to the United States. Their experience are a west coast 
mirror of the Ellis Island experience. But the migration story on the 
west coast is much longer and broader than Angel Island. Many earlier 
migrants to the west coast contributed to the rich history of 
California, including the original resident Native Americans, Spanish 
explorers, Mexican ranchers, Russian colonists, American migrants from 
the Eastern states who came overland or around the Horn, German and 
Irish military recruits, Chinese railroad laborers, Portuguese and 
Italian farmers, and many other groups. The diversity and experience of 
these groups reflects the diversity and experience of all immigrants 
who entered the United States via the Western States, including Alaska, 
Washington, Oregon, and California.
  The study we propose is consistent with the agency's latest official 
thematic framework which establishes the subject of human population 
movement and change--or ``peopling places''--as a primary thematic 
category for study and interpretation. The framework, which serves as a 
general guideline for interpretation, was revised in 1996 in response 
to a Congressional mandate (Civil War Sites Study Act of 1990, Public 
Law 101-628, Sec. 1209) that the full diversity of American history and 
prehistory be expressed in the National Park Service's identification 
and interpretation of historic and prehistoric properties.
  In conclusion, we believe that this bill will shed light on the 
unique blend of pluralism and unity that characterizes our national 
polity. With its responsibility for cultural and historical parks, the 
Park Service plays a unique role in enhancing our understanding of the 
peopling of America and thus of a fuller comprehension of our 
relationships with each other--past, present, and future.
  I urge my colleagues to support this initiative.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. LANDRIEU:
  S. 2479. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 
a refundable credit against income tax to certain elementary and 
secondary school teachers who receive advanced certification and to 
exclude from gross income certain amounts received by such teachers; to 
the Committee on Finance.


                     certified teacher's tax credit

  Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to introduce a 
bill. We are going to be discussing, I hope, next week the 
reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, which is 
a very important act for the country, that provides the ways in which 
the Federal Government supports our local school systems throughout the 
country. There are a few of us here who believe very strongly we need 
to change some of the ways we do that, to really focus on results and 
not process, so we can stop funding failure and begin rewarding 
success.
  So I come to the floor today to introduce a bill because there are so 
many ways we can help improve our schools. Because my time is limited, 
I cannot list them. But one of the ways we can do that is by helping to 
encourage good people to go into the field of teaching and to help 
raise teachers' salaries, if we can, in appropriate ways, to encourage 
good, qualified teachers to stay in the classrooms.
  As you know, Mr. President, we do not fund teachers' salaries 
directly. The bill I am introducing will provide a tax credit for those 
teachers who become nationally board certified. Currently, there are 
over 4,000 teachers who are nationally board certified. This will 
provide a $5,000 tax credit. It is the least we can do to help 
encourage the States to continue the way they are encouraging good, 
qualified people to stay in the classroom and to help raise the 
salaries of teachers in this Nation.
  Just for the record, beginning teachers make $7,000 less than their 
peers, but, more tragically, teachers with a master's degree make about 
$35,000 less.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DURBIN (for himself and Mr. Lautenberg):
  S. 2482. A bill to assist States and units of local government in 
carrying out Safe Homes-Safe Streets programs; to the Committee on the 
Judiciary.


                      SAFE HOMES-SAFE STREETS ACT

 Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation 
along with Senator Lautenberg to help communities voluntarily reduce 
the number of guns in their homes and on their streets. There are over 
200 million guns in America today. Alarmingly, that is almost one for 
every man, woman, and child in this country. Of those 200 million guns, 
66 million are hand guns and the number of assault weapons is 
increasing. Although statistics show a 4.7% decrease in the rate of 
firearm-related injuries from 1996 to 1997, the rate of a firearm-
related injuries is still unacceptably high.
  More than 600,000 gun crimes are committed in the United States each 
year. On average, approximately 200 people are wounded by guns and 
approximately 88 people are killed by guns everyday. Twelve American 
children, under the age of 19, are killed by guns everyday. The rate of 
accidental shooting deaths for children under the age of 15 in the 
United States is nine times higher than the rate of the other 25 
industrialized nations combined. Firearm homicides are the second 
leading cause of death for youth 15-24. Firearm suicide is the third 
leading cause of death in this age group. Handguns account for nearly 
70% of firearm suicides among all age groups. Guns kept in the home for 
self-protection are three times more likely to kill a friend or a 
relative than an intruder.
  The human cost of gun violence is great. Saving families from 
senseless deaths caused by gun violence is long over due. Reducing the 
number of guns in our homes and in our streets is essential to curbing 
gun violence in this country.
  In economic terms, it is estimated that the lifetime medical costs of 
the 134,445 gunshot injuries in the United States in 1994 was $2.3 
billion. The average medical cost per injury was about $17,000. The 
medical cost of gunshot injuries due to assaults was about $1.7 
billion. Taxpayers paid 49% or $1.1 billion of these medical costs. The 
estimated indirect costs of gunshot injuries, the value of lost 
productivity due to fatal and non-fatal injuries, was about $19.7 
billion in 1994.
  There are also non-economic costs which include pain and suffering of 
the survivors, the fear which inevitably permeates all strata of 
society, the societal and emotional stress on both

[[Page 6083]]

adults and children, and the influence gun related violence can have on 
a community.
  The multiple costs of gun-related injuries--the human cost, the 
economic cost, and the non-economic cost--amount to an exceedingly 
costly epidemic and make finding a solution to gun violence a top 
priority. Unfortunately, there is no single cure for this disease. 
However, voluntary gun reduction programs that provide a means to 
reducing the number of weapons on the streets and in children's homes 
are an important step to creating safe and healthy environments.
  That is why I have introduced the Safe Homes-Safe Streets Act of 
2000. The purpose of this Act is to voluntarily reduce the number of 
guns in circulation by aiding State and local law enforcement 
departments that wish to conduct gun reduction programs to create safer 
homes and safer streets.
  Under the Safe Homes-Safe Streets Act, law enforcement officials 
would be permitted to--
  (1) accept voluntary surrender of firearms from individuals seeking 
to dispose of them;
  (2) provide gift certificates or other goods in exchange for 
firearms;
  (3) provide cash in exchange for firearms, in a value not to exceed a 
percentage of the estimated cost of a new firearm of the same type; or
  (4) use any other innovative approach to encourage a voluntary 
reduction in the number of firearms in local communities.
  This legislation would authorize $15 million for grants to States or 
local units of government to conduct these programs.
  A program may include a criminal background check regarding the 
ownership of each firearm or may offer amnesty from such background 
checks, provided that the policy regarding criminal background checks 
is uniformly applied. Whenever any firearm is surrendered under this 
Act, State or local units of government shall inquire whether such 
firearm is needed as evidence. If the surrendered gun is not needed as 
evidence, it shall be destroyed --thus preventing the potential 
recycling of guns and possible illegal use. Any firearm that is a curio 
or relic or that has historic significance shall be donated to a State 
or local museum for display.
  Safe Homes-Safe Streets programs would provide an excellent way for 
communities to draw attention to the problem of gun violence, which is 
fueled by the widespread, easy availability of firearms. Gun reduction 
programs under the Safe Homes-Safe Streets Act would also serve as a 
catalyst for local communities and neighborhood organizations to work 
with law enforcement in a collaborative manner. Moreover, gun reduction 
programs under the Safe Homes-Safe Streets Act would encourage citizens 
to become more involved in the fight against gun violence.
  Most importantly, the Safe Homes-Safe Streets Act would eliminate 
tens of thousands of guns from our homes and streets. With fewer guns 
in American homes, fewer guns can fall into the wrong hands and fewer 
guns can be used for crime or suicide. It makes no difference if older 
or newer guns are collected in the programs because all guns are 
potentially lethal and can be fired accidentally. Guns kept in the home 
for self-protection are three times more likely to kill a friend or a 
relative than an intruder. Safe Homes-Safe Streets programs would help 
stop violence before it occurs.
  On their own volition, some communities have launched successful gun 
reduction programs to help rid themselves of guns and reduce the 
senseless violence in their daily lives. Many communities have 
implemented gun buyback programs; however, other communities have taken 
a more innovative approach to address the circulation of illegal guns 
on their streets. For example, in California and in my hometown of 
Springfield, Illinois, law enforcement officials have implemented the 
``Stop Gun Violence Reward Program.'' Under the ``Stop Gun Violence 
Reward Program,'' citizens are encouraged to anonymously and 
confidentially call the CrimeStoppers hotline when handguns are seen in 
public places. An officer is then dispatched to investigate the 
compliant. If an illegal gun is recovered in a public place, the caller 
receives a $100 cash reward. If the gun is stolen, it is returned to 
its rightful owner. If the gun is not needed as evidence, it is 
destroyed. With federal assistance, more communities would be empowered 
to voluntarily help reduce the number of potentially lethal firearms in 
their homes and on their streets--helping to create safer homes and 
safer streets.
  Moreover, the Safe Homes-Safe Streets Act would help communities 
increase awareness of gun violence and gun possession; reduce the 
number of accidents and domestic violence with guns; reduce the 
availability of highly lethal weapons in the short term; reduce the 
lethality of crimes committed; enhance community solidarity; enhance 
community-police relations; and reduce the taxing medical cost of gun-
related injuries. The benefits of the Safe Homes-Safe Streets Act--
legislation facilitating a voluntary reduction of the number of guns in 
circulation--is clear.
  The Safe Homes-Safe Streets Act would help create safer homes and 
safer streets for our families. Several organizations, including 
Illinois Council Against Hand Gun Violence, Physicians for Social 
Responsibility, Illinois Education Association, National Education 
Association, The Bell Campaign, and the American Public Health 
Association, have already recognized the need for legislation calling 
for a voluntary reduction of the number of firearms in circulation.
  I urge my colleagues to join me and Senator Lautenberg in taking 
steps to cure the deadly epidemic of gun violence by supporting and 
cosponsoring the Safe Homes-Safe Streets Act.
  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. 2482

       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 Homes-Safe Streets Act 
     of 1999''.

     SEC. 2. PURPOSE.

       The purpose of this Act is to reduce firearm circulation by 
     assisting State and local law enforcement agencies in 
     carrying out Safe Homes-Safe Streets programs.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Firearm.--The term ``firearm'' has the meaning given 
     the term in section 921(a) of title 18, United States Code.
       (2) Safe homes-safe streets program.--The term ``Safe 
     Homes-Safe Streets program'' means a program carried out by a 
     law enforcement agency of a State or unit of local government 
     under which--
       (A) the law enforcement agency shall--
       (i) accept the voluntary surrender of firearms from 
     individuals seeking to dispose of them;
       (ii) provide gift certificates or other goods in exchange 
     for firearms;
       (iii) provide cash in exchange for firearms (in a value not 
     to exceed \1/2\ of the estimated cost of a new similar 
     firearm); or
       (iv) use any other innovative approach to cause a voluntary 
     reduction in the number of firearms in the State or local 
     communities;
       (B) the law enforcement agency may conduct a criminal 
     background check regarding the ownership of each firearm 
     surrendered or may offer amnesty from such background checks, 
     to the extent that the policy regarding criminal background 
     checks is uniformly applied; and
       (C) upon the surrender of a firearm, the law enforcement 
     agency shall--
       (i) determine whether such firearm may potentially serve as 
     evidence in any criminal investigation or prosecution; and
       (ii) if the firearm is not needed as evidence--

       (I) destroy the firearm; or
       (II) if the firearm is a curio or relic or has historical 
     significance, donate the firearm to a State or local museum 
     for display.

     SEC. 4. SAFE HOMES-SAFE STREETS PROGRAM GRANTS.

       (a) In General.--The Attorney General may award grants to 
     States or units of local government in accordance with this 
     section, which shall be used to establish and implement Safe 
     Homes-Safe Streets programs.
       (b) Applications.--In order to be eligible to receive a 
     grant under this section, the chief executive of a State or 
     unit of local government shall submit to the Attorney General 
     an application, in such form and containing such information 
     as the Attorney General may reasonably require.

[[Page 6084]]

       (c) Distribution.--The Attorney General shall distribute 
     grant amounts awarded under this section directly to the 
     recipient State or unit of local government.
       (d) Renewal.--A State or unit of local government shall be 
     eligible to apply for and receive a grant under this section 
     annually.
       (e) Matching Requirement.--
       (1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), the Attorney 
     General may not make a grant to a State or unit of local 
     government under this section unless that State or unit of 
     local government agrees that, with respect to the costs to be 
     incurred by the State or unit of local government in carrying 
     out the Safe Homes-Safe Streets program for which the grant 
     was awarded, the State will make available (directly or 
     through donations from public or private entities) non-
     Federal contributions in an amount equal to not less than 50 
     percent of such costs.
       (2) Waiver.--The Attorney General may waive the requirement 
     of paragraph (1), in whole or in part, upon a finding of 
     fiscal hardship on the part of a grant recipient.
       (f) Regulations.--Not later than 90 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Attorney General shall promulgate 
     regulations to implement this section, which shall specify--
       (1) the information to be included in an application for a 
     grant under this section; and
       (2) the requirements that a State or unit of local 
     government shall meet in submitting such an application.

     SEC. 5. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this 
     Act $15,000,000 for each fiscal year.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. SNOWE (for herself and Mr. Warner):
  S. 2483. A bill to provide for the eligibility of small business 
concerns owned and controlled by women for assistance under the mentor-
protege program of the Department of Defense; to the Committee on Armed 
Services.


    INCLUDE WOMEN-OWNED BUSINESSES IN THE DoD MENTOR-PROTEGE PROGRAM

  Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise today on behalf of myself and the 
Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Senator Warner, to 
introduce a bill that will enhance an already successful program and 
have a significant impact on women owned businesses. The purpose of the 
Snowe-Warner bill is to include women-owned businesses as eligible 
participants in the Department of Defense's Mentor-Protege Program.
  In 1990, the Congress established the DoD Mentor-Protege Pilot 
Program to provide incentives for major defense contractors to furnish 
disadvantaged small business concerns with assistance. That act also 
established a participation goal of 5% for those small disadvantaged 
businesses; however, women-owned businesses were not covered under that 
legislation.
  The overall results of that legislation were impressive. According to 
the GAO, from Fiscal Year 1992 through Fiscal Year 1998, appropriated 
mentor-protege funding of about $233 million was obligated through 
cooperative agreements, separate contracts, or line items in DOD 
contracts. And, according to the Department of Defense, between 1994 
and 1997 there was a net gain of 3,342 jobs within protege firms; there 
was a net revenue gain in excess of $276 million within the protege 
firms; and mentors reported an additional $695 million in subcontract 
awards to small disadvantaged businesses during this period. So, 
clearly, our legislation had a beneficial impact on the hundreds of 
small and disadvantaged businesses that now have the opportunity to 
compete and win Defense contracts under this program.
  Then, in 1994, we passed Public Law 103-355, otherwise known as the 
Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act of 1994, which, among other 
provisions, amended Section 15 of the Small Business Act to establish a 
5% annual goal for women-owned business enterprise participation in 
federal prime contracts and subcontracts. The Act also amended Section 
8 of the Small Business Act to give women-owned businesses equal 
standing with small and small disadvantaged businesses in the 
subcontracting plans of federal prime contractors.
  And, again, the results were significant. In Fiscal Year 1997 the 
government reported that women-owned businesses received 2.5% ($5.6 
billion) of the $225 billion prime and subcontract dollars spent, up 
from 1.3% in Fiscal Year 1991 when data by gender was first collected. 
And in the latest data from Fiscal Year 1999, women-owned businesses 
accounted for 2.42% or $4.6 billion of the total $190 billion federal 
contract dollars. The percentage of Federal agencies that awarded at 
least 5% of their prime contract dollars to women-owned businesses was 
37.9% in Fiscal Year 1997, up from 20.4% in Fiscal Year 1987.
  In Fiscal Year 1997 some 5,722 women-owned businesses were involved 
in 446,332 federal prime contract actions amounting to $3.3 billion 
while another $2.3 billion was awarded to women-owned businesses in 
subcontract actions. At that time, women-owned businesses comprised 
8.3% of Federal prime contractors, were involved in 4.1% of the prime 
contract actions and received 2.1% of Federal prime contract awards.
  Why is this important? Women-owned federal contractors own much more 
substantial enterprises than the typical woman-owned firm. The average 
number of employees in women-owned federal contractor firms was 52.2 
compared to just 2.3 among all full-time women-owned firms. Women-owned 
firms involved in Federal procurement have, on average, 1,742% higher 
sales and employ 23 times more employees than the average woman-owned 
firm.
  Despite the resounding success of these initiatives, I must ask the 
question, ``Are we there yet?'' Not quite. Although all Executive 
Branch departments operate Mentor-Protege programs, the three agencies, 
Defense, Energy, and GSA, that account for the most contract dollars 
have never met the 5 percent goal. While Defense, the largest federal 
purchaser, provided $2.3 billion or 50% of all federal contracts going 
to women-owned businesses in Fiscal Year 1999, that amount represented 
only 1.92% of total Defense contracts.
  The other two agencies together provided 16.4% of all federal 
contracts to women-owned businesses in fiscal year 1999 but, again, 
that funding only represented 3.1% of their combined contract funding. 
Of the three agencies, the GSA came closest to meeting the 5% goal with 
4.75% of its contract dollars going to women-owned firms.
  Some agencies, however, are doing very well at meeting the 5% goal. 
Housing and Urban Development sent 14.95% of its 1999 contracts to 
women-owned businesses, Veteran's Affairs sent 5.59%, and 
appropriately, the Small Business Administration spent 15.29% of their 
contract dollars at women-owned firms.
  Mr. President, women-owned businesses are capable of doing more and 
they want to do more. Surveys indicate that when asked if the 
availability of mentor-protege programs would make them more interested 
in entering the government procurement market, 33% of women business 
owners responded favorably. Similarly, 30% of women with businesses 
more than 20 years old were among those most interested in taking part 
in a mentor-protege program.
  When Section 831 of Public Law 101-510 establishing the DoD Mentor-
Protege Pilot Program to provide incentives for major defense 
contractors to furnish disadvantaged small business concerns with 
assistance was drafted, it defined disadvantaged small business 
concerns as those owned and controlled by socially and economically 
disadvantaged individuals, Indian tribes, Hawaiians and those that 
employ the severely disabled. It did not specifically provide for the 
participation by women-owned businesses, those firms that are at least 
51% owned and whose management and daily business operations are 
controlled by one or more women.
  Mr. President, very simply, this bill will correct that, and I, 
therefore, urge my colleagues in the Senate to support the passage of 
the Snowe-Warner bill that allows us to forge two pieces good 
legislation into one better piece of legislation that benefits American 
business women and, by extension, America.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I rise today to join my colleague from 
Maine as a sponsor of this very important piece of legislation that 
would allow women-owned businesses to participate

[[Page 6085]]

in the Department of Defense (DOD) mentor protege program.
  Since 1990, the mentor protege program has provided small 
disadvantaged businesses increased opportunity to compete for federal 
contracts. The program accomplishes this by providing incentives to 
major defense contractors to assist qualified small business to enhance 
their abilities to compete as contractors on DOD contracts. The mentor-
protege program does not guarantee contracts to anyone. Instead, it is 
designed to equip participants with the knowledge and expertise that 
they need to win such contracts on their own, in the competitive market 
place.
  The mentor protege program has been an important tool to help achieve 
the goal--established by Congress in 1987--that DOD increase to five 
percent the total value of contracts and subcontracts awarded to small 
disadvantaged businesses. This has been a remarkable success story. For 
the past six years, the DOD has exceeded this 5% goal.
  In 1994, a similar goal was set for the DOD to award five percent of 
its annual contracts to women-owned businesses. While women-owned 
business participation in defense contracting has increased since 1994, 
we are still, however, well below the 5% goal. It seems appropriate to 
provide DOD with additional tools to assist in meeting this goal. 
Providing women-owned businesses the opportunity to participate in the 
mentor protege program will be a big step forward in expanding federal 
contracting opportunities for these businesses.
  I want to thank Senator Snowe for her leadership on this issue and 
her work on behalf of women-owned businesses around the country. I urge 
swift passage of this legislation to enhance the opportunity for women-
owned businesses to compete for, and win, DOD contracts.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. CLELAND (for himself, and Mr. Coverdell):
  S. 2484. A bill to ensure that immigrant students and their families 
receive the services that the students and families need to 
successfully participate in elementary schools, secondary schools, and 
communities, in the United States, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.


                  THE IMMIGRANTS TO NEW AMERICANS ACT

 Mr. CLELAND. Mr. President, there are an estimated 2.3 million 
foreign-born school children living in the U.S. today and more are 
arriving daily. This is placing increasing demands on our nation's 
schools and community organizations to help these newly arrived 
children and their families with becoming successful in America's 
schools and communities.
  These children began arriving here in large numbers in the 1990s in a 
wave of immigration that is rivaling the first and second waves of 
German, Irish, Polish and Scandinavian immigrants who arrived here in 
the late 1800s and early 1900s. Like those who have preceded them, our 
nation's newest immigrants have a strong desire to succeed in their new 
found homeland. Our challenge is to provide them with the support and 
services they need to achieve to high standards in our schools--and 
beyond--and in so doing we will all be the beneficiaries.
  The wave of immigrants settling into communities all across America 
is resulting in a significant increase in children with diverse 
linguistic and cultural backgrounds enrolling in our schools. For 
example, the Waterloo, Iowa school system is being challenged to teach 
400 Bosnian refugee children who came here without knowing our 
language, culture or customs. Schools in Wausau, Wisconsin are filled 
with Asian children wanting to achieve success in the United States. In 
Dalton, Georgia, 47% of the student population in the public schools 
are Mexican children eager to participate in their new schools and 
community. In Turner, Maine, the school-aged children of hundreds of 
recently arrived Mexican immigrant families are pouring into this rural 
town's schools.
  As these examples illustrate, the foreign-born, school-aged children 
living in our nation today constitute an increasingly significant 
portion of the population, not just in communities accustomed to large 
immigrant populations like New York, Los Angeles and Miami, but also 
non-traditional immigrant communities like Gainesville, Georgia and 
Fremont County, Idaho. According to recently released estimates, this 
trend will continue. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the recently 
arrived immigrant and refugee populations living here today will 
account for 75% of the total U.S. population growth over the next 50 
years. U.S. schools from Florida to Washington State are being 
increasingly challenged by these changing demographics. As Secretary of 
Education Richard Riley recently said, ``dealing with this kind of 
change requires creative thinking and an eagerness to adopt and to 
incorporate cultural and linguistic differences into the learning 
process.''
  We need to make sure that these children are served appropriately--
and that their families are as well. Studies have shown that where 
quality educational programs are joined with community-based services, 
immigrants have an increased opportunity to become an integral part of 
their community and their children are better prepared to achieve 
success in school.
  The recent influx of immigrants into U.S. communities calls for 
innovative and comprehensive solutions. Today, I am joined by my 
distinguished colleague from Georgia, Senator Paul Coverdell, in 
introducing the Immigrants to New Americans Act. This legislation would 
establish a competitive grant program within the Department of 
Education to assist these school systems and communities that are 
experiencing a high number of immigrant families. Specifically, this 
new grant program would provide funding to partnerships of local school 
districts and community-based organizations for the development of 
model programs that assist immigrant children to achieve in U.S. 
schools and that provide services like parenting skills to their 
families as well as access to comprehensive community services, 
including health care, child care, job training and transportation.
  Senator Coverdell and I have both seen first hand the benefits of one 
community's program that brings togther teachers, community leaders and 
businesses in an innovative partnership to aid their linguistically and 
culturally diverse population. It is the Georgia Project and its 
mission is to assist immigrant children from Mexico achieve to higher 
standards in Dalton, Georgia's public schools.
  In recent years, the carpet and poultry industries in Dalton and 
surrounding Whitfield County experienced the need for a larger 
workforce. The city's visionary leaders encouraged Mexican immigrants 
to settle into their community to fill that need. The challenge has 
been in Dalton's public school system where Hispanic enrollment went 
from being just 4 percent ten years ago to over 47 percent today.
  To deal with this sizable increase, Dalton and Whitfield County 
public school administrators and business leaders formed a public-
private consortium. This consortium, known as The Georgia Project, 
initiated a teacher exchange program in 1996 with the University of 
Monterrey in Mexico. Today, seventeen Mexican teachers are helping to 
bridge the language and culture gap by serving as instructors, 
counselors and role models and providing Spanish language training to 
English-speaking students. In addition, Dalton Public School teachers 
spend a month in Monterrey, Mexico, each year learning first hand the 
culture, language and customs of the Mexican students they serve.
  There are other programs across the United States that address 
similar challenges experienced by the City of Dalton and Whitfield 
County. One such example is the Lao Family Project. This is a 
community-based refugee assistance organization that provides a wide 
range of parent-student services to Hmong and Vietnamese refugees in 
St. Paul, Minnesota in an effort to help parents become economically 
self-sufficient and their children succeed in school. The Lao Family 
Project's staff

[[Page 6086]]

are bilingual/bicultural paraprofessionals who provide services that 
include adult English as a second language instruction and preschool 
literacy activities for children.
  In the rural communities of Healdsburg and Windsor, California, the 
Even Start program provides a variety of instructional and support 
services to low-income, recently arrived Mexican immigrant families and 
their preschool and elementary school children. The program focuses on 
increasing family involvement in their children's education, helping 
parents and children with their literacy skills, and offering English 
as a second language course. Many of the instructional activities for 
the parent's classes are coordinated with the classroom teachers to 
ensure consistency with what is being taught to both the parent and 
their children. One focus of these classes is to communicate what the 
children are learning in their regular classes so that parents can help 
their children at home.
  The Exemplary Multicultural Practices in Rural Education Program, or 
EMPIRE, operates in the Yakima region of rural Central Washington 
State, an area with a diverse mix of ethnic groups, including 
Caucasians, Hispanics, Native Americans, African Americans, and Asian 
Americans. The program promotes positive race relations and an 
appreciation for ethnic and cultural differences. It encourages schools 
to develop learning environments where children of all backgrounds can 
be successful in school and the community. With support from EMPIRE's 
board of advisors, each school designs and carries out its own projects 
based on local resources and needs. Schools in which EMPIRE is active 
plan a wide variety of programs and activities with emphasis on staff 
development, student awareness, parent involvement and improvement of 
curriculum and instruction.
  The Immigrants to New Americans Act is endorsed by the National 
Association for Bilingual Education, The National Council of La Raza, 
the League of United Latin American Citizens, the India Abroad Center 
for Political Awareness, and the National Korean American Service and 
Education Consortium.
  I would like to close with the words of Education Secretary Richard 
Riley: ``Regardless of the cultural diversity of our nation's students, 
there is one unifying factor in their lives, education, the primary and 
shared source of hope, opportunity and success. It is our duty as a 
nation to ensure that every ethnically diverse community has the 
opportunity to achieve a quality education and the success that 
accompanies it--just as we have done for generations of Americans 
before them.''
  Our nation's communities are being transformed by the diverse culture 
of their citizens. Successfully addressing this change will require 
leadership, creative thinking and an eagerness to encourage and promote 
the promise that these new challenges bring. By doing so, we as a 
nation will better serve all our children--the best guarantee we have 
of ensuring America's strength, well into the 21st century and beyond.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to print their letters of 
support in the Record.
  There being no objection, the letters were ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                          National Association for


                                          Bilingual Education,

                                   Washington, DC, April 19, 2000.
     Hon. Max Cleland,
     U.S. Senate, Senate Dirksen Building,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Cleland: On behalf of the National Association 
     for Bilingual Education, I wish to commend you on your 
     introduction of legislation to help ensure that immigrant 
     students and their families will receive the services that 
     they require in our schools and communities.
       America's rapidly changing demographics make it imperative 
     that adequate services be available to our nation's 
     newcomers, so that they too will attain the American dream 
     and help make our country stronger. Your bill clearly 
     recognizes the contributions that immigrants have made to the 
     United States over its history, and takes a definitive step 
     forward in the spirit of empowerment through education and 
     community-based collaboration.
       NABE strongly believes that given the appropriate tools and 
     support students will rise to the highest of levels of 
     achievement. Our endorsement of this forward-thinking 
     legislation is a reaffirmation of this philosophy, and we 
     hope your colleagues in Congress will grant it prompt 
     approval.
       Once again, I commend you on the introduction of this 
     important piece of legislation, and I ask that you not 
     hesitate to contact me at (202) 898-1829 if there is anything 
     NABE can do to help your efforts in this respect.
           Sincerely,
                                                      Delia Pompa,
     Executive Director.
                                  ____



                                  National Council of La Raza,

                                   Washington, DC, April 26, 2000.
     Senator Max Cleland,
     Senate Dirksen Office Building,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Cleland: The National Council of La Raza 
     (NCLR) thanks you for your effort to facilitate and enhance 
     the participation of immigrants in American society. In 
     particular, we would like to express our support for your 
     legislation, the ``Immigrants to New Americans Act,'' which 
     would provide education, adult English as a Second Language 
     (ESL), job training, and other important services to 
     immigrants in ``emerging'' communities.
       Over the past decade, dramatic shifts have occurred in the 
     immigrant population in the United States, particularly among 
     Hispanic immigrants. Many Hispanic immigrants have settled in 
     areas where their presence had previously been virtually 
     invisible. For example, the U.S. Census Bureau determined 
     that the South (Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, 
     Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee) 
     experienced a 93% increase in its Hispanic population from 
     1990 to 1998, far outpacing growth in ``traditional'' 
     Hispanic states like California, New York, and Texas, where 
     increases hovered around 32%. While the U.S. Census Bureau 
     estimated the total Hispanic population in the South in 1998 
     to be 640,870, unofficial estimates place the Hispanic 
     population of both Georgia and North Carolina at close to 
     500,000 in each state. Midwestern states have also 
     experienced significant increases in their Hispanic 
     populations during this period, such as Iowa (74%), Minnesota 
     (61%), and Nebraska (96%). Many of these Hispanics are 
     immigrants in search of employment.
       The emergence of new immigrant populations has created a 
     significant need for educational and social services. The 
     search for employment opportunities has historically been the 
     primary impetus for the migration of immigrants. An ever-
     increasing availability of permanent employment has provided 
     the opportunity for many immigrants to settle with their 
     spouses and children, often in areas where previously there 
     had been seasonal agricultural work available. However, these 
     opportunities have largely been in unskilled or low-skilled, 
     low-paying jobs, such as the textile, poultry, and 
     construction industries in the South; meat- and vegetable-
     packing in the Midwest; and light manufacturing and service-
     sector work in major cities like New York City, Los Angeles, 
     and Houston. As these new immigrant populations form 
     permanent settlements, they often face social isolation and 
     disconnection from mainstream society.
       Emerging immigrant communities face a multitude of issues 
     in adapting to their new environment. Among the needs 
     identified in these communities are access to rigorous 
     standards-based curriculum in the public schools, effective 
     parental involvement in their children's education, adult 
     English-language acquisition programs, quality child care, 
     and employment and training. Your legislation would help 
     local communities to provide services in each of these 
     critical areas.
       NCLR believes that the ``Immigrants to New Americans Act'' 
     can have a significant, positive impact on the lives of many 
     immigrant children and families, and on the communities in 
     which they are settling. That is why we strongly support your 
     legislation and encourage the entire Congress to do the same.
           Sincerely,
                                                   Raul Yzaguirre,
     President.
                                  ____

                                            League of United Latin


                                            American Citizens,

                                   Washington, DC, April 27, 2000.
     Hon. Max Cleland,
     Dirksen Senate Building, U.S. Senate
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Cleland: The League of United Latin American 
     citizens (LULAC) wishes to thank you for your efforts at 
     facilitating and enhancing the ability of immigrant children 
     and their families to achieve success in America's schools 
     and communities. We would like to strongly support your 
     legislation, ``The Immigrants to New Americans Act.''
       We believe that this act will greatly enhance the ability 
     for schools and community-based services to develop model 
     programs aimed at helping immigrant students and their 
     families to receive the tools that they need to succeed.
       We find that this closely supports our mission and beliefs 
     that immigrants should be

[[Page 6087]]

     supported in any way possible. LULAC is the oldest and 
     largest Latino civil rights organization in the United 
     States. LULAC advances the economic condition, educational 
     attainment, political influence, health and civil rights of 
     Hispanic Americans through community-based programs operating 
     at more than 700 LULAC Councils nationwide.
       Once again, thank you for putting forth this effort to help 
     those who need a little help getting started in this country. 
     Your legislation will help to carry this country in a 
     positive way well into the 21st century.
           Sincerely,
                                                     Brent Wilkes,
     Executive Director.
                                  ____

                                           The India Abroad Center


                                      for Political Awareness,

                                   Washington, DC, April 24, 2000.
     Hon. Max Cleland,
     Dirksen Senate Building, U.S. Senate
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Cleland: The India Abroad Center for Political 
     Awareness would like to endorse your Immigrants to New 
     Americans Act. We believe that this bill would provide a 
     strong support mechanism to those in the United States that 
     need it the most, our immigrants. Also we would be glad to 
     publish your op-ed piece on this bill in the newspaper India 
     Abroad which reaches nearly 250,000 people in the United 
     States. Thank you again for sponsoring this bill.
           Sincerely,
                                                Prem Shunmugavelu,
     Associate.

                          ____________________