[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 13]
[Senate]
[Pages 19029-19036]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mrs. HUTCHISON (for herself, Mr. Brownback, Mr. Miller, Mr. 
        Smith of New Hampshire, Mr. Hutchinson, Mr. Fitzgerald, and Mr. 
        Allen):
  S. 1513. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to make 
marriage penalty relief effective immediately in the 15-percent bracket 
and the standard deduction; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mrs. HUTCHISON. Madam President, I rise today to introduce 
legislation that will build upon the historic Economic Growth and Tax 
Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 by accelerating the marriage penalty 
tax relief in that bill and make it effective beginning next year. I am 
joined in my effort by Senators Brownback, Miller, Smith of New 
Hampshire, Hutchinson, Fitzgerald, and Allen.
  Earlier this year we delivered to the American people long overdue 
tax relief. Unfortunately, we did not have the ability to give married 
couples the relief from the marriage penalty as soon as we would have 
liked. My bill will complete this unfinished business by treating 
married couples fairly in the tax code beginning next year. 
Particularly now, as the President and Congress consider additional tax 
relief to bolster the economy in these difficult times, this 
legislation would be a smart option. At times like this, what better 
way to help our Nation than by strengthening the building blocks of 
society, our families, by adding to their budgets through marriage 
penalty relief.
  Every year for the past four years I introduced a bill to eliminate 
the marriage penalty tax as I simply could not understand why two 
single people should be thrown into a higher tax bracket and pay more 
in taxes simply because they got married. Not because of a promotion, 
not because of a raise, but because they got married! This year, we 
finally told all Americans that they do not have to choose between love 
and money, that they should not be penalized for exchanging wedding 
vows. I am proud to say that in this year's tax relief plan we 
corrected this quirk in the tax code. We returned to the commonsense 
principles that made this country great, and away from the concept that 
``no good deed goes unpunished.''
  The marriage penalty relief that was passed earlier this year will 
offer critical relief to our married couples, but unfortunately it will 
not take place immediately. I want to improve this timing because when 
the situation is as ridiculous as the marriage penalty, that is wrong. 
There are more than 20 million married couples in America today that 
pay a penalty just because they got married, a penalty that averages 
around $1,400. That is a lot of money! Especially when you are just 
starting out, $1,400 to a young couple could be part of the down 
payment on the new house or the new car for the expenses associated 
with having children. However, they choose to spend that money, or for 
whatever expenses they need it for, we want them to be able to make 
their own choices with the money they earn.
  And we want them to have the ability to do so now, not several years 
from now. What the bill does that I am introducing today is that it 
takes the relief we finally offered in the tax plan and makes it 
effective immediately for the 15 percent bracket and the standard 
deduction.
  Today, if you take the standard deduction when you do your taxes as 
an individual, you do not get the same amount of deduction if you get 
married. That is, the standard deduction does not simply double for 
couples. Whereas today the standard deduction for a single person is 
$4,550, and for a married couple is $7,600, our tax relief bill 
insisted that married couples receive a standard deduction that is 
exactly double that of the single person, or $9,100. Under my bill 
today, this doubling of the standard deduction will occur immediately.
  In addition, we addressed the fact that when most couples marry, the 
second income bumps them up to a higher tax bracket. Therefore, we 
decided to widen every tax bracket so that a married couple will not 
have to pay more in income taxes simply because they go into a higher 
bracket when they combined incomes.
  In this way, a combined income will be taxed at the same rate as if 
it was a single person making two incomes. For example, if each 
individual in a relationship is in the 15-percent income tax bracket 
but they get married and their combined incomes now bump them into the 
30-percent bracket, our tax relief means that they will effectively 
remain in the 15 percent bracket.
  This is critically important, especially to those who are at the 
lower income rates and for whom jumping from the 15 percent bracket to 
the next one could make all the difference in their budget. Our earlier 
legislation widens the 15-percent bracket by $9,000 for married 
couples. My bill today will accelerate this relief by making this 
change now, thereby eliminating the marriage penalty for those couples 
who are in the 15 percent bracket.
  Earlier this year a bipartisan majority agreed that it is very 
important that we relieve the pressure on the more than 20 million 
American couples who pay the marriage penalty tax. We all agreed then 
that this is wrong, and must be changed. Today, we have the chance to 
put our money where our mouth is and offer help to struggling couples 
now. I call upon my colleagues to join in this effort to provide this 
immediate assistance to the working families of America.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. KOHL:
  S. 1515. A bill to provide for enhanced security with respect to 
aircraft; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
  Mr. KOHL. Madam President, I rise this afternoon to introduce the 
``Safe Ground through Safe Skies Act of 2001.'' This legislation 
strengthens security measures for those aircraft that are currently not 
required to comply with an FAA approved security program. The events of 
September 11 have shown us a new reality, that our aircraft can be used 
as lethal weapons against innocent civilians on the ground.
  I applaud the FAA, the Administration, and Congress for quickly 
moving to address this threat as it applies to commercial aircraft. 
With the new security measures put in place by S. 1447, I am certain we 
will not again see a commercial common carrier be hijacked and turned 
into a bomb. However, the proposals under consideration today do 
nothing to stop other aircraft, such as chartered planes, leased 
planes, and cargo planes, from being hijacked and crashed into 
buildings or landmarks.
  I believe many of my colleagues would be surprised to learn that, for 
purposes of security, these aircraft are virtually unregulated. The 
protection of these aircraft, some as big or bigger than those used in 
the September 11 attack, is left to the private sector owners and 
operators, an approach we now reject for commercial common carriers.
  As the Senate continues to work on legislation to enhance security 
measures for commercial common carriers, it is vital that we address 
the gaping hole in our security as it relates to currently unregulated 
aircraft. It would be criminally negligent to pass an Aviation Security 
Act that leaves thousands of aircraft still unprotected from those 
terrorists who would turn our own planes into weapons of mass 
destruction.

[[Page 19030]]

  The Safe Ground through Safe Skies Act is an attempt to address this 
difficult problem. It is based on three goals:
  First, the legislation seeks to maintain the FAA's flexibility to 
design different screening systems for all sorts of aircraft, used for 
all sorts of purposes and boarding and deplaning at airports with a 
wide variety of experience in security.
  Second, the legislation recognizes the time consuming and difficult 
task of putting together a security program for smaller aircraft, many 
of which operate out of very small airports without any security in 
place currently.
  And third, and perhaps most importantly, the legislation addresses 
the immediate threat of a near term repeat terrorist attack.
  To achieve these goals, this legislation requires the FAA 
Administrator to issue a security screening program for all aircraft 
operations with an aircraft that weighs more than 12,500 pounds. That 
means every operator of an aircraft that takes-off in this country with 
more than approximately 15 seats will be subject to new security 
measures. To address the varying types of aircraft and aircraft 
operations, the Administrator will have the authority to waive this new 
requirement in cases reviewed and approved by the Administrator and 
Congress.
  For those aircraft weighing less than 12,500 pounds, this legislation 
requires the Secretary of Transportation to report to Congress, within 
6 months of enactment, recommendations on how to improve security for 
general aviation. Within one year of enactment, the Administrator must 
turn that report into an actual program.
  Finally, effective immediately upon enactment, this legislation 
requires aliens and persons identified by the Secretary of 
Transportation to undergo a background check before buying, leasing, or 
chartering any aircraft. This provision would expire as the 
Administrator issues security rules for each class of aircraft.
  Though this final step may seem extreme, it is a quick and simple way 
to immediately protect our entire aircraft fleet from capture and use 
as a weapon. The section is designed to mirror the requirements for 
background checks for aliens and others seeking flight school training 
already agreed to in S. 1447. If we need to protect ourselves from 
terrorists seeking flight school training in the future, we have an 
equal, if not greater need to protect our aircraft from terrorists who 
may have already received their flight training.
  Current policy falls short of the level of protection that the 
American people require and deserve. Any comprehensive airline safety 
legislation must include all types of aircraft conducting operations in 
our sky. While not placing a heavy burden on the FAA or the general 
aviation industry, the Safe Ground through Safe Skies Act protects our 
airline passengers and those of us on the ground by reducing the 
likelihood of another attack from the skies.
  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. 1515

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

     SECTION 1. ENHANCED SECURITY FOR AIRCRAFT.

       (a) Security for Larger Aircraft.--
       (1) Program required.--Not later than 90 days after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the 
     Federal Aviation Administration shall commence implementation 
     of a program to provide security screening for all aircraft 
     operations conducted with respect to any aircraft having a 
     maximum certified takeoff weight of more than 12,500 pounds 
     that is not operating as of the date of the implementation of 
     the program under security procedures prescribed by the 
     Administrator.
       (2) Waiver.--
       (A) Authority to waive.--The Administrator may waive the 
     applicability of the program under paragraph (1) with respect 
     to any aircraft or class of aircraft otherwise described by 
     that paragraph if the Administrator determines that aircraft 
     described in that paragraph can be operated safely without 
     the applicability of the program to such aircraft or class of 
     aircraft, as the case may be.
       (B) Limitations.--A waiver under subparagraph (A) may not 
     go into effect--
       (i) unless approved by the Secretary of Transportation; and
       (ii) until 10 days after the date on which notice of the 
     waiver has been submitted to the appropriate committees of 
     Congress.
       (3) Program elements.--The program under paragraph (1) 
     shall require the following:
       (A) The search of any aircraft covered by the program 
     before takeoff.
       (B) The screening of all crew members, passengers, and 
     other persons boarding any aircraft covered by the program, 
     and their property to be brought on board such aircraft, 
     before boarding.
       (4) Procedures for searches and screening.--The 
     Administrator shall develop procedures for searches and 
     screenings under the program under paragraph (1). Such 
     procedures may not be implemented until approved by the 
     Secretary.
       (b) Security for Smaller Aircraft.--
       (1) Program required.--Not later than one year after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall 
     commence implementation of a program to provide security for 
     all aircraft operations conducted with respect to any 
     aircraft having a maximum certified takeoff weight of 12,500 
     pounds or less that is not operating as of the date of the 
     implementation of the program under security procedures 
     prescribed by the Administrator. The program shall address 
     security with respect to crew members, passengers, baggage 
     handlers, maintenance workers, and other individuals with 
     access to aircraft covered by the program, and to baggage.
       (2) Report on program.--Not later than 180 days after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit 
     to the appropriate committees of Congress a report containing 
     a proposal for the program to be implemented under paragraph 
     (1).
       (c) Background Checks for Aliens Engaged in Certain 
     Transactions Regarding Aircraft.--
       (1) Requirement.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law and subject to paragraph (3), no person or entity may 
     sell, lease, or charter any aircraft to an alien, or any 
     other individual specified by the Secretary for purposes of 
     this subsection, within the United States unless the Attorney 
     General issues a certification of the completion of a 
     background investigation of the alien, or other individual, 
     as the case may be, that meets the requirements of paragraph 
     (2).
       (2) Background investigation.--A background investigation 
     or an alien or individual under this subsection shall consist 
     of the following:
       (A) A determination whether or not there is a record of a 
     criminal history for the alien or individual, as the case may 
     be, and, if so, a review of the record.
       (B) In the case of an alien, a determination of the status 
     of the alien under the immigration laws of the United States.
       (C) A determination whether the alien or individual, as the 
     case may be, presents a risk to the national security of the 
     United States.
       (3) Expiration.--The prohibition in paragraph (1) shall 
     expire as follows:
       (A) In the case of an aircraft having a maximum certified 
     takeoff weight of more than 12,500 pounds, upon 
     implementation of the program required by subsection (a).
       (B) In the case of an aircraft having a maximum certified 
     takeoff weight of 12,500 pounds or less, upon implementation 
     of the program required by subsection (b).
       (4) Alien defined.--In this subsection, the term ``alien'' 
     has the meaning given that term in section 101(a)(3) of the 
     Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(3)).
       (d) Appropriate Committees of Congress Defined.--In this 
     section, the term ``appropriate committees of Congress'' 
     means--
       (1) the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 
     of the Senate; and
       (2) the Committee on Commerce of the House of 
     Representatives.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. SANTORUM:
  S. 1516. A bill to remove civil liability barriers that discourage 
the donation of fire equipment to volunteer fire companies; to the 
Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. SANTORUM. Madam President, I rise today to introduce the Good 
Samaritan Volunteer Firefighter Assistance Act of 2001. On September 
11, the Nation witnessed the tragic loss of hundreds of heroic 
firefighters. Amazingly, every year quality firefighting equipment 
worth millions of dollars is wasted. In order to avoid civil liability 
lawsuits, heavy industry and wealthier fire departments destroy surplus 
equipment, including hoses, fire trucks, protective gear and breathing 
apparatus, instead of donating it to volunteer fire departments. The 
basic purpose of the bill is to induce donations of surplus 
firefighting equipment by reducing the threat of civil liability for 
organizations, most commonly heavy industry,

[[Page 19031]]

and individuals who wish to make these donations. The bill eliminates 
civil liability barriers to donations of surplus firefighting equipment 
by raising the liability standard for donors from ``negligence'' to 
``gross negligence.''
  The legislation is modeled after legislation passed into law in Texas 
in 1997 which has resulted in an additional $6 million of equipment 
donations from companies and other fire departments for volunteer 
departments which may not be as well equipped. Representative Castle 
has introduced the Good Samaritan Volunteer Firefighter Assistance Act, 
H.R. 1919, which has 63 bipartisan cosponsors in the House of 
Representatives. It is also supported by the National Volunteer Fire 
Council, the Firemen's Association of the State of New York, and a 
former director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA, James 
Lee Witt.
  The Good Samaritan Volunteer Firefighter Assistance Act of 2001 is 
modeled after a bill passed by the Texas state legislature in 1997 and 
signed into law by then-Governor George W. Bush. Now companies in Texas 
can donate surplus equipment to the Texas Forest Service, which then 
certifies the equipment and passes it on to volunteer fire departments 
that are in need. The donated equipment must meet all original 
specifications before it can be sent to volunteer departments. The 
Texas program has already received more then $6 million worth of 
equipment for volunteer fire departments. Arizona, Missouri, Indiana, 
and South Carolina have passed similar legislation at the State level. 
The legislation saves taxpayer dollars by encouraging donations thereby 
reducing the taxpayers' burden of purchasing expensive equipment for 
volunteer fire departments.
  This bill does not cost taxpayer dollars nor does it create 
additional bureaucracies to inspect equipment. The bill gets rid of 
unnecessary inspection bureaucracies, whether they are State run or a 
manufacturer's technician. This is for three reasons. First, 
bureaucracies are not necessary for inspections because the fire chiefs 
make the inspections themselves. Second, some of the State 
bureaucracies control who gets the equipment. These donations are 
private property transactions, not a good that is donated to the State, 
allowing the State to pick who will get the equipment. Third, there is 
no desire to create the temptation for waste, fraud, and abuse in a 
State bureaucracy in charge of picking the winners and losers.
  The bill reflects the purpose of the Texas state law. Federally, 
precedent for similar measures includes the Bill Emerson Good Samaritan 
Food Act, Public Law 104-210, named for the last Representative Bill 
Emerson, which encourages restaurants, hotels and businesses to donate 
millions of dollars worth of food. The Volunteer Protection Act of 
1997, Public Law 105-101, also immunizes individuals who do volunteer 
work for non-profit organizations or governmental entities from 
liability for ordinary negligence in the course of their volunteer 
work. I have also previously introduced three Good Samaritan measures 
in the 106th Congress, S. 843, S. 844 and S. 845. These provisions were 
also included in a broader charitable package in S. 997, the Charity 
Empowerment Act, to provide additional incentives for corporate in-kind 
charitable contributions for motor vehicle, aircraft, and facility use. 
The same provision passed the House of Representatives as part of H.R. 
7, the Community Solutions Act, in July of 2001.
  Volunteers comprise 74 percent of firefighters in the United States. 
Of the total estimated 1,082,500 volunteer and paid firefighters across 
the country, 804,200 are volunteer. Of the total 31,114 fire 
departments in the country, 22,636 are all volunteer; 4,848 are mostly 
volunteer; 1,602 are mostly career; and 2,028 are all career. In 1998, 
54 of the 91 firefighters who died in the line of duty were volunteers.
  This legislation provides a commonsense incentive for additional 
contributions to volunteer fire departments around the country and 
would make it more attractive for corporations to give equipment to 
fire departments in the other States. At this time when all of America 
has witnessed the heroic acts of selflessness and sacrifice of 
firefighters in New York City and in the Washington, D.C. area, I urge 
my colleagues to join me in supporting this incentive for the provision 
of additional safety equipment for volunteer firefighters who put their 
lives on the line every day throughout this great Nation.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. SPECTER:
  S. 1517. A bill to amend titles 10 and 38, United States Code, to 
enhance the Montgomery GI bill, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
  Mr. SPECTER. Madam President, I have sought recognition to comment on 
legislation I am introducing today to put into effect several 
recommendations made by the United States Commission on National 
Security/21st century relative to Montgomery GI bill, MGIB, educational 
assistance benefits administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs, 
VA. The Commission, co-chaired by former Senators Gary Hart and Warren 
Rudman, was tasked with reexamining U.S. national security policies and 
processes, and making recommendations on how the United States could 
best ensure the safety of its citizenry against emerging national 
security threats. Sadly, one of the emerging threats anticipated by the 
Commission, the threat of state or group-sponsored terrorism, was 
realized on September 11, 2001.
  Our Armed Forces, the best in the world, have now engaged the enemy, 
and we rely on these dedicated men and women in service to sacrifice 
their lives, if necessary, to defend liberty and secure justice. The 
Nation must reciprocate by assuring that the benefits provided to 
service members during, and after, their service measure up to the 
grave responsibilities entrusted to them. The Hart-Rudman Commission 
understood that, and, consistent with that understanding, the 
Commission recommended specific improvements in veterans' educational 
assistance benefits to assure that the armed forces are able to 
attract, and retain, highly qualified, dedicated service members.
  The Commission made, in total, seven recommendations on how MGIB 
benefits could be enhanced. It recommended that the MGIB monthly 
benefit be increased and indexed to the average education costs at 
four-year public colleges. It recommended, further, that the payment of 
benefits be accelerated to the beginning of a student's school term. 
The Commission recommended, in addition, that MGIB benefits be made 
available to students taking technical training courses. Further, it 
recommended the repeal of the requirement that service members make 
contributions totaling $1200 in order to ``buy'' eligibility for MGIB 
benefits. It recommended, in addition, that potential beneficiaries be 
given 20 years after discharge from the service, not just 10 years, as 
is currently specified by law, to make use of their MGIB benefits. It 
also recommended that service members with 15 years of service or more 
be entitled to transfer their entitlement to MGIB benefits to their 
spouse or dependent children. Finally, the Commission recommended that 
MGIB benefits made available to Reserves called to serve in overseas 
contingency operations be increased on a sliding scale basis.
  The Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs, a Committee on which I 
serve as ranking minority member, has considered, and moved favorably 
on, the first three Commission recommendations listed above; 
legislation which would, in whole or in part, accomplish these 
recommendations will soon be before the Senate. The committee has not, 
however, acted on the final four recommendations of the Commission, 
mainly because those proposals were not before the committee. It is my 
hope that by introducing this legislation, I will assure that the 
committee continues its consideration of MGIB improvements in the 
months ahead.
  To summarize the bill briefly, section 2 of my bill would eliminate 
the $1,200 pay reduction currently required of service members during 
their first 12 months of active duty as a precondition to eligibility 
for MGIB benefits. The Hart-Rudman Commission is

[[Page 19032]]

not alone in recommending the repeal of this requirement. In 1999, the 
Commission on Service Members and Veterans Transition Assistance, a 
commission headed by the current Secretary of Veterans Affairs, the 
Honorable Anthony J. Principi, made the same recommendation. It surely 
can be argued with considerable force that service members, who are 
asked to risk life and limb in service to the Nation, should not be 
asked, in addition, to contribute a portion of their pay, while in 
service, to ``earn'' eligibility for veterans' educational assistance 
benefits.
  Section 3 of this legislation would allow service members with at 
least 15 years of active duty to transfer their entitlement to MGIB 
benefits to their spouses or dependent children. This past January, I 
met with some of our troops stationed in Bosnia who expressed 
considerable interest in this idea. Many of them mentioned that they 
have families back home and that, rather than paying for their own 
education, they needed funds to pay for their children's education. At 
the very least, the idea needs to be further considered. I am aware 
that Senator Cleland has been working on a concept which is similar, 
but not identical to, this provision. I would like to work with Senator 
Cleland on this important issue.
  Section 4 of my bill would allow former service members 20 years 
after discharge, rather than 10 years, as is specified in current law, 
to utilize their MGIB benefits. I understand that, historically, MGIB 
benefits are intended to assist in the transition to civilian status, 
so that economic opportunities lost due to temporary military service 
can be ameliorated upon transition back to civilian life. This concept 
may have been useful when most departing service members were single 
persons with no family or financial obligations preventing the use of 
education benefits very quickly after discharge. Many former service 
members, however, are married and have children and, with these 
obligations, often find it difficult to return to school immediately 
after separation from service. In addition, today's rapidly-changing 
economy demonstrates that the skills which employers demand today may 
change tomorrow. Extending the MGIB ``delimiting date'' would encourage 
``lifetime learning'' and enable veterans to keep their skills current.
  Finally, section 5 of my bill would enable members of the Selected 
Reserve who are called to active duty as part of a ``contingency 
operation,'' such as the operations to which Reserves are now being 
called, to be eligible for increased MGIB benefits if they serve in 
such an operation for more than one year. Currently, those who enlist 
for a six year reserve commitment are eligible for $251 per month in 
education benefits, whether or not they are called to active duty. It 
would seem to me that Reserves who are activated, especially during 
times of conflict or war, bear close resemblance to individuals who are 
serving an active duty enlistment, and so too should the educational 
benefits made available to such persons. Therefore, my legislation 
would provide that, in cases where a member of the Selected Reserves 
serves one year in a contingency operation, his or her education 
benefit would be adjusted to the half-way point between the benefit 
afforded to a Reserve Member under current law, now, $251 per month, 
and that provided to service members who have served two years active 
duty, currently, $528 per month. In cases involving members of the 
Selected Reserves who serve two years of active service in a 
contingency operation, the amount of educational assistance afforded to 
them would be the same as that which is provided to veterans who had 
served two years of active duty, currently, $528 per month. And for 
those who have served three years active duty in a contingency 
operation, their benefit amount would be the same, currently, $650 per 
month, as that afforded to service members who have served a three year 
enlistment. In this national emergency, it is time to recognize the 
sacrifices made by reservists called to active duty by increasing their 
benefits commensurate with time served on active duty.
  One of the Hart-Rudman Commission's recommendations, that an Office 
of Homeland Security be created to coordinate the Federal government's 
counterterrorism efforts, has already been embraced the President. 
Governor Tom Ridge of Pennsylvania, who was just sworn in yesterday, 
will, I am sure, serve with great distinction as head of that office. 
We need to address more of the Commission's recommendations, including 
those that would enhance national security by making the military a 
more competitive employer so it can attract and retain quality people. 
Beyond that, we need to let our fighting men and women know that we 
value their service by providing them with the tools to succeed upon 
completion of their military careers. This legislation would accomplish 
those purposes. I urge my colleagues to support this effort.
      By Mr. BOND (for himself, Mr. Conrad, and Ms. Snowe):
  S. 1518. A bill to improve procedures with respect to the admission 
to, and departure from, the United States of aliens; to the Committee 
on the Judiciary.
  Mr. BOND. Madam President, among the many things that makes our 
country great is the freedom we possess to move about the country and 
exit and return to our country as we desire. Being a great Nation that 
believes strongly in that freedom and that has paid a tremendous price 
in defending that freedom, we like it to be on display to the rest of 
the world and we continually and generously open our doors to others. 
We as a Nation benefit from foreign visitors coming to the United 
States and other countries benefit when their citizens visit this 
country, whether it be to study at our schools and universities, learn 
at our institutions, use our medical facilities, do business with our 
dynamic private sector or visit our great cities and parks.
  However, on September 11, this great Nation endured a terrible 
tragedy, perpetrated by individuals who entered this country legally, 
as guests, on a visa. Nineteen people who were in this country on 
travel, work and student visas carried out the most deadly attack ever 
on our soil. Three of those people had stayed beyond the expiration of 
their visa. As the investigation of the Attorney General proceeds, many 
others have been detained. Initial reports indicated that a large 
number of these people were in this country on expired visas and I 
suspect we will find that a large number of those involved in the 
planning of the attack were in the United States on expired visas.
  At this time, the only system in place to track the entry and exit of 
visa holders is antiquated and completely inadequate. The government 
has little ability to track those who have entered the United States 
and to be notified if they violate the terms of their visa. As there 
are approximately 300 million immigrants and visitors that enter this 
country every year, getting a handle on this problem will not be 
simple. However, we must know if those who enter the United States to 
study arrive and attend school, if those who come her to work are at 
their jobs, if those who come here to do business do their business and 
return home and if those who we admit into the United States to 
vacation return home at the end of their time in the United States. We 
should strive to keep our borders open, to keep commerce flowing freely 
and not let the terrorist attack disrupt our relations with our good 
neighbors and other friends. But at the same time, we must have a 
better idea of who is entering this country, catch and screen out those 
who may pose a threat and know who has violated the terms of their visa 
and remained in the United States beyond the expiration date.
  I would like to acknowledge and thank my colleagues Kent Conrad and 
Olympia Snowe for their assistance and valuable input on this 
legislation.
  Specifically, this bill calls for the improvement of the information 
received by the Department of State for checking the backgrounds of 
visa applicants. It calls on law enforcement and intelligence agencies 
to share regularly information that will be useful to the

[[Page 19033]]

State Department in identifying those who pose any type of threat to 
the security or people of this country.
  This bill calls for the improvement and implementation of the system 
to track foreign students. Including a requirement that universities 
notify the INS when foreign students do not show up for school, as Hani 
Hanjour failed to do before participating in the attack on the World 
Trade Center.
  It is time to begin the roll of the Integrated Entry and Exit 
Tracking system called for in legislation passed five years ago to 
record the entry of visa holders, record their exit and notify the INS 
and law enforcement agencies of the identity of anyone overstaying 
their visa. This system should also utilize the latest technology, 
including biometrics, to ensure that visas cannot be tampered with or 
stolen. Finally, it is time for the members of the task force to be 
appointed, including the Director of Homeland Security, so that the 
issues surrounding this system can be settled.
  The bill also calls for the tightening of the Visa Waiver Pilot 
program to ensure that passports for participating countries are not 
stolen or defaced by those trying to sneak into the country. It also 
calls for those employing work visa holders to report to the INS if 
that person leaves or is terminated from their job.
  These are all reasonable proposals that will not impact commerce, 
travel and relationships with friendly countries. It will also begin 
the process of having an accurate picture of who has entered the 
country and who has departed. It is one of many steps that needs to be 
taken to avoid further terrorist attacks. I look forward to working 
with my colleagues to implement this legislation.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1518

       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 ``Visa Integrity and Security 
     Act of 2001''.

     SEC. 2. SENSE OF THE CONGRESS REGARDING THE NEED TO EXPEDITE 
                   IMPLEMENTATION OF INTEGRATED ENTRY AND EXIT 
                   DATA SYSTEM.

       (a) Sense of Congress.--In light of the terrorist attacks 
     perpetrated against the United States on September 11, 2001, 
     it is the sense of the Congress that--
       (1) the Attorney General should fully implement the 
     integrated entry and exit data system for airports, seaports, 
     and land border ports of entry, as specified in section 110 
     of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant 
     Responsibility Act of 1996, as amended by the Immigration and 
     Naturalization Service Data Management Improvement Act of 
     2000 (Public Law 106-215), with all deliberate speed and as 
     expeditiously as practicable; and
       (2) the Attorney General, in consultation with the 
     Secretary of State, the Secretary of Commerce, and the 
     Secretary of the Treasury, should immediately begin 
     establishing the Integrated Entry and Exit Data System Task 
     Force, as described in section 3 of the Immigration and 
     Naturalization Service Data Management Improvement Act of 
     2000 (Public Law 106-215).

     SEC. 3. ENTRY-EXIT TRACKING SYSTEM.

       (a) Development of the System.--In the development of the 
     entry-exit tracking system, as described in the preceeding 
     section, the Attorney General shall particularly focus--
       (1) on the utilization of biometric technology, including, 
     but not limited to, electronic fingerprinting, face 
     recognition, and retinal scan technology; and
       (2) on developing a tamper-proof identification, readable 
     at ports of entry as a part of any nonimmigrant visa issued 
     by the Secretary of State.
       (b) Integration With Law Enforcement Databases.--The entry 
     and exit data system described in this section shall be able 
     to be integrated with law enforcement databases for use by 
     State and Federal law enforcement to identify and detain 
     individuals in the United States after the expiration of 
     their visa.

     SEC. 4. ACCESS BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE TO CERTAIN 
                   IDENTIFYING INFORMATION IN THE CRIMINAL HISTORY 
                   RECORDS OF VISA APPLICANTS AND APPLICANTS FOR 
                   ADMISSION TO THE UNITED STATES.

       (a) Amendment of the Immigration and Nationality Act.--
     Section 105 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 
     1105) is amended--
       (1) in the section heading, by inserting ``; data 
     exchange'' after ``security officers'';
       (2) by inserting ``(a)'' after ``Sec. 105.'';
       (3) in subsection (a), by inserting ``and border'' after 
     ``internal'' the second place it appears; and
       (4) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(b) The Attorney General and the Director of the Federal 
     Bureau of Investigation shall provide the Department of State 
     access to the criminal history record information contained 
     in the National Crime Information Center's Interstate 
     Identification Index (NCIC-III), Wanted Persons File, and to 
     any other files maintained by the National Crime Information 
     Center that may be mutually agreed upon by the Attorney 
     General and the Department of State, for the purpose of 
     determining whether or not a visa applicant or applicant for 
     admission has a criminal history record indexed in any such 
     file. The Department of State shall merge the information 
     obtained under this subsection with the information in the 
     system currently accessed by consular officers to determine 
     the criminal history records of aliens applying for visas.''.
       (c) Regular Reporting.--The Director of Central 
     Intelligence, the Secretary of Defense, the Commissioner of 
     Immigration and Naturalization, and the Director of the 
     Federal Bureau of Investigation shall provide information to 
     the Secretary of State on a regular basis as agreed by the 
     Secretary and the head of each of these agencies that will 
     assist the Secretary in determining if an applicant for a 
     visa has a criminal background or poses a threat to the 
     national security of the United States or is affiliated with 
     a group that poses such a threat.
       (d) Report on Screening Information.--Not later than 6 
     months after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary 
     of State shall submit a report to Congress on the information 
     that is needed from any United States agency to best screen 
     visa applicants to identify those affiliated with terrorist 
     organizations or those that pose any threat to the safety or 
     security of the United States, including the type of 
     information currently received by United States agencies and 
     the regularity with which such information is transmitted to 
     the Secretary.

     SEC. 5. STUDENT TRACKING SYSTEM.

       (a) Integration With Port of Entry Information.--For each 
     alien with respect to whom information is collected under 
     this section, the Attorney General shall include information 
     on the date of entry, port of entry, and nonimmigrant 
     classification.
       (b) Expansion of System to Include Other Approved 
     Educational Institutions.--Section 641 of the Illegal 
     Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 
     (8 U.S.C.1372) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)(1), subsection (c)(4)(A), and 
     subsection (d)(1) (in the text above subparagraph (A)), by 
     inserting ``, other approved educational institutions,'' 
     after ``higher education'' each place it appears;
       (2) in subsections (c)(1)(C), (c)(1)(D), and (d)(1)(A), by 
     inserting ``, or other approved educational institution,'' 
     after ``higher education'' each place it appears;
       (3) in subsections (d)(2), (e)(1), and (e)(2), by inserting 
     ``, other approved educational institution,'' after ``higher 
     education'' each place it appears; and
       (4) in subsection (h), by adding at the end the following 
     new paragraph:
       ``(3) Other approved educational institution.--The term 
     `other approved educational institution' includes any air 
     flight school, language training school, vocational school, 
     or other school, approved by the Attorney General, in 
     consultation with the Secretary of Education, under 
     subparagraph (F), (J), or (M) of section 101(a)(15) of the 
     Immigration and Nationality Act.''.
       (c) Expansion of System to Include Additional 
     Information.--Section 641(b) of the Illegal Immigration 
     Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 
     U.S.C.1372(b)), as amended by subsection (a), is further 
     amended--
       (1) by redesignating subparagraphs (B), (C), and (D) of 
     paragraph (1) as subparagraphs (C), (D), and (E), 
     respectively;
       (2) by inserting after subparagraph (A) the following:
       ``(B) the name of any dependent spouse, child, or other 
     family member accompanying the alien student to the United 
     States;''; and
       (3) in paragraph (1)(D) (as so redesignated), by inserting 
     after ``maintaining status as a full-time student'' the 
     following: ``and, if the alien is not maintaining such 
     status, the date on which the alien has concluded the alien's 
     course of study and the reason therefor''; and
       (4) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(5) Information on failure to commence studies.--Each 
     approved institution of higher education, other approved 
     educational institution, or designated exchange visitor 
     program shall inform the Attorney General within 30 days if 
     an alien described in subsection (a)(1) who is scheduled to 
     attend the institution or program fails to do so. The 
     Attorney General shall ensure that information received under 
     this paragraph is included in the National Crime Information 
     Center's Interstate Identification Index.''.

[[Page 19034]]



     SEC. 6. STRENGTHENING VISA WAIVER PILOT PROGRAM.

       Section 217(c)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 
     U.S.C. 1187(c)(2)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(D) Tamper proof passport.--The country employs a tamper-
     proof passport, has established a program to reduce the theft 
     of passports, and has experienced during the preceding two-
     year period a low rate of theft of passports, as determined 
     by the Secretary of State.''.

     SEC. 7. REPORTING REQUIREMENT REGARDING H-1B NONIMMIGRANT 
                   ALIENS.

       (a) Requirement.--Not later than 14 days after the 
     employment of a nonimmigrant alien described in section 
     101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act is 
     terminated by an employer, the employer shall so report to 
     the Attorney General, together with the reasons for the 
     termination.
       (b) Penalty.--Any employer who fails to make a report 
     required under subsection (a) shall be ineligible to employ 
     any nonimmigrant alien described in that subsection for a 
     period of one year.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. HARKIN (for himself, Mr. Lugar, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Crapo, Mr. 
        McConnell, Mr. Helms, Mr. Dayton, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Hutchinson, 
        Mr. Miller, Mrs. Lincoln, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Roberts, Mr. Conrad, 
        and Mr. Nelson of Nebraska):
  S. 1519. A bill to amend the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development 
Act to provide farm credit assistance for activated reservists; to the 
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
  Mr. HARKIN. Madam President, I am proud to be joined by Senators 
Lugar, Kerry, Crapo, McConnell, Helms, Dayton, Leahy, Hutchinson, 
Miller, Lincoln, Baucus, Roberts, Conrad, and Nelson today as we 
introduce legislation in support of those men and women who voluntarily 
leave their communities, leave their jobs, and leave their families to 
serve our country. In the past few weeks, thousands of men and women 
have been called to duty as reservists and members of the National 
Guard. Many of these people have volunteered to leave their farms to 
respond to the call. Some of these people borrow money from the USDA to 
sustain their farms. Because these reservists and members of the 
National Guard have been called up, they may find it difficult to 
continue to meet the terms of these loans. The bill offered today would 
alleviate some of the financial stress caused by the activation.
  The bill directs the USDA to use its lending authority to minimize 
the financial impact of a reservist being activated. The Secretary of 
Agriculture is directed to take actions to help keep the farm of an 
activated reservist in operation, including deferring scheduled 
payments, reducing interest rates, reamortizing or consolidating loans, 
or taking other restructuring actions. The bill also provides the USDA 
new authority to provide emergency loan assistance to farms financially 
injured because of the activation of a reservist.
  I thank Senator Kerry for this idea. He introduced legislation in 
1999, of which I was a cosponsor, that provided similar relief to 
borrowers from the Small Business Administration who are called up. 
Just as small businesses can be greatly affected by the absence of one 
person, farms many times rely entirely on the labor and ingenuity of 
just one or two key people.
  At this time, when these men and women are sacrificing so much, the 
least we can do is alleviate the financial strain at home caused by 
their willingness to serve. By enacting this modest measure, we can 
help lift worries about the farm at home from the minds of the 
individuals and families directly affected by activation.
  Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be printed in 
the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1519

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

     SECTION 1. FARM CREDIT ASSISTANCE FOR ACTIVATED RESERVISTS.

       Subtitle D of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development 
     Act (7 U.S.C. 1981 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end 
     the following:

     ``SEC. 376. FARM CREDIT ASSISTANCE FOR ACTIVATED RESERVISTS.

       ``(a) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) Activated reservist.--The term `activated reservist' 
     means--
       ``(A) a member of a reserve component of any of the Armed 
     Forces of the United States who is serving on active duty in 
     support of a contingency operation (as defined in section 
     101(a)(13) of title 10, United States Code) pursuant to a 
     call or order issued on or after September 11, 2001, under a 
     provision of law referred to in subparagraph (B) of that 
     section; and
       ``(B) a member of the National Guard of a State not in 
     Federal service who is ordered to duty under the laws of the 
     State in support of any operation to protect persons or 
     property from an act of terrorism or a threat of attack by a 
     hostile force during the period of a national emergency 
     declared by the President or Congress on or after September 
     11, 2001.
       ``(2) Eligible person.--The term `eligible person' means--
       ``(A) an activated reservist who owns or operates a farm or 
     ranch;
       ``(B) an owner or operator of the farm or ranch who is a 
     member of the family of the activated reservist; and
       ``(C) an owner or operator of a farm or ranch on which an 
     activated reservist is employed.
       ``(b) Program.--The Secretary shall establish a program to 
     provide assistance to any borrower of a farmer program loan 
     who is an eligible person.
       ``(c) Modification of Loan Terms.--The Secretary shall 
     modify the terms and conditions of a farmer program loan 
     (including a loan in which any participant in the loan is an 
     eligible person) made to an eligible person for a farm or 
     ranch under this title, or purchased under section 309B, to 
     the extent necessary, as determined by the Secretary, to 
     alleviate conditions of distress related to the activation of 
     the activated reservist and to assist in maintaining the farm 
     or ranch for such period of time as the Secretary determines 
     is fair and equitable.
       ``(d) Debt Restructuring.--The Secretary may modify farmer 
     program loans, including delinquent loans, by deferring 
     principal or interest scheduled payments, reducing interest 
     rates or accumulated interest charges, reamortizing or 
     consolidating loans, reducing the amount of scheduled 
     principal or interest payments, releasing additional income, 
     reducing collateral requirements, or taking any other 
     restructuring actions determined appropriate by the 
     Secretary, to alleviate conditions of distress related to the 
     activation of the activated reservist and to assist in 
     maintaining the farm or ranch for such period of time as the 
     Secretary determines is fair and equitable.
       ``(e) Emergency Loans.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall make an emergency 
     loan under subtitle C to an eligible person for a farm or 
     ranch that has suffered, or that is likely to suffer, 
     substantial economic injury as the result of the activation 
     of an activated reservist, as determined by the Secretary.
       ``(2) Administration.--
       ``(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B), 
     an emergency loan made under this subsection shall be made 
     under the terms and conditions of subtitle C.
       ``(B) Exceptions.--An emergency loan made under this 
     subsection shall not be subject to--
       ``(i) the requirements of section 321(a) for a finding by 
     the Secretary that the applicants' farming, ranching, or 
     aquaculture operations have been substantially affected by a 
     natural disaster in the United States or by a major disaster 
     or emergency designated by the President;
       ``(ii) section 321(b); or
       ``(iii) any other requirement of subtitle C that the 
     Secretary waives to carry out this subsection.
       ``(3) Period of eligibility.--To obtain an emergency loan 
     under this subsection, an eligible person shall apply for the 
     emergency loan during the period--
       ``(A) beginning on the date on which the activated 
     reservist is activated; and
       ``(B) ending 180 days after the date on which the activated 
     reservist is discharged or released from active duty.
       ``(f) Notice.--The Secretary shall develop a program to 
     notify eligible persons of assistance that is available under 
     this section.
       ``(g) Spouses or Relatives.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary may provide for procedures 
     under which the spouse or other close relative (as determined 
     by the Secretary) of an activated reservist may participate 
     in, or make decisions related to, a program administered by 
     the Secretary under this title.
       ``(2) Representation.--The Secretary may rely on the 
     representation of the spouse or close relative (even in the 
     absence of a power of attorney) made under the procedures 
     described in paragraph (1) if the Secretary--
       ``(A) determines that the reliance is appropriate in order 
     to prevent undue hardship and to provide equitable treatment 
     for the activated reservist; and
       ``(B) has no reason to believe that the representation of 
     the spouse or close relative is not in accordance with the 
     intent and interests of the activated reservist.''.

     SEC. 2. REGULATIONS.

       (a) In General.--As soon as practicable after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Agriculture shall 
     promulgate

[[Page 19035]]

     such regulations as are necessary to implement the amendment 
     made by section 1.
       (b) Procedure.--The promulgation of the regulations and 
     administration of the amendment made by section 1 shall be 
     made without regard to--
       (1) the notice and comment provisions of section 553 of 
     title 5, United States Code;
       (2) the Statement of Policy of the Secretary of Agriculture 
     effective July 24, 1971 (36 Fed. Reg. 13804), relating to 
     notices of proposed rulemaking and public participation in 
     rulemaking; and
       (3) chapter 35 of title 44, United States Code (commonly 
     known as the ``Paperwork Reduction Act'').
       (c) Congressional Review of Agency Rulemaking.--In carrying 
     out this section, the Secretary shall use the authority 
     provided under section 808 of title 5, United States Code.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BROWNBACK:
  S. 1521. A bill to amend the FREEDOM Support Act to authorize the 
President to waive the restriction of assistance for Azerbaijan if the 
President determines that it is in the national security interest of 
the United States to do so; to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
  Mr. BROWNBACK. Madam President, in the coming weeks, we are going to 
be debating several very contentious bills. However, more than at any 
other point in my career we are considering these issues in an 
extremely congenial, collegial, thoughtful and deliberative way. 
Certainly, many of us disagree about the details of one issue or 
another, however, we have consistently put the interest of the nation 
ahead of the our own interests as political actors.
  This is very encouraging to me. This should be very encouraging to 
the American people. This should be very encouraging to freedom loving 
people of the world. The tenor of the debates on this floor should 
signify to everyone that the United States Government is operating not 
simply as well as it did before September 11th, but better that it did 
on September 11th. In the face of this attack, the American Government 
is operating just as it was always intended to operate.


  Today, Madam President I rise to offer a bill that will ensure that 
our government continues to operate just as intended.
  The administration is going about the business of fighting a war. 
That process relies greatly on our government's ability to strengthen 
ties with countries that agree to help us wage this war on terrorism. 
These countries, in many cases, will be taking on factions within their 
own borders in order to do what is right. For these efforts to prevail, 
we must use all our assets. One of the most important and appealing 
being trade and foreign assistance--particularly with regard to the 
nations of Central and South Asia.
  In this spirit, I am introducing a bill which will grant the 
President the authority to waive the restriction on assistance to the 
country of Azerbaijan, if the President determines that our national 
security and interests will benefit from greater assistance and trade 
with this country--he should have the right to pursue that policy.
  Section 907 of the Freedom Support Act places sanctions on Azerbaijan 
that prevent any support from the United States government for the 
young nation. This language ties the administration's hands as they 
attempt to work with this strategically important ally in the war 
against terrorism.
  Unlike past efforts to repeal or waive section 907 sanctions on 
Azebaijan, today our debate is about more than regional stability in 
Central Asia--our debate now centers on United States national security 
interests.
  Section 907 stands in the way of training and assistance for 
Azerbaijani military hospitals that may have to deal with casualties in 
this campaign.
  Section 907 stands in the way of airport and air traffic control 
upgrades that may need to happen to assist our airforce.
  There are over 71 million people in the Central Asian region which 
includes Azerbaijan. Many of these emerging democracies are battling 
fundamentalist factions. If we do not assist those who want to move 
westward, we empower the factions coming in from countries which 
support terrorist activities.
  With the horrific attack on our country, we have been painfully 
awakened to the global and complex network that terrorists have created 
and aimed at our country and its interests. Our foreign policy must 
help fight against the creation of new terrorist breeding grounds as we 
fight the existing terrorist plague.
  Azerbaijan itself is a bulwark against Islamic fundamentalism in the 
region. Since its independence, Azebaijan has endured Iranian pressure 
to adopt its style of government. Iran secretly funds hundreds of 
religious schools and colleges in Azerbaijan. Iranian diplomats and 
secret service representatives have been expelled from Azerbaijan on 
grounds that they are fomenting disturbances.
  Iran criticizes Azerbaijan for its pro-U.S. stance and is concerned 
about the Azeris increasing ties to the West--particularly with U.S. 
companies. Iran seeks to ensure that Azerbaijan fails with its free 
market and democratic reforms, because secular independence and 
democratic Azerbaijan is perceived as a threat for the fundamentalist 
regime in Iran.
  Right now, we need the help and cooperation of the entire Central 
Asian region--we can not afford to tie the President's hands over a 
conflict between two countries. This is particularly important now 
since these restrictions are used as anti-American fodder by 
fundamentalist factions hoping to shape the development of the region.
  To reiterate, this provides national waiver authority to the 
President to lift sanctions on Azerbaijan. Briefly, the United States 
has had for a series of years, now, sanctions against Azerbaijan. For 
people not familiar, Azerbaijan sits in the Caspian Sea region right 
above Iran.
  It is part of the former Soviet Union. It is an oil- and gas-rich 
area. It is a small country. But it is a small Islamic country that is 
strongly supportive of the United States.
  Their President, President Aliyev, has issued statements about the 
strong support for the United States in the face of our attack on 
terrorism and dealing with terrorism. They have provided the United 
States fly-over rights, landing rights, refueling rights, and 
intelligence information as well. This is in that key strategic part of 
the world, the south Caucasus, just leading into central Asia. It has 
the gateway city, Baku, going into Asia. Baku is an old, really 
European-style city--a gorgeous place. But more important, they are 
supportive of the United States, and yet as they support us, we are 
sanctioning them.
  We are likely to use military bases in Azerbaijan as a staging area 
or as a refueling area or, potentially if we have casualties in the 
region, as a hospital area as well. Yet we are sanctioning them.
  If we continue with these sanctions, the Azeris are not going to be 
able to effectively help us and use their territories. Because of the 
sanctions we have against Azerbaijan, we cannot train their personnel 
to help us in guarding the perimeter of military bases where our 
aircraft may be. Because of the sanctions we have against Azerbaijan, 
we cannot train their hospital personnel to be able to help treat any 
potential difficulties that we may have in that region. Because of the 
sanctions we have against Azerbaijan, we cannot train their personnel 
in counterintelligence to help us in the gathering of information as to 
what is taking place, what is moving in the region, so we can be more 
effective in our fight against terrorism. This is against a country 
that has been strongly supportive of the United States.
  There has been a long, ongoing battle between the Azeris and the 
Armenians in this region of the world, and this has gone on for a long 
period of time. The sanctions are somewhat associated with that. But 
the point being, we have a fight now against terrorism. The President 
needs to have national security waiver authority so, in those specific 
areas that would be beneficial to us, he can lift those sanctions 
against Azerbaijan. This will be a tough issue, but that authority is 
something we should provide the President if we are

[[Page 19036]]

going to prosecute this effort successfully. I think it is very 
important that we put this forward, that we pass it.
  This is not taking the sanctions off completely. It is providing the 
President with waiver authority, national security waiver authority. 
There has to be a national security interest. If it is not needed, if 
the reason to have it is not there, the President doesn't have the 
authority to exercise it. So we should provide him that authority.
  I am introducing this bill tonight. I urge my colleagues to look very 
closely at this issue, and I hope they will sign onto the bill so we 
can move this forward and allow the President the tools he needs to 
prosecute this war on terrorism effectively.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill will be received and appropriately 
referred.

                          ____________________