[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 6]
[Senate]
[Pages 7573-7577]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. AKAKA:
  S. 2346. A bill to amend the Animal Welfare Act to ensure that all 
dogs and cats used by research facilities are obtained legally; to the 
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
  Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Pet Safety 
and Protection Act. My legislation amends the Animal Welfare Act to 
ensure that all companion animals such as dogs and cats used by 
research facilities are obtained legally.
  Over 30 years ago, Congress passed the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) 
authorizing the Secretary of Agriculture to set and enforce standards 
protecting animals used in biomedical research, bred for commercial 
sale, exhibited to the public, or commercially transported from 
inhumane treatment. Despite the well-meaning intentions of the AWA and 
the enforcement efforts of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), 
the Act fails to provide reliable protection against the actions of 
some unethical animal dealers.
  Under the AWA, Class B animal dealers are defined as individuals 
whose business includes the purchase, sale, or transport of animals in 
commerce, including dogs and cats intended for use at research 
facilities. To the dismay of animal welfare advocates and pet owners, 
some Class B, or ``random source,'' dealers have resorted to theft and 
deception to collect animals for resale. In

[[Page 7574]]

many instances these animals were found living under inhumane 
conditions.
  As recently as August of 2003, USDA agents executed a warrant to 
investigate a Class B dealer from Arkansas suspected of violations of 
the AWA for the second time in several years. Many claims have been 
levied against this dealer, and approximately 125 dogs were seized by 
Federal agents during this week-long search. The investigation of this 
facility is ongoing, and an indictment is pending.
  The complaint being investigated by the USDA against the dealer 
alleges that the respondents' veterinarian provided for them falsified 
official health certificates for cats and dogs, and also provided them 
with blank, undated, and signed health certificates. It is also alleged 
that the dealer failed to provide the barest standards of care, 
husbandry, and housing for the animals on the premises. The undercover 
investigation of this facility has revealed that its proprietors were 
aware that some of the companion animals brought to the facility were 
stolen, and also revealed a list of over 50 ``bunchers,'' individuals 
who obtain animals and sell them to ``random source'' animal dealers. 
Bunchers have a variety of methods of obtaining companion animals, 
including responding to newspaper ads offering free animals, 
trespassing on private property to abduct the animals from yards, and 
house burglaries.
  Inadequate veterinary care is one of the worst violations of the AWA 
committed against these animals. The expense for quality veterinary 
care is one that irresponsible Class B dealers do not wish to incur, 
and animals often die as a result of their untreated injuries or 
diseases. This was one of the violations uncovered by the 
investigation, and often resulted from another violation of the AWA 
that requires compatible grouping of animals. Vicious or diseased 
animals were not separated from the general population and posed a risk 
to all of the animals housed with them. In addition, this particular 
dealer also provided inadequate housing facilities that exposed the 
animals to injury from sharp wires. Fecal waste was allowed to 
accumulate in the housing facility, and often dead dogs were left where 
they fell in cages with other living animals. Food receptacles were 
found to be contaminated with moldy and rotten food, and potable water 
was not readily available to the animals. All of these are direct 
violations of the Animal Welfare Act. In addition to neglect, these 
animals often suffer abuse at the hands of dealers. Evidence of gross 
cruelty is being uncovered while the USDA continues to investigate this 
case.
  The Pet Safety and Protection Act strengthens the AWA by prohibiting 
the use of Class B dealers as suppliers of dogs and cats to research 
laboratories. My legislation would not be a burden on research 
facilities because only two percent of the approximately 2,051 Class B 
dealers in the United States currently sell cats and dogs to research 
facilities. I am not here to argue whether animals should or should not 
be used in research. Medical research is an invaluable weapon in the 
battle against disease. New drugs and surgical techniques offer promise 
in the fight against cancer, Alzheimer's, tuberculosis, AIDS, and a 
host of other life-threatening diseases. Animal research has been, and 
continues to be, fundamental to advancements in medicine. However, I am 
concerned with the sale of stolen pets and stray animals to research 
facilities and the poor treatment of these animals by some Class B 
dealers.
  My legislation preserves the integrity of animal research by 
encouraging research laboratories to obtain animals from legitimate 
sources that comply with the AWA. Legitimate sources for animals 
include USDA-licensed Class A dealers, breeders, and research 
facilities, municipal pounds and shelters, and legitimate pet owners 
who want to donate their animals to research. These sources are capable 
of meeting the demand for research animals. The National Institutes of 
Health, in an effort to curb abuse and deception, have already adopted 
policies against the acquisition of dogs and cats from Class B dealers.
  The Pet Safety and Protection Act also reduces the Department of 
Agriculture's regulatory burden by allowing the Department to use its 
resources more efficiently and effectively. Each year, thousands of 
dollars are spent on regulating dealers. To discourage any future 
violations of the AWA, my bill increases the penalties to a minimum of 
$1,000 per violation.
  I reiterate that this bill in no way impairs or impedes research, but 
will end the fraudulent practices of some Class B dealers, as well as 
the unnecessary suffering of these animals in their care. I urge my 
colleagues to support this important legislation. I ask unanimous 
consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                S. 2346

       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 ``Pet Safety and Protection 
     Act of 2004''.

     SEC. 2. PROTECTION OF PETS.

       (a) Research Facilities.--Section 7 of the Animal Welfare 
     Act (7 U.S.C. 2137) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 7. SOURCES OF DOGS AND CATS FOR RESEARCH FACILITIES.

       ``(a) Definition of Person.--In this section, the term 
     `person' means any individual, partnership, firm, joint stock 
     company, corporation, association, trust, estate, pound, 
     shelter, or other legal entity.
       ``(b) Use of Dogs and Cats.--No research facility or 
     Federal research facility may use a dog or cat for research 
     or educational purposes if the dog or cat was obtained from a 
     person other than a person described in subsection (d).
       ``(c) Selling, Donating, or Offering Dogs and Cats.--No 
     person, other than a person described in subsection (d), may 
     sell, donate, or offer a dog or cat to any research facility 
     or Federal research facility.
       ``(d) Permissible Sources.--A person from whom a research 
     facility or a Federal research facility may obtain a dog or 
     cat for research or educational purposes under subsection 
     (b), and a person who may sell, donate, or offer a dog or cat 
     to a research facility or a Federal research facility under 
     subsection (c), shall be--
       ``(1) a dealer licensed under section 3 that has bred and 
     raised the dog or cat;
       ``(2) a publicly owned and operated pound or shelter that--
       ``(A) is registered with the Secretary;
       ``(B) is in compliance with section 28(a)(1) and with the 
     requirements for dealers in subsections (b) and (c) of 
     section 28; and
       ``(C) obtained the dog or cat from its legal owner, other 
     than a pound or shelter;
       ``(3) a person that is donating the dog or cat and that--
       ``(A) bred and raised the dog or cat; or
       ``(B) owned the dog or cat for not less than 1 year 
     immediately preceding the donation;
       ``(4) a research facility licensed by the Secretary; and
       ``(5) a Federal research facility licensed by the 
     Secretary.
       ``(e) Penalties.--
       ``(1) In general.--A person that violates this section 
     shall be fined $1,000 for each violation.
       ``(2) Additional penalty.--A penalty under this subsection 
     shall be in addition to any other applicable penalty.
       ``(f) No Required Sale or Donation.--Nothing in this 
     section requires a pound or shelter to sell, donate, or offer 
     a dog or cat to a research facility or Federal research 
     facility.''.
       (b) Federal Research Facilities.--Section 8 of the Animal 
     Welfare Act (7 U.S.C. 2138) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``Sec. 8. No department'' and inserting the 
     following:

     ``SEC. 8. FEDERAL RESEARCH FACILITIES.

       ``Except as provided in section 7, no department'';
       (2) by striking ``research or experimentation or''; and
       (3) by striking ``such purposes'' and inserting ``that 
     purpose''.
       (c) Certification.--Section 28(b)(1) of the Animal Welfare 
     Act (7 U.S.C. 2158(b)(1)) is amended by striking ``individual 
     or entity'' and inserting ``research facility or Federal 
     research facility''.

     SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       The amendments made by section 2 take effect on the date 
     that is 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. VOINOVICH (for himself, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Jeffords, and Mr. 
        Lieberman):
  S. 2347. A bill to amend the District of Columbia Access Act of 1999 
to permanently authorize the public school and private school tuition 
assistance programs established under the Act; to

[[Page 7575]]

the Committee on Governmental Affairs.
  Mr. VOINOVICH. Mr. President, leveling the playing field for high 
school graduates in the District of Columbia continues to be a top 
priority of the Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the 
Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia which I chair. Today I 
would like to highlight the tremendous impact the District of Columbia 
Tuition Assistance Program--D.C. TAG--has had on promoting higher 
education for high school graduates in the Nation's Capital and 
introduce legislation that would permanently authorize the District of 
Columbia College Access Act of 1999.
  In 1999, I worked with the House and fellow Senators Jeffords and 
Durbin to craft the District of Columbia College Access Act which was 
signed into law on November 12, 1999. Soon after, under the direction 
of Mayor Anthony Williams, the D.C. TAG Program was created to 
implement this important legislation. The first grants were awarded in 
2000.
  The aim of the Program was to afford D.C. high school graduates the 
same opportunity that high school seniors in each of the 50 States 
have, the ability to attend public universities and colleges at in-
State tuition rates in all 50 States and participating private 
schools--Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU) nationwide 
or private colleges or universities in Virginia or Maryland. The 
program has made it possible for D.C. residents to attend college who 
did not have access to similar State-supported systems.
  The D.C. TAG scholarships are used by D.C. residents to pay the 
difference between in-State and out-of-State tuition, up to $10,000 per 
student per school year with a cumulative cap of $50,000 per student. 
In addition, as of March 2002, D.C. residents attending participating 
private institutions started receiving tuition grants under the program 
of $2,500 per student per school year with a cumulative cap of $12,500 
per student.
  To date, D.C. TAG has dispersed more than $63 million to a total of 
6,527 students, many of whom are the first in their family to attend 
college. All current high school students who are D.C. residents are 
eligible for these scholarships and participation is increasing.
  The powerful impact of the program on high school graduates 
continuing on to college is hard to deny. Data from the Department of 
Education's Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System show that 
the number of D.C. high school graduates continuing on to college 
increased from 1,750 in 1998 to 2,230 in 2002. That's a 28 percent 
increase since the program was created. This is the highest level of 
college attendance of District students and exceeds the national 
average, over the same period, of a 5-percent increase.
  Mayor Williams stated that `'No State in the Union can make that 
claim. This unprecedented figure is due in large part, if not almost 
exclusively, I believe, to D.C. TAG.''
  According to a survey conducted by the D.C. TAG Office, the grants 
have become an essential part of higher education planning for D.C. 
residents. The majority of students who have received assistance 
through the program have indicated that the existence of the grants 
made a difference in their decision to attend college, and also played 
a role in deciding which college to attend.
  It is important for my colleagues to know that thousands of D.C. 
students have taken advantage of this program. It can help to turn 
around years of economic and educational despair in the District.
  We are now coming to the end of the 5-year authorization for the 
program which expires in November 2005. Because of this and the success 
of the program, Senators Durbin, Jeffords, Lieberman, and I are 
introducing this bill to permanently reauthorize the D.C. College 
Access Act.
  In closing I would like to quote two D.C. Residents. La Rue Purry, 
currently a freshman at the University of Alabama states that ``This 
program gave me the opportunity to get the education I always wanted, 
the education my family couldn't have provided for me.''
  Brian Ford, a former D.C. TAG recipient, who testified at the House 
committee on Government Reform Hearing on March 25, 2004, stated that 
``The D.C. Tuition Assistance Program is a necessity for the city of 
Washington, DC, and for its residents. I urge Congress to please 
continue to provide financial support to the D.C. TAG program so one 
day students like myself can have a college diploma hanging on the wall 
for the world to see.''
  I urge all of my colleagues to support this legislation and I'm 
confident that it can be enacted this year. 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. 2347

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

     SECTION 1. PERMANENT AUTHORIZATION OF TUITION ASSISTANCE 
                   PROGRAMS.

       (a) Public School Program.--Section 3(i) of the District of 
     Columbia College Access Act of 1999 (sec. 38--2702(i), D.C. 
     Official Code) is amended by striking ``each of the five 
     succeeding fiscal years'' and inserting ``each succeeding 
     fiscal year''.
       (b) Private School Program.--Section 5(f) of such Act (sec. 
     38--2704(f), D.C. Official Code) is amended by striking 
     ``each of the five succeeding fiscal years'' and inserting 
     ``each succeeding fiscal year''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. HATCH (for himself and Mr. Kennedy):
  S. 2349. A bill to modify the application of the antitrust laws to 
permit collective development and implementation of a standard contract 
form for playwrights for the licensing of their plays; to the Committee 
on the Judiciary.
  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce S. 2349, ``The 
Playwrights Licensing Antitrust Initiative'' or ``PLAI [play] Act.''
  This legislation is designed to ensure the continued vitality of 
American theater. When the theater is crowded and the curtain rises, it 
is easy to forget that the entire show began with one person: the lone 
playwright who put pen to paper. While this artistic independence--and 
the individual expression it fosters--are absolutely central to the 
continuing vitality of quality live theater in America, it has resulted 
in individual playwrights being increasingly forced into a situation 
where they bargain alone against corporate behemoths and organized 
labor groups over terms of compensation and artistic control when their 
works are performed on Broadway.
  Due to the interaction of Federal labor law, the antitrust laws, and 
the Copyright Act, playwrights and their voluntary peer membership 
organization, the Dramatists Guild of America, operate under the shadow 
of possible antitrust litigation, which has substantially and 
detrimentally decreased their ability to coordinate their actions in 
protecting their artistic and financial interests. This has impeded the 
ability of playwrights to act collectively in dealing with highly-
organized and unionized groups--such as actors, directors, and 
choreographers on the one hand--and the increasingly consolidated 
producers and investors on the other.
  Playwrights contribute enduring, thoughtful entertainment and 
cultural enrichment to our lives. I know that many of my colleagues 
here in the Senate share my appreciation for the creative work they do. 
Despite the importance of their work, our current antitrust laws 
prevent them from negotiating a standard form contract for the 
production of their works. As a result, playwrights--who are frequently 
at a substantial bargaining disadvantage--are forced to accept 
contracts on a take it or leave it basis.
  If we truly want the American stage to flourish, we must remedy this 
situation. The PLAI Act is a narrow measure that allows playwrights, 
composers and lyricists--through either the Dramatists Guild or any 
other voluntary peer organization--to act collectively in dealing with 
other industry groups that operate both under and behind the bright 
lights of the American stage.
  The PLAI Act enables playwrights to act collectively without 
violating the

[[Page 7576]]

antitrust laws. It allows these men and women to sit down with their 
creative colleagues in the industry to negotiate, adopt and implement a 
standard form contract for the production of their works. Actors, 
stagehands, directors, producers and venue owners of live theater--
nearly all other theater workers and artists--already have this right. 
Importantly, this extends only to the adoption and implementation--but 
not any collective enforcement--of an updated standard form contract. 
Thus, it would merely allow dramatists to replace the terms of the 
current standard contract--which I am given to understand has remained 
virtually unchanged for several decades--with amended terms that 
reflect the changing business and artistic landscape on Broadway.
  My hope is that the basic ability to develop a standard form contract 
as well as provisions ensuring that certain artists' rights are 
respected in the production of their plays will encourage young, 
struggling playwrights to continue working in the field. Too often, 
playwrights with great potential abandon their writing--or choose to 
write for a different audience or venue--because they are powerless to 
negotiate even minimum levels of compensation or artistic copyright 
protection for their work. William Shakespeare himself was paid no more 
than eight pounds apiece for his plays, and was not able to make his 
living from writing. This was, of course, back in the late 16th 
century.
  We should not allow today's antitrust laws to be used to discourage 
some of our most creative citizens from pursuing careers in live 
theater. When talented individuals are pushed away from their craft 
because of the unintended consequences of legislation, it is incumbent 
upon those of us in Congress to set things right.
  As a long time enthusiast of live theater, and a lyricist myself, I 
am proud to co-sponsor this bill. It is my belief that the PLAI Act 
will help foster the next Arthur Miller, the next Andrew Lloyd Webber, 
or the next Wendy Wasserstein. By helping playwrights in this way we 
encourage the continued vibrancy of American live theater and artistic 
and literary culture.
  I commend my co-sponsor Senator Kennedy for his efforts on this bill. 
His leadership and support represent a significant step forward in 
preserving the future of live theater in America. I urge my colleagues 
to join Senator Kennedy and me in supporting the PLAI Act.
  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. 2349

       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 ``Playwrights Licensing 
     Antitrust Initiative Act of 2004''.

     SEC. 2. NONAPPLICATION OF ANTITRUST LAWS.

       (a) In General.--Subject to subsection (c), the antitrust 
     laws shall not apply to any joint discussion, consideration, 
     review, action, or agreement for the express purpose of, and 
     limited to, the development of a standard form contract 
     containing minimum terms of artistic protection and levels of 
     compensation for playwrights by means of--
       (1) meetings, discussions, and negotiations between or 
     among playwrights or their representatives and producers or 
     their representatives; or
       (2) joint or collective voluntary actions for the limited 
     purposes of developing a standard form contract by 
     playwrights or their representatives.
       (b) Adoption and Implementation.--Subject to subsection 
     (c), the antitrust laws shall not apply to any joint 
     discussion, consideration, review, or action for the express 
     purpose of, and limited to, reaching a collective agreement 
     among playwrights adopting a standard form contract developed 
     pursuant to subsection (a) as the participating playwrights 
     sole and exclusive means by which participating playwrights 
     shall license their plays to producers.
       (c) Amendment of Contract.--A standard form of contract 
     developed and implemented under subsections (a) and (b) shall 
     be subject to amendment by individual playwrights and 
     producers consistent with the terms of the standard form 
     contract.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Antitrust laws.--The term ``antitrust laws'' has the 
     meaning given it in section (a) of the first section of the 
     Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. 12) except that such term includes 
     section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 45) 
     to the extent that such section applies to unfair methods of 
     competition.
       (2) Playwright.--The term ``playwright'' means the author, 
     composer, or lyricist of a dramatic or musical work intended 
     to be performed on the speaking stage and shall include, 
     where appropriate, the adapter of a work from another medium.
       (3) Producer.--The term ``producer''--
       (A) means any person who obtains the rights to present live 
     stage productions of a play; and
       (B) includes any person who presents a play as first class 
     performances in major cities, as well as those who present 
     plays in regional and not-for-profit theaters.

  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, it is a privilege to join in cosponsoring 
the Playwrights Licensing Antitrust Initiative Act, to permit the 
development of a standard, minimum contract for playwrights for the 
licensing and production of their work.
  The bill will provide needed protection for playwrights whose work is 
the creative force behind so many memorable successes in the Nation's 
performing arts. The stunning creations that millions of Americans 
enjoy on Broadway, Off Broadway, and in local communities across the 
country reflect the special genius of our creative artists. They 
express our Nation's hopes, disappointments, achievements and its 
challenges for the years ahead.
  If you travel to New York this week, you can attend any one of dozens 
of shows to entertain or enlighten us. There are classic musical 
productions--shows that we have loved all our lives such as Gypsy and 
42nd Street and Fiddler on the Roof, and more recently, The Producers. 
There are other dramatic works on issues that are important to each of 
us--about personal struggles and individual achievement and growth, 
about immigration and race relations--Bridge and Tunnel, The Tricky 
Part and Caroline, or Change. They are the new classics from the 
emerging voices of theater.
  The men and women who write these shows should be fairly compensated 
for their creative achievements. The bill that Senator Hatch and I 
introduce today will provide a measure of greater fairness for them. 
Currently, they are prohibited from entering into any collective 
negotiation for compensation or control of their work. Because they are 
not members of a union, they must negotiate individually with producers 
of their work.
  For well-known authors, the negotiation can be challenging. For 
emerging authors, it can be impossible.
  The bill we are proposing will grant a very limited modification of 
the antitrust laws, so that playwrights will be able to negotiate a 
minimum compensation package as fair reimbursement for their work. It 
will give playwrights similar rights to actors, actresses, dancers, 
composers, musicians and others who bring theater to life on America's 
stages.
  Currently, writers who work in the film industry enjoy greater 
protection for their work than their counterparts in the theater. We 
need to do more to see that our talented playwrights are able to 
continue their work in our theaters, and end the alarming current trend 
away from writing for live theater.
  As President Kennedy once said, ``I am certain that after the dust of 
centuries has passed over our cities, we, too, will be remembered not 
for victories or defeats in battle or politics, but for our 
contribution to the human spirit.''
  I hope that we can take this opportunity to expand the creative arts 
in our country and contribute to the vital spirit of our citizens in 
communities across America with their performances in drama, comedy and 
music.
  American theater is as lively, diverse, and exciting as any in the 
world. We must do all we can to protect this unique legacy and ensure a 
healthy theater community in the years ahead.
  I urge my colleagues to join us in supporting this important 
legislation.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. CONRAD (for himself and Mr. Dorgan):

[[Page 7577]]

  S.J. Res. 34. A joint resolution designating May 29, 2004, on the 
occasion of the dedication of the National World War II Memorial, as 
Remembrance of World War II Veterans Day; to the Committee on the 
Judiciary.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, after 17 years of hard work on the part of 
many individuals, especially World War II veterans, the World War II 
memorial will become a reality on Saturday, May 29, 2004 with a 
dedication ceremony in Washington, D.C. Hundreds of thousands of World 
War II veterans and their families are expected to attend. In 
recognition of this important occasion, I am introducing a Senate Joint 
Resolution along with my distinguished colleague, Senator Byron Dorgan, 
to honor our World War II veterans, their families and this dedication 
next month.
  The idea for the National World War II Memorial was first presented 
to Congresswomen Marcy Kaptur during a conversation with a constituent 
and World War II veteran, Roger Durbin in 1987. Shortly after that 
conversation, Congresswoman Kaptur introduced legislation to create a 
memorial, and Congress passed legislation authorizing the national 
memorial in 1993.
  The National World War II Memorial will pay tribute to the more than 
16,112,000 veterans of all military services--Army, Army Air Corps, 
Marine Corps, Navy, Coast Guard and Merchant Marine--who served in 
World War II between the invasion of Poland in 1939 and the surrender 
of Japan in 1945. Approximately 69,000 of these servicemen were from 
North Dakota. The memorial will acknowledge the supreme sacrifice of 
more than 400,000 military personnel, including 1,569 North Dakotans, 
who lost their lives between 1939 and 1945.
  As veterans and their families visit Washington over the coming 
weeks, many will recall the heroism and sacrifices from some of the 
remarkable campaigns and famous battles of World War II, including the 
attack on Pearl Harbor, December, 1941; the Battle of Midway, June, 
1942; the Allied campaign across North Africa, November, 1942; 
Operation Overlord (D-Day), June 1944; the capture of Iwo Jima, 
February, 1945; and the Tokyo bombing raids of March, 1945.
  The Memorial will also have special meaning for North Dakotans as 
they remember the heroic efforts of the 164th Infantry Regiment of the 
American Division, a unit of the North Dakota Army National Guard and 
the first unit of the United States Army to land on Guadalcanal in 
October, 1942. Some of the fiercest fighting of World War II took place 
in the effort to recapture the island.
  The Memorial will also hold special meaning for Senators and Members 
of Congress of the 108th Congress as we recognize and honor current 
members including Senator Daniel K. Akaka, Senator Ernest F. Hollings, 
Senator Daniel K. Inouye, Senator Frank R. Lautenberg, Senator Ted 
Stevens, Senator John W. Warner, Congressman Cass Ballenger, 
Congressman John D. Dingell, Congressman Ralph M. Hall, Congressman Amo 
Houghton, Congressman Henry J. Hyde, and Congressman Ralph Regula.
  As we pause during the Memorial Day weekend to remember World War II 
veterans who served and sacrificed so much more than 59 years ago, it 
is my hope that Americans will honor and remember this ``Greatest 
Generation'' for the contributions that have enabled millions of 
Americans, for more than 50 years, to enjoy unparalled prosperity and 
the blessings of freedom. Let us also remember the ongoing sacrifices 
of our active duty military personnel who are currently serving in all 
parts of the world, but especially in Iraq and the conflict against 
terrorism in Afghanistan.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the joint resolution be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the joint resolution was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                              S.J. Res. 34

       Whereas on May 29, 2004, thousands of veterans, their 
     families, and friends will gather on the Mall in Washington, 
     District of Columbia, to dedicate the National World War II 
     Memorial;
       Whereas on that day, Americans will pay tribute to the more 
     than 16,112,000 veterans of all military services who served 
     in World War II between the German invasion of Poland in 1939 
     and the surrender by Japan on V-J Day in 1945;
       Whereas on that day, Americans will be reminded of the 
     heroism and sacrifice of members of the Armed Forces who were 
     on duty during some of the critical conflicts of World War 
     II, including the attack on Pearl Harbor of December 7, 1941, 
     the Battle of Midway of June 6, 1942, the invasion of 
     Guadalcanal on August 7, 1942, the Allied campaign in North 
     Africa in November 1942, Operation Overlord (D-Day) on June 
     6, 1944, the capture of Iwo Jima on February 23, 1945, and 
     the Tokyo bombing raids of March 1945;
       Whereas on that day, veterans and their families from North 
     Dakota will honor the heroism and sacrifice of the 
     approximately 69,000 North Dakota veterans who served in 
     World War II, including 1,569 who made the ultimate 
     sacrifice, and recognize the hardships and sacrifices of the 
     164th Regiment of the American Division, a unit of the North 
     Dakota Army National Guard, who were the first unit of the 
     United States Army to land on Guadalcanal on October 13, 
     1942, in the campaign to recapture that island;
       Whereas on that day, America will acknowledge the supreme 
     sacrifice of the more than 400,000 Army, Army Air Corps, 
     Navy, Marine Corps, Coast Guard, and Merchant Marine 
     personnel who were killed in action in World War II;
       Whereas 12 distinguished Senators and Members of Congress 
     serving in the 108th Congress, including Senator Daniel K. 
     Akaka, Senator Ernest F. Hollings, Senator Daniel K. Inouye, 
     Senator Frank R. Lautenberg, Senator Ted Stevens, Senator 
     John W. Warner, Congressman Cass Ballenger, Congressman John 
     D. Dingell, Congressman Ralph M. Hall, Congressman Amo 
     Houghton, Congressman Henry J. Hyde, and Congressman Ralph 
     Regula, served in World War II; and
       Whereas World War II veterans, members of the generation 
     known as ``the Greatest Generation'', through their sacrifice 
     and hard work over more than 50 years, have enabled millions 
     of Americans to enjoy unparalleled prosperity and the 
     blessings of freedom: Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
     United States of America in Congress assembled, That May 29, 
     2004, is hereby designated as Remembrance of World War II 
     Veterans Day, and the President is urged to call upon the 
     people of the United States to celebrate the day with 
     appropriate ceremonies and activities.

                          ____________________