E PL UR UM IB N U U S Congressional Record United States th of America PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 104 CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION

Vol. 141 WASHINGTON, MONDAY, JULY 17, 1995 No. 115 House of Representatives

The House met at 10:30 a.m. and was that is good, the pilot that gives us di- ensuring the solvency of Medicare and called to order by the Speaker pro tem- rection and our guardian through all the health of their seniors, why are pore [Mr. EVERETT]. the perils of life. Bless us this day and they keeping them a secret? What are f every day, we pray. Amen. they afraid of? f It appears that they are trying to DESIGNATION OF SPEAKER PRO sneak their radical and extreme cuts TEMPORE THE JOURNAL by the American public. I can under- The SPEAKER pro tempore laid be- The SPEAKER pro tempore. The stand why they would be inclined to do fore the House the following commu- Chair has examined the Journal of the so, given the fact that they are also nication from the Speaker: last day’s proceedings and announces pushing a $240 billion tax cut for the wealthy. WASHINGTON, DC, to the House his approval thereof. July 17, 1995. Pursuant to clause 1, rule I, the Jour- Raiding Medicare to pay for this un- I hereby designate the Honorable TERRY nal stands approved. wise tax cut will inflict unacceptable pain on this Nation’s seniors. Out-of- EVERETT to act as Speaker pro tempore on f this day. pocket expenses for seniors will rise by NEWT GINGRICH, PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE $850 by the year 2002. These cuts will Speaker of the House of Representatives. also greatly diminish the ability of The SPEAKER. Will the gentleman f older Americans to access quality care. from Michigan [Mr. DINGELL] come for- Seniors have a right to know what is RECESS ward and lead the House in the Pledge in store for Medicare, especially if they of Allegiance. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu- are being asked to bear skyrocketing Mr. DINGELL led the Pledge of Alle- ant to clause 12, rule I, the House will premiums and limited access to care to giance as follows: stand in recess until 12 noon. help finance tax breaks for the Accordingly (at 10 o’clock and 31 I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the wealthy. United States of America, and to the Repub- minutes a.m.), the House stood in re- I call upon my Republican colleagues lic for which it stands, one nation under God, to deliver a full and open debate on cess until 12 noon. indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. how best to improve and strengthen f f Medicare. I also urge them to join me AFTER RECESS ON MEDICARE in rejecting the unfair tax break/Medi- care cut tradeoff being advanced. The recess having expired, the House (Mr. DINGELL asked and was given f was called to order by the Speaker pro permission to address the House for 1 tempore (Mr. EVERETT) at 12 noon. minute and to revise and extend his re- DO NOT TAKE AWAY HEALTH f marks.) CARE SECURITY FROM OUR SEN- Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, like the IORS PRAYER many seniors who have contacted me, I (Mr. LEWIS of Georgia asked and was The Chaplain, Rev. James David am shocked that the Republican budg- given permission to address the House Ford, D.D., offered the following pray- et slashes Medicare by $270 billion. for 1 minute and to revise and extend er: It now appears that Republicans are his remarks.) We speak about Your sovereignty, O preparing to end Medicare as we know Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, God, and yet we often act as if You did it. Recent media reports indicate that while I was in my district yesterday, I not exist; our prayers of devotion call they want to privatize this valuable met senior citizens who are frightened. upon Your name and yet we think we program, as they did when it was en- They don’t have much money to spare, can walk alone; our public petitions in- acted in 1965. and they watch what they spend. They voke Your grace and yet privately we Sadly, the Republicans are hiding are worried that they will lose the se- do not care; our mouths call upon You their plans for reforming Medicare. curity of Medicare. with requests and appeals and yet our The current legislative schedule allows They understand that cuts to Medi- hearts and souls go their own way. for only a few days in September to in- care are not reform. They understand Slow us down, O gracious God, and turn troduce, review, and vote on their pro- that they will pay more. us to the truth to see You as the au- posed changes. If my colleagues across I share their concern. The Repub- thor of all creation, the redeemer of all the aisle have such wonderful ideas for licans say they will give seniors more

b This symbol represents the time of day during the House proceedings, e.g., b 1407 is 2:07 p.m. Matter set in this typeface indicates words inserted or appended, rather than spoken, by a Member of the House on the floor.

H 7015 H 7016 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE July 17, 1995 choice. But they do not mention that BIENNIAL REVISION TO U.S. ARC- In just 7 pages of the bill dealing many seniors cannot afford the choice. TIC RESEARCH PLAN—MESSAGE with the EPA, there are 21 anti-envi- Our elderly will pay more and get less. FROM THE PRESIDENT OF THE ronment riders, including the following Republicans say they must cut Medi- UNITED STATES provisions: blocking enforcement of air care to save it. If my Republican col- The SPEAKER pro tempore laid be- pollution permits; limiting enforce- leagues are concerned about the Medi- fore the House the following message ment of storm water and sanitary care Program, why do they cut Medi- from the President of the United sewer provisions in the Water Pollu- care to pay for tax cuts for the rich? States; which was read and, together tion Control Act; handicapping the This will not help Medicare. with the accompanying papers, without EPA’s ability under the Clean Air Act Thirty years ago, Congress and the objection, referred to the Committee to regulate toxic emissions from cer- President signed a sacred trust with on Science: tain refineries; putting other limits on our seniors—Medicare. We must not enforcing environmental laws affecting stand by while that trust is broken. To the Congress of the United States: other parts of the oil and gas industry; Pursuant to the provisions of the stopping EPA from taking steps to f Arctic Research and Policy Act of 1984, keep arsenic, radon and other as amended (15 U.S.C. 4108(a)), I trans- WAKE UP, AMERICA radionuclei out of our drinking water; mit herewith the fourth biennial revi- (Ms. FURSE asked and was given per- sion (1996–2000) to the United States limiting the EPA’s efforts to control mission to address the House for 1 Arctic Research Plan. toxic releases from cement kilns and other incinerators; restricting the minute and to revise and extend her re- WILLIAM J. CLINTON. marks.) THE WHITE HOUSE, July 14, 1995. gathering and publishing of informa- tion about the use of chemicals; re- Ms. FURSE. Mr. Speaker, I want to f issue a wake-up call to the American stricting the protection of the coun- people. I want to say to the American REPUBLICAN SNEAK ATTACK ON try’s wetlands, blocking efforts to en- voters: Please watch closely what’s THE ENVIRONMENT courage car pooling; restricting efforts happening here in Congress. I don’t The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a to improve water quality in the Great think you’ll like what you’ll see. previous order of the House the gen- Lakes; and, undermining the regula- What you’ll see during this appro- tleman from Colorado [Mr. SKAGGS] is tion of pesticides in foods. priations process is a back-door attack recognized for 5 minutes. Mr. Speaker, the pattern could not be on the environment. Instead of reau- Mr. SKAGGS. Mr. Speaker, I am clearer. Just take a look at it, page thorizing and finetuning laws in the afraid that the new Republican major- after page of regressive anti-environ- light of day, this Congress is covertly ity in the House is carrying out what is mental and underhanded provisions starving programs to death through in effect a sneak attack on public aimed at handcuffing efforts to protect lack of funding. health, on environmental protection our food supply, keep our air and water The American people trust that the and on our national park system, clean, protect vital wetlands, all things environmental laws that we’ve had on among other things. vital to our natural systems all over the books for the past two decades will Following the unfortunate example the country. It is no wonder, Mr. Speaker, that continue to be enforced, because of James Watt, they are distorting the Carol Browner, the EPA administrator, they’re law. Wrong. This new Repub- normal legislative process around here, has concluded that we are seeing ‘‘an lican Congress is in the process of: acting against House rules by using the organized, concerted effort to under- Taking away money from the Fish and appropriations process to rewrite law mine public health and safety and the Wildlife Service which lists species and reshape policy, so that they can environment.’’ that are on the brink of extinction; achieve, by stealth, objectives that If anything, Carol Browner under- taking away money from the EPA lack real public support. We saw the start of this pattern with states the situation. The American which stops polluters from dumping the first rescissions bill, with its pages people need to know what is going on. waste into our rivers; and taking away of legislative language waiving envi- They need to know that this new Re- money from the Forest Service which ronmental and forest management publican majority is determined to un- ensures logging operations don’t harm laws, language that under the normal dermine the progress that we have salmon spawning habitat. rules of the House should not have been made in the last several decades in pro- So even if though there’s a law soon in any bill of that kind. tecting our environment, progress that to protect the environment, there will We are seeing it again now in the In- the American people are proud of and be no money to enforce it. terior appropriations bill, which we want to see continued. They need to America, is this really what you will take up again later today, with its know that we are in the midst of a full- voted for? I don’t think so. provisions to dissolve the National Bio- fledged attack on the safeguards of the f logical Service, transfer its functions water we drink and the air we breathe. to the U.S. Geological Service, again, They need to know because, when they COMMUNICATION FROM THE legislating on an appropriations bill, do know, they will reject this assault CLERK OF THE HOUSE again, an attack on research and on on public health, public safety and pub- The SPEAKER pro tempore laid be- sound wildlife conservation; also, in lic lands. fore the House the following commu- the same bill, with its provisions to es- We need to be doing more, not less, nication from the Clerk of the House of sentially eliminate the Mojave Na- to clean up the environment and to Representatives: tional Preserve in California as a unit protect people’s health. U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, of the National Park Service, by a back For instance, two new studies this Washington, DC, July 14, 1995. door attack instead of a straight- year tell us that 53 million Americans Hon. NEWT GINGRICH, forward proposal to repeal or amend are drinking tap water that is below The Speaker, U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, DC. the California Desert Protection Act. standards. What is the response of the DEAR MR. SPEAKER: Pursuant to the per- Later this week we will see it in even new majority here in the Congress to mission granted in Clause 5 of Rule III of the more outrageous ways when the full this? To do more to clean up the na- Rules of the U.S. House of Representatives, I Committee on Appropriations takes up tion’s water? No. The Republican re- have the honor to transmit a sealed envelope the bill to fund the Environmental Pro- sponse is to come up with eight dif- received from the White House on Friday, tection Agency. That bill has more rid- ferent legislative riders to determine July 14, 1995 at 10:18 a.m. and said to contain ers than the Long Island Railroad. the Clean Water Act and the Safe a message from the President whereby he Most of them are intended to prevent Drinking Water Act. Hard to imagine. transmits the fourth biennial report (1995– the government from doing its job in This Republican sneak attack on the 2000) to the United States Arctic Research Plan. protecting our water, our air, our wet- environment should not and will not go Sincerely yours, lands, our health. Let us just take a unopposed. The American people did ROBIN H. CARLE, look quickly at the passenger count, not vote last November to roll back 25 Clerk, U.S. House of Representatives. the number of riders on that bill. years of environmental progress. They July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H 7017 did not vote for more pollution or for for division of the question in the House or for a division of the question in the backhanded legislative shenanigans to in the Committee of the Whole. If that House or Committee of the Whole. If under cut environmental standards amendment is adopted, the provisions of the this amendment is adopted, it shall be bill, as amended, shall be considered as the just to satisfy the greed and the cam- original bill for the purpose of further considered as a part of the original text paign access paid for by many indus- amendment under the five-minute rule. Fur- for the purpose of further amendment trial polluters. ther consideration of the bill for amendment under the 5 minute rule. In allowing Together with other members of the shall proceed by title rather than by para- this amendment, we are following past Committee on Appropriations and of graph. Each title shall be considered as read. practices of previous Congresses, in this House as a whole, we must do all Points of order against provisions in the bill order to be as fair as we possibly can be that we can to spread the word about for failure to comply with clause 2 or 6 of on these appropriations bills. this sneak attack and to keep it from rule XXI are waived. During further consid- eration of the bill for amendment, the Chair- This rule accords priority in recogni- succeeding. man of the Committee of the Whole may ac- tion to Members who have preprinted Nothing is more important than pro- cord priority in recognition on the basis of their amendments in the CONGRES- tecting our air, our water, our lands, whether the Member offering an amendment SIONAL RECORD. The rule does not re- the public’s health. has caused it to be printed in the portion of quire pre-printing, but simply encour- f the Congressional Record designated for that ages Members to take advantage of the purpose in clause 6 of rule XXIII. Amend- option in order to facilitate consider- RECESS ments so printed shall be considered as read. At the conclusion of consideration of the bill ation of amendments on the House The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu- for amendment the Committee shall rise and floor. ant to clause 12 of rule I, the Chair de- report the bill to the House with such Finally, House Resolution 188 pro- clares the House in recess until 4 p.m. amendments as may have been adopted. The vides for one motion to recommit, with today. previous question shall be considered as or- or without instructions, as is the right (Accordingly (at 12 o’clock and 14 dered on the bill and amendments thereto to of the minority members of the House. minutes p.m.), the House stood in re- final passage without intervening motion ex- Mr. Speaker, this is the fifth open cess until 4:00 p.m. cept one motion to recommit with or with- out instructions. rule to be offered during the consider- f The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gen- ation of the 1966 appropriations proc- b 1602 tleman from California [Mr. DREIER] is ess—the sixth if you count the first In- recognized for 1 hour. terior appropriations rule. House Reso- AFTER RECESS Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, for pur- lution 188 is a typical open rule to be The recess having expired, the House poses of debate only, I yield the cus- considered for general appropriations was called to order by the Speaker pro tomary 30 minutes to my very good bills. This rule does not restrict the tempore (Mr. SHAYS) at 4 o’clock and 2 friend, the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. normal open amending process and any minutes p.m. HALL], pending which I yield myself amendments that comply with the standing rules of the House may be of- f such time as I may consume. During consideration of this rule, all time fered. PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION yielded is for purposes of debate only. H.R. 1976 appropriates a total of $62.7 OF H.R. 1976, AGRICULTURE, (Mr. DREIER asked and was given billion dollars, which is $6.3 billion less RURAL DEVELOPMENT, FOOD permission to include extraneous mat- than was appropriated last year. This AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, ter). bill provides $13 billion in discre- AND RELATED AGENCIES APPRO- Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, House tionary spending and $49 billion in PRIATIONS ACT, 1996 Resolution 188 is an open rule provid- mandatory spending, a decrease of ing for consideration of H.R. 1976, the Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, by direc- about $5.3 billion below the amount Agriculture, Rural Development, Food tion of the Committee on Rules, I call available for fiscal year 1995. Clearly, and Drug Administration and Related up House Resolution 188 and ask for its the Appropriations Committee has had Agencies appropriations bill for fiscal immediate consideration. to balance a wide array of interests and year 1996. The Clerk read as follows: had to make very difficult choices with The rule provides for 1 hour of gen- drastically reduced resources. H. RES. 188 eral debate divided equally between the With that in mind, I want to com- Resolved, That at any time after the adop- chairman and ranking minority mem- mend the close work of the authorizing tion of this resolution the Speaker may, pur- ber of the Committee on Appropria- suant to clause 1(b) of rule XXIII, declare the and appropriating committees in tions. The bill is to be read by title for House resolved into the Committee of the crafting the legislation that will soon amendment, and each title is to be con- Whole House on the state of the Union for be before the House. They have worked consideration of the bill (H.R. 1976) making sidered as read. The rule waives clause 2 of rule together under an incredibly tight appropriations for Agriculture, Rural Devel- budget to ensure that all funding is opment, Food and Drug Administration, and XXI—which prohibits unauthorized ap- Related Agencies programs for the fiscal propriations and legislation on an ap- spent where it is needed most. To- year ending September 30, 1996, and for other propriations bill—and also waives gether, they have responsibly sought to purposes. The first reading of the bill shall clause 6 of rule XXI—which prohibits maintain functions that are crucial to be dispensed with. General debate shall be reappropriating unexpended balances the health and safety of the American confined to the bill and shall not exceed one of appropriations in general appropria- consumer and the future success of this hour equally divided and controlled by the nation’s farming communities. chairman and ranking minority member of tions bills—against provisions of the the Committee on Appropriations. After gen- bill. H.R. 1976 was favorably reported out eral debate the bill shall be considered for Under the rule, it is in order to con- of the Committee on Appropriations, as amendment under the five-minute rule, and sider first an amendment printed in the was the open rule by the Rules Com- the amendment printed in the report of the rule to be offered by Mr. SKEEN of New mittee. I urge my colleagues to support Committee on Rules accompanying this res- Mexico. This amendment shall be con- the rule so that we may proceed with olution shall be considered as pending. That sidered as read. The amendment is de- consideration of the merits of the leg- amendment shall be considered as read, shall batable for 10 minutes divided between islation. be debatable for ten minutes equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking the chairman and ranking member of Mr. Speaker, I include for the minority member of the Committee on Ap- the Appropriations Committee. The RECORD information on the amendment propriations, shall not be subject to amend- amendment offered by Mr. SKEEN is not process. The document referred to is as ment, and shall not be subject to a demand subject to amendment or to a demand follows: H 7018 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE July 17, 1995 THE AMENDMENT PROCESS UNDER SPECIAL RULES REPORTED BY THE RULES COMMITTEE,1 103D CONGRESS V. 104TH CONGRESS [As of July 14, 1995]

103d Congress 104th Congress Rule type Number of rules Percent of total Number of rules Percent of total

Open/Modified-open 2 ...... 46 44 34 72 Modified Closed 3 ...... 49 47 12 26 Closed 4 ...... 9 9 1 2 Totals: ...... 104 100 47 100 1 This table applies only to rules which provide for the original consideration of bills, joint resolutions or budget resolutions and which provide for an amendment process. It does not apply to special rules which only waive points of order against appropriations bills which are already privileged and are considered under an open amendment process under House rules. 2 An open rule is one under which any Member may offer a germane amendment under the five-minute rule. A modified open rule is one under which any Member may offer a germane amendment under the five-minute rule subject only to an overall time limit on the amendment process and/or a requirement that the amendment be preprinted in the Congressional Record. 3 A modified closed rule is one under which the Rules Committee limits the amendments that may be offered only to those amendments designated in the special rule or the Rules Committee report to accompany it, or which preclude amendments to a particular portion of a bill, even though the rest of the bill may be completely open to amendment. 4 A closed rule is one under which no amendments may be offered (other than amendments recommended by the committee in reporting the bill).

SPECIAL RULES REPORTED BY THE RULES COMMITTEE, 104TH CONGRESS [As of July 14, 1995]

H. Res. No. (Date rept.) Rule type Bill No. Subject Disposition of rule

H. Res. 38 (1/18/95) ...... O ...... H.R. 5 ...... Unfunded Mandate Reform ...... A: 350–71 (1/19/95). H. Res. 44 (1/24/95) ...... MC ...... H. Con. Res. 17 ...... Social Security ...... A: 255–172 (1/25/95). H.J. Res. 1 ...... Balanced Budget Amdt ...... H. Res. 51 (1/31/95) ...... O ...... H.R. 101 ...... Land Transfer, Taos Pueblo Indians ...... A: voice vote (2/1/95). H. Res. 52 (1/31/95) ...... O ...... H.R. 400 ...... Land Exchange, Arctic Nat’l. Park and Preserve ...... A: voice vote (2/1/95). H. Res. 53 (1/31/95) ...... O ...... H.R. 440 ...... Land Conveyance, Butte County, Calif ...... A: voice vote (2/1/95). H. Res. 55 (2/1/95) ...... O ...... H.R. 2 ...... Line Item Veto ...... A: voice vote (2/2/95). H. Res. 60 (2/6/95) ...... O ...... H.R. 665 ...... Victim Restitution ...... A: voice vote (2/7/95). H. Res. 61 (2/6/95) ...... O ...... H.R. 666 ...... Exclusionary Rule Reform ...... A: voice vote (2/7/95). H. Res. 63 (2/8/95) ...... MO ...... H.R. 667 ...... Violent Criminal Incarceration ...... A: voice vote (2/9/95). H. Res. 69 (2/9/95) ...... O ...... H.R. 668 ...... Criminal Alien Deportation ...... A: voice vote (2/10/95). H. Res. 79 (2/10/95) ...... MO ...... H.R. 728 ...... Law Enforcement Block Grants ...... A: voice vote (2/13/95). H. Res. 83 (2/13/95) ...... MO ...... H.R. 7 ...... National Security Revitalization ...... PQ: 229–100; A: 227–127 (2/15/95). H. Res. 88 (2/16/95) ...... MC ...... H.R. 831 ...... Health Insurance Deductibility ...... PQ: 230–191; A: 229–188 (2/21/95). H. Res. 91 (2/21/95) ...... O ...... H.R. 830 ...... Paperwork Reduction Act ...... A: voice vote (2/22/95). H. Res. 92 (2/21/95) ...... MC ...... H.R. 889 ...... Defense Supplemental ...... A: 282–144 (2/22/95). H. Res. 93 (2/22/95) ...... MO ...... H.R. 450 ...... Regulatory Transition Act ...... A: 252–175 (2/23/95). H. Res. 96 (2/24/95) ...... MO ...... H.R. 1022 ...... Risk Assessment ...... A: 253–165 (2/27/95). H. Res. 100 (2/27/95) ...... O ...... H.R. 926 ...... Regulatory Reform and Relief Act ...... A: voice vote (2/28/95). H. Res. 101 (2/28/95) ...... MO ...... H.R. 925 ...... Private Property Protection Act ...... A: 271–151 (3/2/95) H. Res. 103 (3/3/95) ...... MO ...... H.R. 1058 ...... Securities Litigation Reform ...... H. Res. 104 (3/3/95) ...... MO ...... H.R. 988 ...... Attorney Accountability Act ...... A: voice vote (3/6/95) H. Res. 105 (3/6/95) ...... MO ...... A: 257–155 (3/7/95) H. Res. 108 (3/7/95) ...... Debate ...... H.R. 956 ...... Product Liability Reform ...... A: voice vote (3/8/95) H. Res. 109 (3/8/95) ...... MC ...... PQ: 234–191 A: 247–181 (3/9/95) H. Res. 115 (3/14/95) ...... MO ...... H.R. 1159 ...... Making Emergency Supp. Approps...... A: 242–190 (3/15/95) H. Res. 116 (3/15/95) ...... MC ...... H.J. Res. 73 ...... Term Limits Const. Amdt ...... A: voice vote (3/28/95) H. Res. 117 (3/16/95) ...... Debate ...... H.R. 4 ...... Personal Responsibility Act of 1995 ...... A: voice vote (3/21/95) H. Res. 119 (3/21/95) ...... MC ...... A: 217–211 (3/22/95) H. Res. 125 (4/3/95) ...... O ...... H.R. 1271 ...... Family Privacy Protection Act ...... A: 423–1 (4/4/95) H. Res. 126 (4/3/95) ...... O ...... H.R. 660 ...... Older Persons Housing Act ...... A: voice vote (4/6/95) H. Res. 128 (4/4/95) ...... MC ...... H.R. 1215 ...... Contract With America Tax Relief Act of 1995 ...... A: 228–204 (4/5/95) H. Res. 130 (4/5/95) ...... MC ...... H.R. 483 ...... Medicare Select Expansion ...... A: 253–172 (4/6/95) H. Res. 136 (5/1/95) ...... O ...... H.R. 655 ...... Hydrogen Future Act of 1995 ...... A: voice vote (5/2/95) H. Res. 139 (5/3/95) ...... O ...... H.R. 1361 ...... Coast Guard Auth. FY 1996 ...... A: voice vote (5/9/95) H. Res. 140 (5/9/95) ...... O ...... H.R. 961 ...... Clean Water Amendments ...... A: 414–4 (5/10/95) H. Res. 144 (5/11/95) ...... O ...... H.R. 535 ...... Fish Hatchery—Arkansas ...... A: voice vote (5/15/95) H. Res. 145 (5/11/95) ...... O ...... H.R. 584 ...... Fish Hatchery—Iowa ...... A: voice vote (5/15/95) H. Res. 146 (5/11/95) ...... O ...... H.R. 614 ...... Fish Hatchery—Minnesota ...... A: voice vote (5/15/95) H. Res. 149 (5/16/95) ...... MC ...... H. Con. Res. 67 ...... Budget Resolution FY 1996 ...... PQ: 252–170 A: 255–168 (5/17/95) H. Res. 155 (5/22/95) ...... MO ...... H.R. 1561 ...... American Overseas Interests Act ...... A: 233–176 (5/23/95) H. Res. 164 (6/8/95) ...... MC ...... H.R. 1530 ...... Nat. Defense Auth. FY 1996 ...... PQ: 225–191 A: 233–183 (6/13/95) H. Res. 167 (6/15/95) ...... O ...... H.R. 1817 ...... MilCon Appropriations FY 1996 ...... PQ:223–180 A: 245–155 (6/16/95) H. Res. 169 (6/19/95) ...... MC ...... H.R. 1854 ...... Leg. Branch Approps. FY 1996 ...... PQ: 232–196 A: 236–191 (6/20/95) H. Res. 170 (6/20/95) ...... O ...... H.R. 1868 ...... For. Ops. Approps. FY 1996 ...... PQ: 221–178 A: 217–175 (6/22/95) H. Res. 171 (6/22/95) ...... O ...... H.R. 1905 ...... Energy & Water Approps. FY 1996 ...... A: voice vote (7/12/95) H. Res. 173 (6/27/95) ...... C ...... H.J. Res. 79 ...... Flag Constitutional Amendment ...... PQ: 258–170 A: 271–152 (6/28/95) H. Res. 176 (6/28/95) ...... MC ...... H.R. 1944 ...... Emer. Supp. Approps...... PQ: 236–194 A: 234–192 (6/29/95) H. Res. 185 (7/11/95) ...... O ...... H.R. 1977 ...... Interior Approps. FY 1996 ...... PQ: 235–193 D: 192–238 (7/12/95) H. Res. 187 (7/12/95) ...... O ...... H.R. 1977 ...... Interior Approps. FY 1996 #2 ...... PQ: 230–194 A: 229–195 (7/13/95) H. Res. 188 (7/12/95) ...... O ...... H.R. 1976 ...... Agriculture Approps. FY 1996 ...... Codes: O-open rule; MO-modified open rule; MC-modified closed rule; C-closed rule; A-adoption vote; D-defeated; PQ-previous question vote. Source: Notices of Action Taken, Committee on Rules, 104th Congress.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of Mr. Speaker, I am concerned that the causes 20,000 illnesses and up to 500 my time. rule does provide waivers to allow cer- deaths each year, primarily among sen- Mr. HALL of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I tain legislative language in the bill ior citizens and children. The Depart- yield myself such time as I may which will weaken our Nation’s food ment has taken the correct action in consume. safety. This language in the bill will moving forward to modernize and up- (Mr. HALL of Ohio asked and was cut off funding for the Department of grade its food inspection system. Halt- given permission to revise and extend Agriculture’s new plan to modernize its ing the program through this bill is un- his remarks.) meat and poultry inspection program. I Mr. HALL of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, as acceptable, and frankly, not in the in- am very concerned over the protection terests of public safety. Just in the last my colleague has described, House Res- of this language which will delay olution 188 is a rule which provides 1 few days, another strain of E. coli bac- tougher food inspection standards hour of general debate on the Depart- teria made 18 people ill in Montana. which could expose thousands of people ment of Agriculture and Related Agen- Unfortunately, an amendment offered to deadly levels of the E. coli bacteria cies bill for fiscal year 1996. The rule to the rule to remove the protection and other pathogens. does provide waivers of clause 2 of rule for the weakening language failed in XXI to allow unauthorized appropria- This is not the time, Mr. Speaker, to the Rules Committee. be weakening food inspection, espe- tions in provisions in the bill, as well If the weakening language in the bill as clause 6 of rule XXI prohibiting re- cially inspection of safe meat. We all is removed on a point of order, it will appropriations in some provisions. The remember the 1993 outbreak of the not in any way preclude the Agri- rule also provides priority recognition deadly E. coli bacteria in a fast food to Members who have preprinted their restaurant that resulted in over 600 ill- culture Committee, in its oversight ca- pacity, from continuing to negotiate amendments in the CONGRESSIONAL nesses and 4 deaths. According to the RECORD. Center for Disease Control, E. coli July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H 7019 with the USDA on updating its meat provisions that deal with the issue of on a farm or you work in the city, the inspection program. In fact, if the pro- meat inspection. While I am not an ex- seriousness of the issue that will be de- vision is not removed, we will have to pert myself on meat inspection, I am bated when this bill eventually reaches go back to square one and start the very expert on consumption. With that, the floor. food safety negotiations all over again. I should say that I am convinced, based Mr. Speaker, I would say simply that We just can’t afford to prolong these on the action that was taken by the I would like to see some middle ground new meat inspection regulations in- committee, that there is a tremendous on this. I understand the reasons why definitely. Human lives are at stake. effort that has been made in the area of the gentleman from New York [Mr. In addition to the food inspection inspection. WALSH] offered the amendment, be- issue, Mr. Speaker, I am concerned Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he cause anybody who represents small with several of the provisions in the may consume to the gentleman from businesses, and I have an awful lot of bill which affect nutrition programs. New Mexico [Mr. SKEEN], the distin- them in my district, you are bound to While the committee, to its credit, in- guished chairman from the Sub- be concerned about the impact of any cluded an increase to cover inflation in committee on Agricultural Appropria- rule and any rulemaking process on the Women, Infants, and Children’s tions, to deal with this issue. small business. feeding program [WIC], the Adminis- Mr. SKEEN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the I am also concerned, however, be- tration’s request for an additional $90 gentleman for yielding me the time. cause I think that our committee Mr. Speaker, let me say right now in- million was not included. Had this re- frankly is not the right forum in which sofar as meat inspection is concerned, quest been honored, another 180,000 this issue ought to be discussed. This and I understand the concern of the women and children per month would issue ought to be dealt with by the gentleman from Wisconsin and others have been eligible to receive nutrition Committee on Agriculture. They know who have worked with this, but the supplements. The bill also caps the the most about the issue. The Commit- program that we are undergoing now total number of people who may re- tee on Appropriations is essentially a does not extend the time for the adop- ceive WIC. I am afraid that a cap on committee that is supposed to deal tion of new standards for meat inspec- total numbers of people served will with budgets. If you want to have effec- tion. It cuts it much shorter and expe- eliminate an incentive for innovative tive nonpolitical discussion of this dites the process of initiating the cost savings to make the money go fur- issue, I think that it belongs in the pol- HACCP Program. ther. icy committee, not a finance commit- This is taken at the behest of the With respect to food stamps, I note tee. that the bill eliminates the $2.5 billion Secretary of Agriculture, along with reserve for food stamps that the Agri- other people who have been very much Nonetheless, it is here. If it is here, I culture Department maintains to han- interested and very much involved in would prefer, for instance, that in addi- dle unexpectedly high demand. This is trying to speed up this process and tion to the choice of either having the risky because in a sudden recession, we make it one of common understanding Walsh amendment or not having the could see the people who legitimately and agreement between the processors Walsh amendment, that we would have qualify for help, unable to receive ben- as well as those who are concerned a third option such as that proposed by efits. Also disturbing is the freeze in about the health and safety of the the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. DUR- calculating the standard deduction for meat inspection program. But it is a BIN] when he was in the full committee food stamp eligibility which will have new scientific program that must be last week. It seems to me that would the effect of forcing people to become initiated. It is a drastic change, I do be a way to force compromise in the ineligible for food stamps or having admit, that has caused a great deal of regulatory process without going to their benefits reduced. controversy. the extremes that the Walsh amend- The committee did increase funds for The process is ongoing, as we speak, ment does. child nutrition programs such as at the behest of the Secretary of Agri- For that reason, I very reluctantly school lunch and school breakfast. culture, and I would ask the gentleman would simply state that I will also op- However, we will see some of the small- to consider this when considering vot- pose the previous question on the rule er programs such as donations to soup ing against or opposing the previous and the rule itself, because I believe kitchens and TEFAP shrink. question. I do not have any other com- that something like the Durbin amend- Finally, in the Rules Committee ment. ment perhaps would give us a much hearing, Representative HARMAN did The gentleman from New York [Mr. better way to deal with this issue than request an amendment known as the WALSH] is on his way over, Mr. Speak- having to either go up or down on the Brewster-Harman deficit reduction er, and he is in direct negotiation on Walsh amendment, which I personally lockbox amendment. This would have this particular program. I would say prefer not to do. allowed any savings obtained through this, that voting against the previous Mr. SKEEN. Mr. Speaker, will the floor votes to go into a special deficit question is not going to help this mat- gentleman yield? reduction trust fund. Given the inter- ter be resolved or speed it up or any- Mr. OBEY. I yield to the gentleman est that many of us have in deficit re- thing else. As a matter of fact, it may from New Mexico. delay it. duction, I believe the Rules Committee Mr. SKEEN. I thank the distin- Mr. HALL of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I should have made a lockbox amend- guished gentleman for yielding. ment in order. yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Because of these serious short- Wisconsin [Mr. OBEY]. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Il- comings in the bill, I do plan to ask for Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the linois [Mr. DURBIN] as I understand it is a ‘‘no’’ vote on the previous question. gentleman for yielding me the time. on his way here, and we are certainly If the previous question is defeated, I Mr. Speaker, let me simply say, be- going to give him every opportunity, will move to include language to strike cause of my great respect for the dis- and also the gentleman from New York the protection of the weakening lan- tinguished subcommittee chairman, I [Mr. WALSH] is on his way. guage for USDA’s meat inspection pro- am very reluctant to oppose the rule I understand the argument that this gram, and to include the Brewster-Har- and the previous question on the rule matter should be debated in the Com- man amendment under the rule. but I feel compelled to, nonetheless. mittee on Agriculture, but unfortu- Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of Mr. Speaker, I come from a district nately that is not the case. This was my time. that has a lot of farmers. I come from dealt with through the Committee on a district that has a lot of small towns. Appropriations and begun through the b 1615 I also come from a district that has Committee on Appropriations. We Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield had direct recent experience with E. would be very happy to lend that pur- myself such time as I may consume. coli. In my hometown just this week- view to the Committee on Agriculture, Mr. Speaker, first let me say that end, for instance, we had another case but they are not up to speed on it. We again this is an open rule, and the gen- of E. coli break out. I think that drives have been in the thick of the negotia- tleman is right that we protect the home to everyone, whether you work tions. H 7020 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE July 17, 1995 At the behest of the Secretary of Ag- arrive at the proposed rules that make Mr. OBEY. Let me simply say that I riculture, we have kept out of the ne- sense to guarantee food safety and the would very much like to see something gotiations between the two sides. Pro- safety of our meat supply. worked out, as a representative of a tecting small producers, small proc- In meeting with Secretary Glickman, rural area myself. My concern, how- essors, is absolutely of major concern those of us who serve on the Commit- ever, is that I would like to avoid a re- to us, because in many respects I think tee on Agriculture expressed some con- peat of what we had on the rescissions they view this as a threat to continu- cern with the proposed rulemaking. By bill where we were actually debating ing business. We do not want that to that, I mean there are now two propos- the language of one provision on the happen. We want our food situation als: One involves the current regula- floor, on timber, for instance, while the safe. tions in regards to food safety and how language, itself, was being worked out Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I would cer- the USDA conducts its meat inspec- between the administration and the tainly agree with that. I would also tion, which quite frankly in my per- committee in a room one floor below us say, however, that assuring the sonal opinion is not based entirely on in this building. consuring public that they can safely sound science, it is very complex, it is I would kind of like to know what consume these products to me is of ut- very burdensome, and it is very costly. agreements have been worked out be- most importance, obviously because of Then we have this new proposal fore we decide whether we have to deal the public health questions involved called HACCP. That is the hazard anal- with the specifics of the Walsh amend- and also because, frankly, people in the ysis control point. That is the better ment or not. All we have to go on at industry need to have the market secu- system. That is a system that we have this time is the comment from Sec- rity of people knowing that their prod- all proposed in the Committee on Agri- retary Glickman which says, ‘‘I am ucts are perfectly safe. culture and all throughout agriculture writing to express my strong concerns But the problem with this rule is to try to use sound science to guaran- and objections to the adoption of the that the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. tee the safety of our meat and to ad- amendment in question.’’ DURBIN] would not be able to offer the dress the tragedy that happened in the Like the gentleman, I would like to compromise proposal that he tried to Northwest in regards to E. coli. see something worked out. My concern offer in full committee, and because The problem is that we cannot layer about this rule is that it does not give this rule goes out of its way to protect the two together without really get- us the opportunity to have another ap- the base amendment, the Walsh amend- ting to a real problem. The problem is proach to this problem the way the ment, which would not be in order nor- the small meat locker industry and the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. DURBIN] meat processing industry, according to mally under the rules of the House, it would have liked to have had in the their concerns, have not been part of seems to me that we would be better amendment that he offered. the process. I do not have any objection to the off if we had another choice to choose The problem is in regards to sound goals that I think all of us share. from. But under the rule, we do not. science again, we have some concerns Mr. ROBERTS. I thank the gen- Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I am that a better approach might be used. tleman for his contribution. happy to yield such time as he may Then we have a small business concern The statement by the Secretary, I consume to my friend, the gentleman where a lot of small meat lockers feel—I cannot speak for Secretary from Dodge City, KS [Mr. ROBERTS], might be put out of business. That is a Glickman although I try a lot, in Kan- the distinguished chairman of the Com- very real concern in farm country. sas, we try to get him to go at least 65 mittee on Agriculture. So we met with the Secretary. I have in a 55-mile-an-hour zone—but I think Mr. ROBERTS. I thank the gen- here a draft of a letter that the com- in regards to his comment on meat in- tleman for yielding me the time. mittee gave to the Secretary and the spection, that it is somewhat dated. Mr. Speaker, I am out of breath. This Secretary is working on it. He has an- We have had a lengthy meeting, as I is one of these I had not intended to other draft. It was supposed to be back have said, a bipartisan one, with the speak but was viewing the proceedings at about 4:30. members of the Committee on Agri- on the floor and overheard the concern I think that if we reach an agreement culture, the leadership of the commit- that was voiced by the distinguished with Secretary Glickman, and I have tee that will have to produce the legis- gentleman from Wisconsin in regards talked this over with the gentleman lation to follow up in regards to the to meat inspection and the rule that from New York [Mr. WALSH], that if rulemaking. pertains to this issue. there is an open process and if we can We are negotiating now with lan- As I catch my breath, I would like to guarantee at least the future of the guage that I think may have a chance inform the gentleman from Wisconsin small meat locker industry, and if we to work. I would just urge the gen- that we held a meeting, a very impor- can use sound science approaches, and tleman to maybe consider that. There tant meeting, in this regard with Sec- if the cowboys and all the livestock will be ample time, I think, for the retary Glickman of the Department of producers and the meat processors and gentleman to raise his points of con- Agriculture. By we, I mean the distin- the meat industry can be saying, ‘‘We cern. guished ranking member, the chairman are part of this process, we can sit at Mr. OBEY. If the gentleman will emeritus, if I can use that term, of the the table,’’ and if in fact we can make yield further, I like to hear that, be- Committee on Agriculture, the gen- sure in the layering of this process that cause frankly you are the people that tleman from Texas [Mr. STENHOLM], we do not get into more red tape and should be working the language out. who has been extremely active in re- regulations and a lot of perception but Those of us on the Committee on Ap- gards to meat inspection and this sub- very little protection for the American propriations, I do not think, have the ject; the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. consumer, I think we can work this expertise that your committee has to VOLKMER] who is the ranking member out. deal with the issue. of the appropriate subcommittee; and I would say to the gentleman that Mr. ROBERTS. I would like for the the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. there is a process ongoing and hope- gentleman to say that again about 4 GUNDERSON], the chairman of the sub- fully in working with Secretary Glick- times on virtually every subject that committee. man and the Committee on Agri- has come up under this appropriation We will be doing, regardless of what culture, I think we can find an answer. bill if he would. happens on the proposed rulemaking, a It may be that the gentleman from Mr. OBEY. I have said that on at bill, or legislation as it applies to meat New York at that particular time, who least one other occasion in the past 2 inspection, not only in regards to meat is part of the process, can simply with- weeks. but fish and also poultry. draw his amendment, and we can all Mr. ROBERTS. The gentleman has The gentleman from New York who declare victory and we can all reach a got two to go. Reclaiming my time, we is not present and can speak for him- product that we could agree upon. have worked out a partnership arrange- self in regards to his amendment sim- Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, will the gen- ment with the gentleman from New ply proposed that there would be some tleman yield? Mexico [Mr. SKEEN] and others on the kind of rulemaking to make sure that Mr. ROBERTS. I yield to the gen- committee. I am quite confident of the there would be an open process as we tleman from Wisconsin. total package. July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H 7021 I see no further use to discuss this at differences, everyone be on equal foot- After the period on page 3, line 7 insert the this time unless the gentleman from ing, no one with special promises, ev- following: ‘‘All points of order are waived New Mexico has a question or the dis- eryone working basically with a plain against the amendment numbered 1 printed tinguished gentleman from California. white canvas with the same set of in the Congressional Record of July 10, 1995 pursuant to clause 6 of rule XXIII, to be of- Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I simply paints to get to a finished product on fered by Representative Brewster or his des- would like to say that this is a new this legislation. ignee.’’ day. We have seen tremendous coopera- b 1630 Mr. HALL of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, if tion between the authorizing commit- This is not a delay in any sense. In there are no further requests for time tee and the appropriations subcommit- from my colleague, I yield back the tee that is dealing with this. fact, if this negotiated rulemaking process were followed, I think we would balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to my Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield friend, the gentleman from New Mexico avoid a lot of lengthy, costly lawsuits. But again, if a compromise is worked myself such time as I might consume [Mr. SKEEN], the chairman of the sub- out that is fair to everyone, I am going to simply say that this is a very fair, committee. balanced, and open rule. It is obvious Mr. SKEEN. I thank the gentleman to support it. But I have not seen that that we have members of the appro- for yielding me the time. agreement yet. I have worked very priations subcommittee and the au- Mr. Speaker, I want to assure the closely with the gentleman from Illi- thorizing committee working very gentleman from Wisconsin that there nois [Mr. DURBIN]. I have discussed this closely together to deal with the issue is going to be every opportunity for fully with the staff, with the agri- of meat inspection. We also are work- any other approach to this during the culture commissioner, and we are ing on a compromise to deal with the consideration of this particular bill and working conscientiously to resolve this question of the lockbox. rule. The gentleman from Illinois [Mr. important issue, and it is an important issue. It is very important that we over- DURBIN] has one of them. I appreciate But just let me enter a couple of whelmingly pass first the previous the concern, but I think this tactic of facts into this. First of all, 90 percent question, and then the rule, and I urge trying, if we do not pass the rule, of the meat currently inspected in this an ‘‘aye’’ vote on both. delays the process of coming up with country meets these higher standards. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance an adequate solution to this problem in We are talking about 10 percent. Also, of my time and I move the previous itself. I would not like to see the de- let me say 90 percent of food-borne ill- question on the resolution. layed. I appreciate the concerns of the ness in this country comes not from The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. gentleman from Wisconsin. meat processing but from the failure to SHAYS). The question is on ordering the Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 cook it properly, and the Secretary previous question. minutes to my friend, the gentleman would do us all a service if he would The question was taken; and the from Syracuse, NY [Mr. WALSH]. get up on his bully pulpit and tell peo- Speaker pro tempore announced that Mr. WALSH. I thank my good friend the ayes appeared to have it. the gentleman from California for ple: ‘‘Cook your hamburger, cook it; cook it until it is black if you have to, Mr. HALL of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, on yielding me the time. that I demand the yeas and nays. Mr. Speaker, I would like to first of but cook it,’’ because that is where the problem is. It is not steaks and chops The yeas and nays were ordered. all rise in strong support of this rule The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu- and commend our chairman, the gen- and poultry and so on. It is because of the way that hamburger is made that ant to clause 5 of rule I, further pro- tleman from New Mexico [Mr. SKEEN], we have so much problem with that ceedings on this question are postponed who has worked very, very closely with until later today. our ranking minority member, the gen- meat. So cook it. If we did that, if we would all cook it properly, we could f tleman from Illinois [Mr. DURBIN], on this bill all the way along. The same substantially reduce this problem. I thank the gentleman from Kansas PROVIDING FOR FURTHER CONSID- sense of fairness that the gentleman ERATION OF H.R. 1977, DEPART- [Mr. ROBERTS], the gentleman from from Illinois [Mr. DURBIN] presented MENT OF THE INTERIOR AND New Mexico [Mr. SKEEN], the gen- last year, the gentleman from New RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIA- tleman from Wisconsin [Mr. OBEY], the Mexico [Mr. SKEEN] has reciprocated, TIONS ACT, 1996 gentleman from Illinois [Mr. DURBIN], and we have all worked very closely on and the gentleman from California [Mr. Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, by direc- this together. tion of the Committee on Rules, I call Let me just say, I hope we can pass DREIER] all for their interest. If there up House Resolution 189 and ask for its this rule today. I think it is a good is to be a compromise, I will support it, immediate consideration. rule. It provides for full and open dis- but it has to be a real compromise. Mr. HALL of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I The Clerk read the resolution, as fol- cussion. It is an open rule. I do not yield myself such time as I may lows: think they get any better than that. consume. H. RES. 189 Let me just suggest, regarding this Mr. Speaker, I have no further re- amendment that I had offered in the Resolved, That during further consideration quests for time. I would say though of H.R. 1977 pursuant to House Resolution subcommittee and full committee that I would urge a no vote on the pre- 187, further consideration of the bill for which was accepted, that if there is in- vious questions. And if the previous amendment in the Committee of the Whole deed a compromise worked out, that question would be defeated, I would House on the state of the Union shall pro- would be fine. But I want to make sure offer an amendment to the rule which ceed without intervening motion except: (1) that the compromise does not gut the amendments printed in the portion of the would make in order an amendment Congressional Record designated for that amendment. which would remove the protection I think it is very important to show purpose in clause 6 of rule XXIII before July from a point of order under clause 2 of that the subcommittee and the full 14, 1995; (2) motions that the Committee rise rule XXI for language pertaining to the committee support this amendment for offered by the majority leader or his des- prevention of implementation of new ignee; and (3) motions that the Committee good reasons, because this legislation, meat and poultry inspection regulation rise and report the bill to the House with the standards that have been proposed by the USDA. such amendments as may have been adopted by the Secretary will in fact change I will also offer the Brewster-Harman offered as preferential under clause 2(d) of the way meat is inspected. The meat lockbox amendment, and I include the rule XXI. Each further amendment to the bill may be offered only by the Member who industry supports that idea. They sup- text of the two amendments at this port the higher standards. I think ev- caused it to be printed, shall be considered as point in the RECORD. read, shall be debatable for ten minutes eryone does. It is how we get to them The amendments referred to are as that matters. equally divided and controlled by the pro- follows: ponent and an opponent, shall not be subject What I have proposed is simply a 9- On page 2, line 25 strike the period and in- to amendment, and shall not be subject to a month process of negotiated rule- sert the following: ‘‘, except as follows: be- demand for division of the question in the making that would allow all the prin- ginning with ‘‘: Provided’’ on page 24, line 13, House or in the Committee of the Whole. The cipals to come together, work out the through page 25, line 5.’’ Chairman of the Committee of the Whole H 7022 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE July 17, 1995 may postpone until a time during further ponent and an opponent. Moreover, b 1645 consideration in the Committee of the Whole such amendments are not amendable, a request for a recorded vote on any amend- Mr. BEILENSON. Mr. Speaker, I and are not subject to a demand for a yield myself such time as I may ment made in order by this resolution. The division of the question either in the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole consume. may reduce to not less than five minutes the House or in the Committee of the Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 189 time for voting by electronic device on any Whole. reflects an agreement between the postponed question that immediately follows Furthermore, the rule authorizes the chairman and the ranking minority another vote by electronic device without in- Chairman of the Committee of the member of the Appropriations Commit- tervening business: Provided, That the time Whole to postpone any request for a re- for voting by electronic device on the first in tee for completing consideration of corded vote on an amendment to a amendments to the Interior appropria- any series of questions shall be not less than later time. Finally, the Chair may re- fifteen minutes. tions bill for fiscal year 1996. Although duce to 5 minutes the time for a vote we have some concerns about this rule, The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gen- on any amendment in a series of tleman from California [Mr. DREIER] is we urge Members to support it. amendments, provided that the time This new rule would limit the offer- recognized for 1 hour. for voting on the first in any such se- Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, for the ing of all further amendments to the ries of amendments is not less than 15 Interior appropriations bill for fiscal purposes of debate only, I yield the cus- minutes. tomary 30 minutes to the gentleman year 1996 to those that were printed in Mr. Speaker, the Rules Committee from California [Mr. BEILENSON] pend- the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD prior to recognizes that there are a number of ing which I yield myself such time as I July 14. No amendments printed on amendments on issues important to might consume. During consideration July 14 or later, including secondary both sides of the aisle, such as funding of this resolution, all time yielded is amendments, would be in order. for the arts and humanities, which for the purpose of debate only. Debate time on each of those amend- merit additional debate time beyond (Mr. DREIER asked and was given ments would be restricted to 10 min- the 10 minutes allowed under this new permission to include extraneous mate- utes, although under the amendment rule. Accordingly, I intend to offer an rial.) to the rule to be offered by the gen- amendment to the rule which would Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, the Rules tleman from California [Mr. DREIER], permit the House to debate nine spe- Committee brings to the floor of the nine specified amendments would be cific amendments already printed in House today the third rule providing debatable for 20 minutes each, rather the RECORD, each for a period not to for the consideration of H.R. 1977, legis- than 10 minutes. Those amendments exceed 20 minutes, equally divided and lation making appropriations for the are ones that Democratic Members, controlled by the proponent and an op- Department of the Interior and related particularly, believe require more than ponent. The amendment is the result of agencies in fiscal year 1996. 10 minutes to adequately debate, and The rule which the House passed last close cooperation and consultation we appreciate the fact that time for week for this legislation was a very with the minority, and in light of our their consideration will be extended. straightforward and balanced rule. It cooperation with the minority on this In addition, this new rule would re- was open, it was fair, and it was rea- amendment, I hope very much we will strict all other motions, except a mo- sonable given the importance of mov- be able to maintain strong bipartisan tion to rise if offered by the majority ing ahead with this year’s appropria- support for it. leader or his designee, and a motion to tions process. Unfortunately, despite Mr. Speaker, in recent months the rise and report with adopted amend- the wide open amendment process House has made remarkable progress ments as a preferential motion pursu- called for in that rule, we saw the bill toward fulfilling its legislative agenda. ant to rule XXI, clause 2(d), which is a become needlessly bogged down in par- On the very first day of this session, prerogative of the majority leader or tisan politics, and we witnessed the de- the House passed a sweeping set of con- his designee. Thus, no other Member liberative process being taken hostage gressional reforms. Within the first 100 would have the right to make a motion by dilatory tactics. days we completed the historic Con- to rise, or a motion to strike the enact- Mr. Speaker, I suggest that the time tract With America, often with biparti- ing clause, or any other motion that, has now come to rescue this bill, and san support. Just last month we passed under normal procedure, any Member the deliberative process, from the an equally historic plan to balance the is allowed to make. clutches of partisan delay and obstruc- Federal budget in 7 years. Finally, the new rule gives the chair- tion. This additional rule is offered Now we have the obligation and the man of the Committee of the Whole the simply as a precaution, to enable the responsibility to move ahead with the authority to postpone recorded votes, House to move this critical funding annual appropriations process. I do not and to reduce to 5 minutes a recorded legislation forward, but in a manner have to remind our colleagues, Mr. vote on any amendment in a series of which is fair and reasonable to both Speaker, just how important these amendments that follow an initial 15- sides of the aisle. funding bills are. Without prompt pas- minute vote. By enabling the chairman First, the rule provides for the fur- sage of these bills by both Chambers, to cluster and reduce the allotted time ther consideration of H.R. 1977 for the continued operations of the Federal for recorded votes, the House will be amendment without any intervening Government would most certainly be able to save a great deal of time that motions, except for: amendments in jeopardy. The August district work would otherwise be spent voting. which have been printed in the CON- period is just 3 short weeks, I hope Mr. Speaker, this new rule will help GRESSIONAL RECORD prior to July 14, they are short weeks away, and the end assure that consideration of the Inte- 1995; motions that the Committee rise of the fiscal year itself is just over the rior appropriations bill will come to a if offered by the Majority Leader or his horizon. Clearly, time is of the essence, close in a matter of hours, rather than designee; and motions that the Com- and our work is cut out for us. be prolonged for several more days. mittee rise and report with bill back to While the Rules Committee contin- Both the chairman and the ranking mi- the House with any amendments adopt- ues to support a generally open amend- nority member of the Appropriations, ed in the Committee of the Whole, as a ment process, as much as possible, and our respective leaders, in the inter- preferential motion pursuant to clause when considering appropriations bills, I est of moving appropriations bills 2(d) of rule XXI. believe we owe it to our constituents, through the House more expeditiously, Second, under the rule, amendments whom we are elected to serve, to legis- agreed last Thursday night to limit de- which have been printed in the RECORD late in a responsible and efficient man- bate on all the remaining amendments may be offered only by the Members ner. These are not mutually exclusive following completion of title I of H.R. who submitted them to be printed. goals, Mr. Speaker, and that is the 1977. Such amendments shall be considered principle underlying the rule which we Because the rule reflects the concur- as read, and are debatable for a period consider this afternoon. rence of the two parties, we are sup- not to exceed 10 minutes each, equally Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of porting it. However, I do want to men- divided and controlled by the pro- my time. tion the concerns that many Members July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H 7023 on this side of the aisle have about this bers. We hope that pattern will change contain authorizing language under the rule. with some of the remaining amend- rules. This sweeping authorizing lan- First, the fact that the rule will not ments to be considered, particularly guage is contained in these bills only allow second-degree amendments the amendments that would help pro- because the Republican majority has means that there will be less flexibility tect our Nation’s forests. waived points of order against them, in the amending process. For example, We also hope that the membership and because Republican majorities in a case where a last-minute change to will not agree to amendments that have voted to include them in the bills an amendment could produce a com- would provide less protection for some in the first place. It goes without say- promise that would be supported by a of these programs. In particular, we ing that Democrats lack the votes to majority of Members, that change will hope that the amendments which include authorizing language, to delete be prohibited unless unanimous con- would cut or eliminate funding for the authorizing language, or do much of sent is obtained. NEA, the National Endowment for the anything else in these bills. Second, although leaders on both Arts, will be rejected. They are slashing away at the sci- sides support limiting time on the re- Mr. Speaker, to repeat, despite our entific knowledge on which we base maining amendments to 10 or 20 min- concerns about the rule, we do support sensitive resource decisions, placing in utes apiece, these limits mean that it, and we urge Members to vote for it. jeopardy our ability to plan manage- many Members who wish to participate Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he ment practices to minimize the impact in debate on particular amendments may consume to the gentleman from on communities. will not have that opportunity, and California [Mr. MILLER]. They are compromising law enforce- that some very important issues will (Mr. MILLER of California asked and ment capability even as over 20,000 not be aired nearly to the extent that was given permission to revise and ex- crimes from murder to resource viola- they deserve to be aired before we cast tend his remarks and include extra- tions occurred on Fish and Wildlife neous material.) votes on them. We hope that on future Service lands last year. Mr. MILLER of California. Mr. appropriations bills, it will not be nec- They have crippled the ability of the Speaker, Members, the press, and the essary to curtail debate on amend- Park Service to enforce the law creat- public should understand the cynical ing the Mojave National Preserve, ments to the extent provided for here. and dangerous strategy being pursued Third, and most importantly, fun- which passed this Congress by over- by the Republican majority on this damental rights of Members in floor whelming margins last year. bill. The Republican plan, like this leg- They have handicapped the effective procedure—which are particularly im- islation, is not designed to improve implementation of the Endangered portant to Members of the minority— management of the Department of the Species Act by depriving the EPA of would be waived by this rule. As I men- interior, or even the laws and policies funds needed for prelisting actions that tioned earlier, no Member other than administered by that Department. could minimize more drastic action the majority leader or his designee Instead, it is intended to wreak down the road. would have the right to offer motions havoc with the environmental laws, They have killed the Urban Parks to rise or other motions that are the the resource management laws, the Program that serves dozens of needy prerogative of any Member under the species protection laws that we have communities and was expanded by last standing Rules of the House. implemented over the past quarter cen- year’s crime bill. Although we understand the reason tury to protect the land, the health and They have dissolved critical assist- the majority has written into the rule the safety of the American people. ance to both Indian children and adults the denial of that right, I would like to The Republican majority offers up a to assist their education in public point out that it is highly unusual for new rule, a more restrictive rule, to schools. the House to waive or limit that right. cut off debate and limit our ability to This bill undoes major changes en- In fact, to the best of our knowledge, it learn what is in this bill or to offer al- acted just last year to improve self is unprecedented for that right to be ternatives to it. The Republican major- governance by Indian tribes. waived in a rule. We raise this matter ity claims this new rule is designed to It crippled the Land and Water Con- in the hope that it will not be included make the House proceed more effi- servation Fund by slashing funds for in future rules. ciently. acquiring lands by nearly 80 percent. Finally, Mr. Speaker, beyond our That is untrue. It is designed to Altogether, this bill makes over 70 concerns about the rule itself, as I have allow them to undermine, subvert, and substantive changes in law, most with- said in previous statements, many of repeal basic environmental, manage- out a day of hearings by the authoriz- us have strong objections to the bill ment and safety laws without giving ing committees to see what impact this rule makes in order. dissenting Members—and the public—a those devastating cuts and changes We do not believe that the majority reasonable opportunity to learn what would have on the ability of agencies of Americans support the bill’s deep their legislation would do. to do the jobs they are charged with cuts in the many important and useful The cynicism of this approach can be doing for the American people. This is programs it funds—programs that cost demonstrated by reading a memo, not rational law-making; this is slash very little for the immense value they dated July 6, 1995, from the chairman and burn, shoot-from-the-hip legislat- add to the quality of our lives. of the Rules Committee to the Repub- ing and it is bad for America. We are dismayed that the bill cuts lican leadership. In this memo, which I I know Republican Members will say funding for these programs by 12 per- move be placed in the RECORD, Chair- that Democrats included authorizing cent, especially since many of them man SOLOMON discussed several dif- language when we were in the major- have already been reduced in recent ferent ‘‘alternatives to restrict rules on ity, and they are right. years. What we find particularly trou- appropriations bills.’’ The memo iden- The difference is that the authorizing bling is the fact that the reason the tifies several procedural ways for the committees regularly objected to such bill cuts so deeply is because those majority to curtail the debate and pre- practices. As an authorizing chairman, spending reductions are needed to help vent a full airing of the issues and poli- I vigorously objected to that misuse of pay for an unnecessary increase in de- cies they are attempting to impose. the legislative process, as did other au- fense spending, and a tax cut that will I find it especially intriguing that thorizing chairman. We changed the mainly benefit the wealthiest among one of the Republican strategies is to rules to limit authorization law us. We think that those budget prior- ‘‘Limit Legislative Amendments.’’ changes in appropriations bills. ities are wrong. Chairman SOLOMON notes that, ‘‘The By contrast, the new Republican ma- We are further dismayed that many more legislative policy debates that jority came into office in January hav- sensible amendments that have been are injected into the appropriations ing denounced the so-called tyranny of offered since debate began on H.R. process, beyond mere cutting amend- Democratic rules, only to issue restric- 1977—amendments that would have im- ments, the longer the amendment proc- tive rule after restrictive rule. They proved the bill’s protection of our nat- ess on each bill will take.’’ have made a mockery of their pledge of ural and cultural resources—have not That is, of course, true, because ap- open debate and open rules. Indeed, Re- been accepted by a majority of Mem- propriations bills are not supposed to publican authorizing chairmen are co- H 7024 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE July 17, 1995 complicitous in this backdoor strategy to prevent good faith efforts to change Second Rule—If the above suggestions are for changing the law, and the Repub- their flawed product—by Democrats still not sufficient in expediting action, the lican rules are preventing us from and Republicans alike—that they come Leadership can always seek a second rule to using the House Rules they wrote to forward with this rule to clamp down further restrict amendments (as was done on the foreign ops bill), and blame Democrats block this unconscionable practice. on the debate and steamroll their for the need to do so. Now, as if this is not cynical enough, flawed product through the House. Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield let me quote from Chairman SOLOMON’s The memorandum referred to follows: myself such time as I may consume to memo again. He writes that if his var- [Memorandum—July 6, 1995] express my very deep appreciation to ious schemes for limiting amendments Re alternatives to restrictive rules on appro- my friend, the gentleman from Mar- and debates on these terrible bills are priations bills tinez, CA, the former chairman of the ‘‘not sufficient,’’ ‘‘the leadership can To: The Republican Leadership. authorizing committee, for his very always seek a second rule’’—as they From: Jerry Solomon. kind words in support of our efforts to are doing today—‘‘to further restrict So far, the majority leadership and Appro- proceed with the open amendment amendments (as was done on the for- priations Committee have not taken advan- tage of existing House rules to manage and process. eign ops bill) and blame Democrats for control the amendment process, even though He has described us as being both the need to do so.’’ the Rules Committee has followed the Ma- cynical and deceitful. The fact of the ‘‘And blame Democrats for the need jority Leader’s guidelines on appropriations matter is when we began this appro- to do so.’’ rules to allow for a greater management and priating process, we had a wide-open What a cynical and deceitful strat- control. These include opening appropria- egy. tions bills to amendment by title instead of rule that had the goal of allowing Let us remember, first of all, that by paragraph, and by encouraging Members every Member to participate in this many of the amendments that are de- to pre-print their amendments in the RECORD process. to receive priority in recognition. This b laying this process are being offered by should have paved the way for unanimous 1700 Republicans, not Democrats, including consent agreements and motions, if nec- Only when we had to stay in session the one by Mr. GILCHREST concerning essary, to limit debate on particular amend- very, very late at night and deal with the use of volunteers—an amendment ments and amendments thereto, and even to this process of delay did it lead us to that passed with overwhelming biparti- limit debate on further amendments to a conclude that this was necessary. san support because the original re- particular title. Under House Rules, once such a motion has been agreed to, only pre- Mr. Speaker, I yield 6 minutes to the strictions voted by the Republican ma- distinguished gentleman from Ohio jority were so punitive and counter- printed amendments are allowed upon the expiration of the time limit, and such [Mr. REGULA], the chairman of the sub- productive. Other Republican amend- amendments may only be debated for 10 min- committee. ments, like that by Mr. NEUMANN, are utes—5 minutes for and 5 minutes against. In (Mr. REGULA asked and was given so terrible that they prompt extended addition, the Leadership has not exercised permission to revise and extend his re- debate, including the opposition of the the Majority Leader’s new prerogative under marks.) Speaker himself. the Rules to offer the motion to rise once Mr. REGULA. Mr. Speaker, I think it House is considering limitation amendments Second, let me note that the reason is important that we set the record so many amendments are needed is at the end of the process. This could be done, for instance, after allowing two limitation straight here. We have had some alle- that these bills are bad legislation, amendments per side, with time agreements gations here about what is in this bill. written with a hand on the bible of on each. I noted with interest that among the right wing extremism and an eye on Below is a listing of suggestions for alter- things that were mentioned that the the calendar, noting how late we are in native approaches to restrictive rules: bill does, it was not mentioned that it Time Limit Agreements—The majority the legislative year without a single saves the taxpayers $1.5 billion dollars. appropriations bill through the proc- managers of appropriations bills should make a greater effort to seek unanimous There was an election on November 8, ess—not because of Democratic ob- consent to limit time on amendments, in- 1994, and the message was clear: We structionism, but purely because of the cluding amendments thereto. want deficit reduction. We do not want mismanagement of the process by the Time Limit Motions—The majority man- to leave our children and our grand- Republican majority. agers should take greater advantage of mov- children with a continuing legacy of So now, the Republicans who casti- ing reasonable time limits on amendments, big debt. gated Democrats for allegedly restric- and, if necessary, on further amendments to When we put this bill together, we tive rules and who promised open rules, a title. None has been moved to date as far as we know. Such motions on titles would looked at all the functions and said, are not only bringing initially re- still allow for ten minute debates on pre- ‘‘Where can we effectively get the job stricted rules to the floor, but are plot- printed amendments after the time has ex- done and save money?’’ And as a result ting even more restrictive rules on pired for debating priority amendments of- of this approach, we have a savings in sweeping legislation. fered by both sides to the title. here, as I mentioned before, of $1.5 bil- And no one should be confused as to Limiting Legislative Amendments—The lion. Now, if that includes interest, in why the Republican majority seeks more legislative policy debates that are in- 20 years it is probably $4 or $5 billion, jected into the appropriations process, be- these new rules: it is because they and on, and on, and on. want these sweeping changes to fun- yond mere cutting amendments, the longer the amendment process on each bill will So, I think it is important that we damental laws to take place without take. A greater effort could be made by the note that. public scrutiny and without full de- Leadership to limit legislative provisions Also, as I said when the bill was in- bate. and amendments on appropriations bills in troduced, we really dealt with three They do not want the press, or the favor of debating and voting on these categories of functions: American people, to know what is in through the regular authorization process. The must-dos. The must-dos are this legislation. They want to proceed In this way, the Leadership could reserve keeping the parks open, keep the for- with the fiction that this is a dry bill such debates in the appropriations process to ests open for the visitors, recreation of numbers that appropriates money only those major issues which the Leader- users, keep the Fish and Wildlife facili- ship strongly feels must be attached to ap- for fiscal year 1996 when, in fact, it is propriations bills. ties open for the visitors, keep the anything but; it is an insidious and ex- Limit Dilatory Motions—Special rules BLM lands open for the visitors, keep tremist bill that rips up the ability of could confine the minority to not more than the Smithsonian open for the visitors, this government to continue to manage one motion to strike the enacting clause per keep the National Gallery open, keep our resources, waste taxpayer money, bill and also authorize not more than one the Kennedy Center open for those who or protect our citizens. motion to rise per day by anyone other than want to visit—this is one of our memo- And it is for that reason that we op- the majority manager or the majority lead- rials—and we did that job. pose this legislation and seek to mod- er. At present, motions to strike the enact- These are must-dos. The must-dos ing clause are in order at any time there has ify it through the regular amendment been a change in the bill, i.e., an amendment are pretty much flat-funded in spite of process. And because the Republicans adopted; and motions to rise are in order at the fact that we were faced with a 10- are embarrassed to have their handi- any time after there has been only one inter- percent-plus reduction in the amount work found out, and because they want vening speech since the last such motion. of money available. July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H 7025 The second category was the need-to- believe the bill and the rule deserve to some of the thoughts that we heard dos, and the need-to-dos are to finish support. from the gentleman from California buildings that are under construction. I had to smile a little bit when there earlier with respect to the need to fin- They include health and safety in our was some mention of the endangered ish the appropriations process by Au- parks, and forests, and public lands species issue and the fact that this does gust. I certainly want to see that hap- generally. So we took care of those not provide for listing or prelisting. pen, too. I know of no one on this side projects that were under way or that The reason is that there is no author- of the aisle who does not feel a strong affected the health and safety of those ization. The authorization expired a degree of responsibility to try to finish that would visit our public facilities. couple of years ago when this body was the appropriation bills in the House by We took care of basic science. We in the control of what is now the mi- the time we leave here for the sched- recognized that, if we are to go into the nority party, and that party chose to uled August recess, and I want to say next century with a nation that is on it not reauthorize the Endangered Spe- that I fully intend to provide whatever toes, that if we are to leave a legacy of cies Act. I do not know why, because I cooperation is required to get that a highly developed economy in these just heard comments that this is very done. What I do not want to see in the United States, we have to continue a important, and yet for a period of ap- process, however, is to see policy issues program of science. proximately 2 years nothing was done buried and budget issues buried so we So the United States Geologic Sur- to enact a reauthorization. Therefore, do not have adequate ability to discuss vey was kept pretty much at their 1995 under the rules of this House, we are them in a manner which will make levels. Again they deal with earth- not in a position to appropriate money those issues most understandable to quakes, they did the mapping that was because there is no authorization. the general public who will be affected used in Desert Storm, they deal with Now I have to say that the Commit- by our decisions on those issues. I water quality, the things that are im- tee on Resources is working on an au- think the gentleman from California portant as a legacy to the future. thorization bill, and we have funding in [Mr. MILLER] indicated earlier his con- What we are really talking about in there, in this bill, subject to authoriza- cerns about what is happening, and this bill is what kind of a world we are tion. That is the proper way to do it, frankly, Mr. Speaker, there are some of going to leave for future generations. and that is what we have tried to do us who feel what is happening is this: Are we going to preserve the crown throughout this bill, and I certainly We feel that after the original news jewels of the national parks and for- urge the Members to support the rule stories came out about the kind of ests? Are we going to leave a legacy of and support the bill. meetings with lobbyists that led to the good science? Are we going to leave a Mr. BEILENSON. Mr. Speaker, before deregulation bill that passed this legacy of good management? Because yielding to our next speaker, may I House and was then turned down in the we do not want to burden future gen- just say very briefly I think it is fair to Senate 100 to nothing because it was erations with an inordinate amount of say that there is no finer or respected looked at as simply being a lobbyists’ debt to achieve our goals. Member than the distinguished mem- dream list, we feel that people who are We put a freeze on land acquisition. ber from Ohio who just spoke, but I pushing those kinds of changes in regu- Let us not buy more land until we take would say to our friend from Ohio that latory practices which are desired by care of what we have. Let us not start the reason the gentleman has been special interests and are not desired by new programs or new construction forced to make such large cuts in so the general public, we feel that there is until we take care of what is already many programs that are, in fact, not a very high potential for the appropria- on the books. only nice to do, but many of us think tions process being abused by bringing The third category is the nice-to-dos, are important to do, is because his those issues into the appropriations and there are a lot of nice things that party adopted a budget resolution process, burying them in an appropria- we could do, but we do not have the which requires us over the next 7 years tions bill debate strong policy issues money to do it, and we have that in our to spend an additional $77 billion on de- that have to do with the Clean Water own lives. There are many things that fense which I think perhaps the major- Act, the Clean Air Act, the food inspec- people would like to do in their own ity of us would like to argue against tion, basic labor law, basic rights of personal lives, if they had a lot of and because they are setting aside $245 working people under that law, basic money, but what we feel is important billion for tax cuts, the benefits of law with respect to housing. And we do is to apply common sense, to apply bal- which, the majority of benefits of not believe that those issues ought to ance. Therefore, on some of the things which, go to the wealthiest among us. be slipped into the appropriations proc- that would be nice to do we had to cut If we were not having to pay for those ess, debated for 5 or 10 minutes a side, back severely, such as land acquisition. $350 billion worth of cuts and raises in and in essence have this House make We had over 400 letters from Mem- spending for defense and tax cuts, the major policy decisions with absolutely bers requesting some kind of a project gentleman would have had available to no ability to really discuss those is- or some kind of a program, many of him and to his committee an addi- sues, absolutely no ability to amend those nice to do, but we had to say, tional several billions of dollars which the amendments that are being offered, ‘‘No, we can’t afford it if we are going would have made his job, and our job, and no ability for the people on the to get a responsible budget in the fu- a good deal less difficult and painful. committees who know the most about ture,’’ and one of the things we did was Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the those issues, the policy committees, try to avoid programs or construction distinguished gentleman from Wiscon- the authorizing committees, to actu- that would have large downstream sin [Mr. OBEY], the ranking minority ally participate in that discussion so costs. It is a goal, as outlined in the member of the Committee on Appro- that Members of this House know what budget adopted by the House and the priations. they are doing when they do it. other body, the budget of the Congress, Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the I do not want to wake up after we if my colleagues will, to achieve bal- gentleman for yielding this time to me. have walked out of here in August and ance by the year 2002; that is only 7 Mr. Speaker, I would simply like to discover that only then is the press years away. To do that we have to say that, because the gentleman from able to find out what has been slipped start on a glide path to achieve sav- California has indicated accurately through here on appropriation bill ings, and that means not starting new this is a rule which has been worked after appropriation bill—something programs that would be expensive, not out between both sides, I certainly which we would not have had the abil- starting new construction that would have absolutely no objection to the ity to debate and which the press be expensive, not acquiring land that rule. I certainly have misgivings about would not have had the ability to cover would cost big dollars to manage. the process by which we have gotten until after we are out of here in Au- So that is the commonsense, that is here, but I certainly do not have any gust. So I want to repeat: I am very the responsible, approach, and that is objection to the specific rule and will, willing to cooperate to see to it that what we attempted to do in this bill, in fact, support the rule. we meet our responsibilities to get the and I think we did it with fairness, Let me simply say, having done that, budget issues through. That is the job without partisanship, and I certainly however, that I would like to respond of the Committee on Appropriations, to H 7026 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE July 17, 1995 help see to it we get the budget issues tional Science Foundation does not manities and museum programs, activities, through by the time we get out of here. provide funds to foster education in and efforts in the cities and states of Amer- But I do not want that cooperation to history, in languages, in philosophy, in ica; and be abused by then also bringing into ethics, in religion, in literature, in the Whereas, federal funding serves as a cata- the mix a huge number of policy issues arts. In other words, the National lyst to leverage additional dollars for cul- tural activity—the $373 million invested in which on their merits deserve to be dis- Science Foundation does not contrib- these three agencies by the federal govern- cussed in full public view, in the light ute to the disciplines that will educate ment leverages up to 12 times that amount of day, not at 10, 11, or 12 o’clock at our children in the ways of peace in from state and local governments, private night on the floor, or as was the case communities at home and in nations foundations, corporations and individuals in last week, not in subcommittee at 1, 2, abroad. communities across the nation to support 3, and 4 o’clock in the morning when Do you believe that education in the highest quality cultural programs in the certainly there is no member of the science and math is enough without world; and public attending, no members of the education in the other disciplines? Of Whereas, federal funding for cultural ac- press, and the message about what has course you do not. If you do not, then tivities stimulates local economies and im- proves the quality of civic life throughout been done to people never gets out. why should you attack the Endow- the country—the NEA, NEH and IMS support So if we could accommodate that dis- ments and the Institute of Museum programs that enhance community develop- tinction, I think we could get along Services which contribute to fostering ment, promote cultural planning, stimulate here a whole lot better than was the those important educational subjects. business development, spur urban renewal, case Thursday night, and the public we These are very powerful educational attract new businesses, draw significant are supposed to serve will have been agencies, and I do hope that the at- tourism dollars, and improve the overall served much better in the process. tacks against them tonight will be quality of life in our cities and towns; and Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 thwarted. Whereas, the nonprofit arts industry gen- minute to the gentleman from Ohio Mr. Speaker, I would submit for the erates $36.8 billion annually in economic ac- tivity and supports 1.3 million jobs—from RECORD a letter which I have received, [Mr. REGULA]. large urban to small rural communities, the Mr. REGULA. Mr. Speaker, I just dated July 10, from Dr. Norman Rice, nonprofit arts industry annually returns $3.4 want to make it very clear that this is Mayor of Seattle, who is also president billion in federal income taxes; $1.2 billion in a bill to appropriate money, and every of the United States Conference of state government revenue and $790 million in dollar in this bill was subject to Mayors. local government revenue; and amendment. There is no restriction on THE UNITED STATES Whereas, federal arts funding to cities, the ability of Members to add or sub- CONFERENCE OF MAYORS, towns and states has helped stimulate the tract the amount of money. So I think Washington, DC, July 10, 1995. growth of 3,800 local arts agencies in Ameri- there has to be an understanding, while Hon. SIDNEY YATES, ca’s cities and counties and $650 million an- U.S. House of Representatives, there are some policy questions in- nually in local government funding to the Washington, DC. arts and humanities; and volved in the bill, that basically the DEAR MR. YATES: At our 63rd Annual Con- Whereas, federal funding for cultural ac- money issues are open for amendment ference of Mayors, held June 16–20, in Miami, tivities is essential to promote full access to in every dimension. the mayors passed a strong resolution in and participation in exhibits, performances, support of the National Endowments for the b 1715 arts education and other cultural events re- Arts and Humanities and the Institute for gardless of geography and family income; Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, if the gen- Museum Services. and As you begin your final deliberations over tleman will yield, I am sure the gen- Whereas, federal funding for cultural ac- the future of these three federal agencies, I tivities is essential to maintaining the deli- tleman understands, however, that is strongly urge you to take into consideration cate balance in shared responsibility and these language amendments are pro- the support the arts and humanities have at partnership for public funding of the arts and tected by the rule, we are operating the local level and the vital role they play in humanities at the federal, state and local outside of the normal confines of the improving the lives of all Americans, espe- government levels; and House rules, and that has very serious cially our young children. We are all aware of the budget constraints Whereas, the NEA and NEH have been implications for some laws that are placed in a precarious position because of very important to the consuming pub- and the need to work towards a balanced budget, but we feel Congress would be mak- difficult economic times; and lic. ing a grave error to eliminate, or drastically Whereas, draconian cuts to the NEA’s and Mr. BEILENSON. Mr. Speaker, I reduce, federal support for the arts which, in NEH’s budget would have a disastrous effect yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from turn, leverages critical private support for on the survival of arts and humanities insti- Illinois [Mr. YATES] the ranking mem- the arts. Every mayor has witnessed how tutions, arts organizations, artists, and cul- ber. federal leadership in the arts and humanities tural programming at the national, state (Mr. YATES asked and was given per- has benefited his or her community in the and local level; and mission to revise and extend his re- creation of jobs, businesses, tourism, and Whereas, the NEA’s budget has already in- marks and include extraneous mate- overall quality of life. curred repeated funding cuts for several con- I have enclosed a copy of our Arts and Hu- secutive years and currently operates at its rial.) manities resolution that was passed unani- 1984 funding level, Mr. YATES. Mr. Speaker, I want to mously by the mayors. Now, therefore, be it resolved, that the talk about family values briefly to- We urge you to support continued federal U.S. Conference of Mayors calls upon the night, because we are going to vote on involvement in the arts and humanities. President and Congress to reauthorize the them later in the evening. Sincerely, National Endowment for the Arts, National Love of family, respect for our fellow NORMAN RICE, Endowment for the Humanities and the In- man, a well-educated and ethically Mayor of Seattle, President. stitute of Museum Services for five years at minded people is our ideal and our goal ARTS, HUMANITIES AND MUSEUMS FUNDING a funding level that enables the agencies to for all Americans. You know how im- AND REAUTHORIZATION exercise a strong national leadership role to portant education is in attaining these Whereas, the arts, humanities and muse- invest in the social, economic and cultural well-being of the American public. goals. To that end, the National En- ums are critical to the quality of life and liv- ability of America’s cities; and Be it further resolved, that the U.S. Con- dowment for the Arts, the National En- Whereas, the National Endowment for the ference of Mayors calls upon the President dowment for the Humanities, and the Arts’ and the National Endowment for the and Congress to oppose eliminating or phas- Institute for Museum Services are Humanities’ thirty years of promoting cul- ing-out our federal cultural agencies; to op- three of the most powerful educational tural heritage and vitality throughout the pose reducing their budgets; and to oppose forces in existence. nation has built a cultural infrastructure in mandating all funds be blockgranted to the Mr. Speaker, we now fund the Na- this nation of arts and humanities agencies states, which would eliminate the national tional Science Foundation at nearly $3 in every state and 3,800 local arts agencies leadership role of these federal agencies. billion, and we do not cut that founda- throughout the country; and Mr. BEILENSON. Mr. Speaker, I Whereas, the National Endowment for the tion, and we should not cut that foun- Arts (NEA), National Endowment for the Hu- yield 3 minutes to the distinguished dation, because it fosters the develop- manities (NEH), Institute of Museum Serv- gentleman from Michigan [Mr. DIN- ment of science and mathematics, ices (IMS) are the primary federal agencies GELL] the ranking member of the Com- which is very important. But the Na- that provide federal funding for the arts, hu- mittee on Energy and Commerce. July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H 7027

Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I am sissippi [Mr. PARKER] or perhaps by the in actuality do damage to our national hard put to explain why such a puni- gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. economy. tive and harsh rule is before this body OLVER], he will not be permitted to do Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, will the at this time. so. gentleman yield? This is a bad rule for a bad piece of Why? Because of the rule. That is the Mr. NADLER. I yield to the gen- legislation. It establishes bad prece- amendment under the rules, which is a tleman from California. dence. It curtails the rights of the normal action which is taken by this Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I thank Members to adequately debate the body, to perfect amendments and to my friend for yielding. I would like to measure before us, and it confines make the legislation more meaningful, clarify one more time the time for de- Members to a straitjacket with regard more correct, and more in the broad, bating the amendment to which my to the amendment process, the oppor- overall public interest. friend is referring has been doubled, or tunity to speak and to explain these Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, it is my will be when I offer an amendment at amendments. great pleasure to yield 2 minutes to my the end of the debate. We are doubling It is, all in all, a bad rule, and it very good friend from Michigan, Mr. the amount of time. should be rejected by the House. It per- DINGELL, pending which I hope he will Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, reclaim- mits only Members on the Republican yield to me just a moment so that I ing my time, for a relatively small side to offer a motion to rise, it per- might clarify some of the things the Federal investment, millions of dollars mits only Members on the Republican gentleman has said. are generated each year in our commu- side to have a motion which would re- Mr. DINGELL. I will be happy to nities as a result of NEA funding. In quire the House to rise and report the yield to the distinguished gentleman 1992, the $166 million invested by the bill back to the House with such from California. National Endowment for the Arts is es- amendments as may have been adopt- Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I would timated to have generated local eco- ed. It requires that amendments which simply like to clarify a statement nomic activity throughout the country are offered may be only debatable for made. In my opening statement, I said totalling $1.68 billion. In fact, the Fed- 10 minutes, 5 minutes for the pro- that at the end of this rule debate, I eral Government received an average ponents, 5 minutes for the opponents. will, having a request that came from of $3.4 billion in income tax revenue Legislative amendments which would Members on my friend’s side of the from nonprofit arts organizations, ac- deal with fuel efficiency standards for aisle, ask for a doubling of the amount cording to a recent study. To cut this appliances and buildings would get 5 of time for debate on nine amend- funding would be fiscally imprudent. minutes on each side. Those are impor- ments, including amendments that But there is much more than money tant matters and they were debated in were raised. If I could continue, I say at stake here. What is at stake is the this House for a number of hours at an that because we did have an agreement soul of America—the richness, the tex- earlier time. The action which is being of 10 minutes per side, a total of 10 ture, the intangible verve which taken here is not being taken by a leg- minutes. Now we have doubled that, courses through our daily existence in islative committee, but rather by the because Members on your side made ways that we do not always recognize Committee on Appropriations. that request of us. in the short run. I would make the observation to this Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, reclaim- To argue that we must sell our soul body that fuel efficiency and energy ef- ing my time, this is a little like rape. to pay our bills is downright irrespon- ficiency standards for appliances are The issue here is not how much force is sible. Some might argue that the work something which are of importance to used, but just that force is used. The spurred by NEA funding is not a worth- American industry, and the standards hard fact is 10 minutes to discuss a while investment of our federal tax which are now on the books with re- matter on one side, to discuss a matter dollars. Yes, it is difficult to quantify gard to energy efficiency for appliances of this importance, is not an adequate the noneconomic benefits we gain from was adopted as a result of the solicita- amount of time in which to engage in our Federal commitment to the arts. tion of American industry. responsible debate. The gentleman has But what of our grandfather’s This is something which is probably not corrected any of the concerns, and pocketwatch that we keep always, for not known to my Republican col- I thank the gentleman for yielding, I which we invest in repairs, which has leagues, because most of those who are have enormous respect for him, but he no real value in an economic sense? We pushing this kind of change were not has not corrected nor has he proposed cannot describe why it is valuable to present in the House at the time it was to correct the fact that the amend- us, but it is part of who we are—it feeds adopted. The reason industry wanted ments may not be amended. our soul in an intangible way. Simi- those standards was so that they would Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, if the gen- larly, it is difficult to quantify the not confront the certain probability of tleman will continue to yield, we sim- smile on a child’s face when she sees every State in the Union coming for- ply did that at the request of the mi- her first play at a children’s theater, or ward with different energy efficiency nority. the self-exploration we may experience standards for appliances. Why? Because Mr. DINGELL. The gentleman’s when we look at a painting. These are they could not have meaningful inter- kindness is extraordinary, but it is not things on which we cannot put a price, state commerce in appliances when adequate, nor does it do the things that but are made possible through our Fed- they have to have standards which are have to be done to make this rule the eral commitment to the arts and hu- enacted in 50 different ways, in 50 dif- kind that a responsible legislator may manities. ferent sets of language, by 50 different support. Some may argue that they support States. Mr. BEILENSON. Mr. Speaker, I the arts—but taxpayers should not be Five minutes on each side is going to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from forced to finance the NEA. But without be afforded to this body to discuss a New York [Mr. NADLER]. NEA support, many of the smaller, proposal of that importance. Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise community based arts organizations Let me make another observation. today in opposition to this restrictive would perish. Private funds are stimu- The language of the rule prohibits divi- rule which does not allow us to con- lated by the NEA imprimatur and sion of the question. It sets up the curi- sider fully the magnitude of the chang- matching requirements. ous situation where we may find that ing proposes in this bill. To limit de- When this body established the NEA, two amendments will be adopted, after bate on whether to eliminate all sup- we said, ‘‘The Congress hereby finds no reading and after no debate. Mem- port of the arts, the soul of America, to and declares * * * that it is necessary bers who might wish to amend an 10 minutes, is outrageous. and appropriate for the Federal Gov- amendment to perfect it are now pre- Those supporting eliminating fund- ernment to help create and sustain not cluded by this rule. For example, if a ing for the National Endowment for only a climate encouraging freedom of member of the legislative committee the Arts argue that it is too costly. If thought, imagination, and inquiry but desires to offer an amendment which given more than a minute, I could also the material conditions facilitat- would perfect a rule, perhaps the one argue, with verity, that cutting the Na- ing the release of this creative talent.’’ offered by the gentleman from Mis- tional Endowment for the Arts would This remains an important goal. Let us H 7028 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE July 17, 1995 not act rashly and put in jeopardy the Mr. BEILENSON. Mr. Speaker, I ask (Mr. BEILENSON asked and was future of America’s soul with only 10 Members to support this rule. given permission to include extraneous minutes of debate. material in the RECORD.) The material referred to follows: FLOOR PROCEDURE IN THE 104TH CONGRESS; COMPILED BY THE RULES COMMITTEE DEMOCRATS

Amendments Bill No. Title Resolution No. Process used for floor consideration in order

H.R. 1* ...... Compliance ...... H. Res. 6 Closed ...... None. H. Res. 6 ...... Opening Day Rules Package ...... H. Res. 5 Closed; contained a closed rule on H.R. 1 within the closed rule ...... None. H.R. 5* ...... Unfunded Mandates ...... H. Res. 38 Restrictive; Motion adopted over Democratic objection in the Committee of the Whole to N/A. limit debate on section 4; Pre-printing gets preference. H.J. Res. 2* ...... Balanced Budget ...... H. Res. 44 Restrictive; only certain substitutes ...... 2R; 4D. H. Res. 43 ...... Committee Hearings Scheduling ...... H. Res. 43 (OJ) Restrictive; considered in House no amendments ...... N/A. H.R. 2* ...... Line Item Veto ...... H. Res. 55 Open; Pre-printing gets preference ...... N/A. H.R. 665* ...... Victim Restitution Act of 1995 ...... H. Res. 61 Open; Pre-printing gets preference ...... N/A. H.R. 666* ...... Exclusionary Rule Reform Act of 1995 ...... H. Res. 60 Open; Pre-printing gets preference ...... N/A. H.R. 667* ...... Violent Criminal Incarceration Act of 1995 ...... H. Res. 63 Restrictive; 10 hr. Time Cap on amendments ...... N/A. H.R. 668* ...... The Criminal Alien Deportation Improvement Act ...... H. Res. 69 Open; Pre-printing gets preference; Contains self-executing provision ...... N/A. H.R. 728* ...... Local Government Law Enforcement Block Grants ...... H. Res. 79 Restrictive; 10 hr. Time Cap on amendments; Pre-printing gets preference ...... N/A. H.R. 7* ...... National Security Revitalization Act ...... H. Res. 83 Restrictive; 10 hr. Time Cap on amendments; Pre-printing gets preference ...... N/A. H.R. 729* ...... Death Penalty/Habeas ...... N/A Restrictive; brought up under UC with a 6 hr. time cap on amendments ...... N/A. S. 2 ...... Senate Compliance ...... N/A Closed; Put on Suspension Calendar over Democratic objection ...... None. H.R. 831 ...... To Permanently Extend the Health Insurance Deduction for the Self- H. Res. 88 Restrictive; makes in order only the Gibbons amendment; Waives all points of order; Con- 1D. Employed. tains self-executing provision. H.R. 830* ...... The Paperwork Reduction Act ...... H. Res. 91 Open ...... N/A. H.R. 889 ...... Emergency Supplemental/Rescinding Certain Budget Authority ...... H. Res. 92 Restrictive; makes in order only the Obey substitute ...... 1D. H.R. 450* ...... Regulatory Moratorium ...... H. Res. 93 Restrictive; 10 hr. Time Cap on amendments; Pre-printing gets preference ...... N/A. H.R. 1022* ...... Risk Assessment ...... H. Res. 96 Restrictive; 10 hr. Time Cap on amendments ...... N/A. H.R. 926* ...... Regulatory Flexibility ...... H. Res. 100 Open ...... N/A. H.R. 925* ...... Private Property Protection Act ...... H. Res. 101 Restrictive; 12 hr. time cap on amendments; Requires Members to pre-print their amend- 1D. ments in the Record prior to the bill’s consideration for amendment, waives germane- ness and budget act points of order as well as points of order concerning appropriating on a legislative bill against the committee substitute used as base text. H.R. 1058* ...... Securities Litigation Reform Act ...... H. Res. 105 Restrictive; 8 hr. time cap on amendments; Pre-printing gets preference; Makes in order 1D. the Wyden amendment and waives germaneness against it. H.R. 988* ...... The Attorney Accountability Act of 1995 ...... H. Res. 104 Restrictive; 7 hr. time cap on amendments; Pre-printing gets preference ...... N/A. H.R. 956* ...... Product Liability and Legal Reform Act ...... H. Res. 109 Restrictive; makes in order only 15 germane amendments and denies 64 germane amend- 8D; 7R. ments from being considered. H.R. 1158 ...... Making Emergency Supplemental Appropriations and Rescissions ...... H. Res. 115 Restrictive; Combines emergency H.R. 1158 & nonemergency 1159 and strikes the abortion N/A. provision; makes in order only pre-printed amendments that include offsets within the same chapter (deeper cuts in programs already cut); waives points of order against three amendments; waives cl 2 of rule XXI against the bill, cl 2, XXI and cl 7 of rule XVI against the substitute; waives cl 2(e) od rule XXI against the amendments in the Record; 10 hr time cap on amendments. 30 minutes debate on each amendment. H.J. Res. 73* ...... Term Limits ...... H. Res. 116 Restrictive; Makes in order only 4 amendments considered under a ‘‘Queen of the Hill’’ pro- 1D; 3R cedure and denies 21 germane amendments from being considered. H.R. 4* ...... Welfare Reform ...... H. Res. 119 Restrictive; Makes in order only 31 perfecting amendments and two substitutes; Denies 130 5D; 26R germane amendments from being considered; The substitutes are to be considered under a ‘‘Queen of the Hill’’ procedure; All points of order are waived against the amendments. H.R. 1271* ...... Family Privacy Act ...... H. Res. 125 Open ...... N/A H.R. 660* ...... Housing for Older Persons Act ...... H. Res. 126 Open ...... N/A H.R. 1215* ...... The Contract With America Tax Relief Act of 1995 ...... H. Res. 129 Restrictive; Self Executes language that makes tax cuts contingent on the adoption of a 1D balanced budget plan and strikes section 3006. Makes in order only one substitute. Waives all points of order against the bill, substitute made in order as original text and Gephardt substitute. H.R. 483 ...... Medicare Select Extension ...... H. Res. 130 Restrictive; waives cl 2(1)(6) of rule XI against the bill; makes H.R. 1391 in order as origi- 1D nal text; makes in order only the Dingell substitute; allows Commerce Committee to file a report on the bill at any time. H.R. 655 ...... Hydrogen Future Act ...... H. Res. 136 Open ...... N/A. H.R. 1361 ...... Coast Guard Authorization ...... H. Res. 139 Open; waives sections 302(f) and 308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act against the bill’s N/A. consideration and the committee substitute; waives cl 5(a) of rule XXI against the com- mittee substitute. H.R. 961 ...... Clean Water Act ...... H. Res. 140 Open; pre-printing gets preference; waives sections 302(f) and 602(b) of the Budget Act N/A. against the bill’s consideration; waives cl 7 of rule XVI, cl 5(a) of rule XXI and section 302(f) of the Budget Act against the committee substitute. Makes in order Shuster sub- stitute as first order of business. H.R. 535 ...... Corning National Fish Hatchery Conveyance Act ...... H. Res. 144 Open ...... N/A. H.R. 584 ...... Conveyance of the Fairport National Fish Hatchery to the State of H. Res. 145 Open ...... N/A. Iowa. H.R. 614 ...... Conveyance of the New London National Fish Hatchery Production H. Res. 146 Open ...... N/A Facility. H. Con. Res. 67 ...... Budget Resolution ...... H. Res. 149 Restrictive; Makes in order 4 substitutes under regular order; Gephardt, Neumann/Solomon, 3D; 1R Payne/Owens, President’s Budget if printed in Record on 5/17/95; waives all points of order against substitutes and concurrent resolution; suspends application of Rule XLIX with respect to the resolution; self-executes Agriculture language. H.R. 1561 ...... American Overseas Interests Act of 1995 ...... H. Res. 155 Restrictive; Requires amendments to be printed in the Record prior to their consideration; N/A 10 hr. time cap; waives cl 2(1)(6) of rule XI against the bill’s consideration; Also waives sections 302(f), 303(a), 308(a) and 402(a) against the bill’s consideration and the com- mittee amendment in order as original text; waives cl 5(a) of rule XXI against the amendment; amendment consideration is closed at 2:30 p.m. on May 25, 1995. Self-exe- cutes provision which removes section 2210 from the bill. This was done at the request of the Budget Committee. H.R. 1530 ...... National Defense Authorization Act FY 1996 ...... H. Res. 164 Restrictive; Makes in order only the amendments printed in the report; waives all points of 36R; 18D; 2 order against the bill, substitute and amendments printed in the report. Gives the Chair- Bipartisan man en bloc authority. Self-executes a provision which strikes section 807 of the bill; provides for an additional 30 min. of debate on Nunn-Lugar section; Allows Mr. Clinger to offer a modification of his amendment with the concurrence of Ms. Collins. H.R. 1817 ...... Military Construction Appropriations; FY 1996 ...... H. Res. 167 Open; waives cl. 2 and cl. 6 of rule XXI against the bill; 1 hr. general debate; Uses House ...... passed budget numbers as threshold for spending amounts pending passage of Budget. H.R. 1854 ...... Legislative Branch Appropriations ...... H. Res. 169 Restrictive; Makes in order only 11 amendments; waives sections 302(f) and 308(a) of the 5R; 4D; 2 Budget Act against the bill and cl. 2 and cl. 6 of rule XXI against the bill. All points of Bipartisan order are waived against the amendments. H.R. 1868 ...... Foreign Operations Appropriations ...... H. Res. 170 Open; waives cl. 2, cl. 5(b), and cl. 6 of rule XXI against the bill; makes in order the Gil- N/A man amendments as first order of business; waives all points of order against the amendments; if adopted they will be considered as original text; waives cl. 2 of rule XXI against the amendments printed in the report. Pre-printing gets priority (Hall) (Menendez) (Goss) (Smith, NJ). H.R. 1905 ...... Energy & Water Appropriations ...... H. Res. 171 Open; waives cl. 2 and cl. 6 of rule XXI against the bill; makes in order the Shuster N/A amendment as the first order of business; waives all points of order against the amend- ment; if adopted it will be considered as original text. Pre-printing gets priority. H.J. Res. 79 ...... Constitutional Amendment to Permit Congress and States to Prohibit H. Res. 173 Closed; provides one hour of general debate and one motion to recommit with or without N/A the Physical Desecration of the American Flag. instructions; if there are instructions, the MO is debatable for 1 hr. H.R. 1944 ...... Recissions Bill ...... H. Res. 175 Restrictive; Provides for consideration of the bill in the House; Permits the Chairman of the N/A Appropriations Committee to offer one amendment which is unamendable; waives all points of order against the amendment. H.R. 1868 (2nd rule) ...... Foreign Operations Appropriations ...... H. Res. 177 Restrictive; Provides for further consideration of the bill; makes in order only the four ...... amendments printed in the rules report (20 min each). Waives all points of order against the amendments; Prohibits intervening motions in the Committee of the Whole; Provides for an automatic rise and report following the disposition of the amendments. July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H 7029 FLOOR PROCEDURE IN THE 104TH CONGRESS; COMPILED BY THE RULES COMMITTEE DEMOCRATS—Continued

Amendments Bill No. Title Resolution No. Process used for floor consideration in order

H.R. 1977 *Rule Defeated* . Interior Appropriations ...... H. Res. 185 Open; waives sections 302(f) and 308(a) of the Budget Act and cl 2 and cl 6 of rule XXI; N/A provides that the bill be read by title; waives all points of order against the Tauzin amendment; self-executes Budget Committee amendment; waives cl 2(e) of rule XXI against amendments to the bill; Pre-printing gets priority. H.R. 1977 ...... Interior Appropriations ...... H.Res. 187 Open; waives sections 302(f), 306 and 308(e) of the Budget Act; waives clauses 2 and 6 N/A of rule XXI against provisions in the bill; waives all points of order against the Tauzin amendment; provides that the bill be read by title; self-executes Budget Committee amendment and makes NEA funding subject to House passed authorization; waives cl 2(e) of rule XXI against the amendments to the bill; Pre-printing gets priority. H.R. 1976 ...... Agriculture Appropriations ...... H. Res. 188 Open; waives clauses 2 and 6 of rule XXI against provisions in the bill; provides that the N/A bill be read by title; Makes Skeen amendment first order of business, if adopted the amendment will be considered as base text (10 min.); Pre-printing gets priority. H.R. 1977 (3rd rule) ...... Interior Appropriations ...... H. Res. 189 Restrictive; provides for the further consideration of the bill; allows only amendments pre- ...... printed before July 14th to be considered; limits motions to rise. * Contract Bills, 67% restrictive; 33% open. ** All legislation, 62% restrictive; 38% open. *** Restrictive rules are those which limit the number of amendments which can be offered, and include so called modified open and modified closed rules as well as completely closed rules and rules providing for consideration in the House as opposed to the Committee of the Whole. This definition of restrictive rule is taken from the Republican chart of resolutions reported from the Rules Committee in the 103rd Congress. **** Not included in this chart are three bills which should have been placed on the Suspension Calendar. H.R. 101, H.R. 400, H.R. 440.

Mr. BEILENSON. Mr. Speaker, I who can stand up and argue these de- with this bill, such as funding for the yield the balance of my time to the bates. arts and humanities, deserve additional gentleman from California [Mr. MIL- time on the floor for debate. As I have b 1730 LER]. said, we have doubled the amount of The Speaker pro tempore. The gen- That is open and free debate. This time on that. This amendment was de- tleman from California [Mr. MILLER] is rule is not about open and free debate. veloped in close consultation and co- recognized for 2 minutes. This rule is about closing down debate operation with the minority and I urge Mr. MILLER of California. Mr. so you do not have to answer the hard my colleagues to support this fair and Speaker, I thank the gentleman for questions. straightforward amendment. yielding. Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman Mr. Speaker, I would ask my col- myself such time as I may consume. from California [Mr. BEILENSON] leagues to oppose this rule. It was said Mr. Speaker, we did hear from my Mr. BEILENSON. Mr. Speaker, we by the gentleman from California in friend from Woodland Hills that there have no time over here. If we did, I his opening statement that this rule is support of this rule. I guess I am would have recognized myself and was here to rescue this important bill speaking for the leadership on both would have joined in support of the from Democratic tactics. Let me just sides of the aisle in stating that there amendment which we are pleased that say on last Thursday we had 14 amend- is strong support for this rule. the gentleman is offering. We ask for ments offered on the floor of the House, I hope that we can pass it. its support. 8 of which were Republican amend- AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. DREIER Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, that is ments. The total time for Democratic Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I offer an the reason that I was very careful in debate on those amendments was 31⁄2 amendment. maintaining time over here so that I hours. We spent over 2 hours just on The Clerk read as follows: would get those wonderful words from the Gilchrest amendment alone, the the distinguished minority manager of Gilchrest amendment, which was to re- Amendment offered by Mr. DREIER: Page 2, line 13, insert the following after this rule. move legislation from this appropria- the period: Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance tions bill dealing with the use of volun- ‘‘Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, of my time, and I move the previous teers in the environmental field by the the following amendments (identified by nu- question on the amendment and on the National Biological Survey. merical designation pursuant to clause 5 of resolution. So most of the time was in fact spent rule XXIII) shall be debatable for 20 minutes The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without trying to figure out how to remove leg- equally divided and controlled by the pro- objection, the previous question is or- islation that was unacceptable both to ponent and an opponent: the amendments dered on the amendment and on the numbered 11, 31, 40, 41, 57, 61, 65, 66, and 72. Republicans and to Democrats. But be- resolution. cause of that debate, we now see that The amendment numbered 57 is hereby modi- fied to insert on page 94 after line 24.’’. There was no objection. all of a sudden debate on this bill, on The question is on the amendment issues ranging from endangered species The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. offered by the gentleman from Califor- SHAYS). The gentleman from California to the National Endowment for the nia [Mr. DREIER]. Arts, are now collapsed into 20 minutes [Mr. DREIER] has 15 minutes remaining The amendment was agreed to. or 10 minutes on these most important on the amendment and the rule. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The issues. Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield question is on the resolution, as This is clearly a gift to those who do myself such time as I may consume. amended. not want to take the heat for the pol- Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned in my The question was taken; and the icy considerations that they want to opening statement and in response to Speaker pro tempore announced that have this bill enact. They do not want statements from the gentleman from the ayes appeared to have it. to take the heat for the changes in the New York [Mr. NADLER] and the gen- Mr. MILLER of California. Mr. law. If you can get this down so later tleman from Michigan [Mr. DINGELL], Speaker, I object to the vote on the tonight at 10 or 11 o’clock at night we this amendment would simply permit ground that a quorum is not present are spending 10 minutes a side to de- the House to debate a specific group of and make the point of order that a bate these issues, then you can go on 9 amendments for up to 20 minutes quorum is not present. about your business. each, rather than the 10 minutes pro- The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu- It is the wrong way to legislate. The vided for under the pending rule. ant to clause 5, rule I, further proceed- House deserves better, the members of Debate time on these amendments ings on this motion will be postponed the authorizing committees who are shall be equally divided and controlled until 6 p.m. disenfranchised by this effort deserve between the proponent and an oppo- The point of no quorum is considered better, and the American people de- nent. As the new rule already stipu- as withdrawn. serve better about these kinds of major lates, the amendments shall be consid- f changes being presented to us now, in ered as read, are not subject to amend- as restrictive a rule essentially as you ment or to a demand for a division of PERMISSION FOR SUNDRY COM- can have, which is to offer you the the question. MITTEES AND THEIR SUB- minimum time per side as opposed to Mr. Speaker, as I was saying earlier, COMMITTEES TO SIT TODAY the minimum time you have under the we are offering this amendment in a DURING THE 5-MINUTE RULE 5-minute rule for the Members of the spirit of bipartisanship, recognizing Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I ask House, which is 5 minutes per Member that certain issues that are associated unanimous consent that the following H 7030 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE July 17, 1995 committees and their subcommittees The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there The text of the amendment is as fol- be permitted to sit today while the objection to the request of the gen- lows: House is meeting in the Committee of tleman from Ohio? Amendment offered by Mr. BASS: Page 47, the Whole House under the 5-minute There was no objection. line 25, insert before the period the follow- rule. The Committee on Government f ing: Reform and Oversight, the Committee ‘‘: Provided: That the Forest Service shall on the Judiciary, and the Committee DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR make a priority emergency purchase of the on Resources. AND RELATED AGENCIES APPRO- Bretton Woods tract within the White Moun- tain National Forest in New Hampshire.’’ It is my understanding that the mi- PRIATIONS ACT, 1996 nority has been consulted and that The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu- The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursu- there is no objection to these requests. ant to House Resolution 187 and rule ant to House Resolution 189, the gen- The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there XXIII, the Chair declares the House in tleman from New Hampshire [Mr. objection to the request of the gen- the Committee of the Whole House on BASS] will be recognized for 5 minutes, tleman from California? the State of the Union for the further and a Member opposed will be recog- Mr. BEILENSON. Mr. Speaker, re- consideration of the bill, H.R. 1977. nized for 5 minutes. serving the right to object, I shall not The Chair recognizes the gentleman object, we have been advised that the b 1804 from New Hampshire [Mr. BASS]. Democratic leadership has been con- IN THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE Mr. BASS. Mr. Chairman, I yield my- sulted and has no objection to the re- Accordingly, the House resolved it- self such time as I may consume. quest. self into the Committee of the Whole Mr. Chairman, I understand that this Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reserva- House on the State of the Union for the amendment is subject to a point of tion of objection. further consideration of the bill (H.R. order and I plan to withdraw it shortly. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there 1977) making appropriations for the De- However, I would like to enter into a objection to the request of the gen- partment of the Interior and related very brief colloquy with the chairman tleman from California? agencies for the fiscal year ending Sep- of the Subcommittee on the Interior of There was no objection. tember 30, 1996, and for other purposes, the Committee on Appropriations. f with Mr. SHAYS (Chairman pro tem- Is this acceptable to the gentleman from Ohio? RECESS pore) in the chair. The Clerk read the title of the bill. Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, if the The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu- The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. When gentleman will yield, yes, it is. We do ant to clause 12, rule I, the Chair de- the Committee of the Whole rose on object to the amendment, but I think clares the House in recess until 6 p.m. Thursday, July 12, 1995, title II was the colloquy will clear that up. today. open for amendment at any point. Mr. BASS. I thank the gentleman Accordingly (at 5 o’clock and 34 min- Pursuant to House Resolution 189, very much. utes p.m.), the House stood in recess further consideration of the bill for Mr. Chairman, it is my understand- until 6 p.m. amendment shall proceed without in- ing that certain funds will be available f tervening motion except amendments in this bill for emergency land acquisi- beginning in title II printed in the CON- tions. These acquisitions include tracts b 1803 GRESSIONAL RECORD before July 14, of land which are surrounded by exist- AFTER RECESS 1995; motions that the committee rise ing national forest land and are immi- The recess having expired, the House offered by the majority leader or his nently threatened by development. It was called to order by the Speaker pro designee, and motions that the com- is my further understanding that the tempore (Mr. SENSENBRENNER) at 6:03 mittee rise and report the bill to the Bretton Woods tract in the White p.m. House with such amendments as may Mountain National Forest is the type of acquisition that might qualify for f have been adopted offered a pref- erential under clause 2(d) of rule XXI. funding. PROVIDING FOR FURTHER CONSID- Each further amendment to the bill Is this also the understanding of the ERATION OF H.R. 1977, DEPART- may be offered only by the Member gentleman from Ohio? MENT OF THE INTERIOR AND who caused it to be printed, is consid- Mr. REGULA. If the gentleman will RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIA- ered read, is debatable for either 10 or yield further, yes, it is. I would point TIONS ACT, 1996 20 minutes, as the case may be, equally out, as the gentleman did earlier, that The SPEAKER pro tempore. The divided and controlled by the pro- the money in here only applies in the pending business is the de novo vote on ponent and an opponent of the amend- event of an emergency. This is the type the passage of House Resolution 189, as ment, shall not be subject to amend- of thing that might qualify. amended. ment, and shall not be subject to a de- Mr. BASS. Very well. I thank my col- The Clerk read the title of the resolu- mand for division of the question. league for his courtesy. tion. The Chairman of the Committee of Mr. Chairman, I rise today to express my (For text of House Resolution 189, as the Whole may postpone until a time strong support for the acquisition of the amended, see prior proceedings of the during further consideration in the Bretton Woods tract and its incorporation into House of today.) Committee of the Whole a request for a the White Mountain National Forest. Histori- The SPEAKER pro tempore. The recorded vote on any amendment. cally, aesthetically, and recreationally, this question is on the resolution, as The Chairman of the Committee of 480-acre tract is invaluable to New Hamp- amended. the Whole may reduce to not less than shire's North Country. This expanse is one of The resolution, as amended, was 5 minutes the time for voting by elec- the last remaining undeveloped private owner- agreed to. tronic device on any postponed ques- ships that lies within the panorama of the his- A motion to reconsider was laid on tion that immediately follows another toric Mt. Washington Hotel where the Bretton the table. vote by electronic device without in- Woods Treaty was signed 50 years ago. The f tervening business, provided that the property contains over 10 miles of trails that time for voting by electronic device on provide the area's many visitors with outstand- GENERAL LEAVE the first in any series of questions shall ing recreational opportunities, including hiking, Mr. REGULA. Mr. Speaker, I ask not be less than 15 minutes. mountain biking, cross-country skiing, and unanimous consent that all Members Are there any amendments to title snowmobiling. may have 5 legislative days in which to II? The Forest Service has informed me that revise and extend their remarks on AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. BASS this tract's acquisition would qualify as an H.R. 1977, which we are about to con- Mr. BASS. Mr. Chairman, I offer an emergency. The land is surrounded on three sider, and that I may be permitted to amendment. sides by the national forest. While the land is include tables, charts, and other mate- The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The zoned for development, the owner is ready to rials. Clerk will designate the amendment. sell the parcel to the Forest Service. However, July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H 7031 if an emergency acquisition of this land is not Page 66, strike lines 11 through 15 and in- Mr. COBURN. I yield to the gen- made, the land will be developed for economic sert the following: tleman from Ohio. reasons. I believe that it would be a serious Department of education Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, we have mistake to allow development of this land lo- OFFICE OF ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY no objection to this amendment. We cated in the midst of the White Mountain Na- EDUCATION had a discussion on this on Thursday tional Forest. INDIAN EDUCATION on a previous amendment concerning Mr. Chairman, I include a letter from For necessary expenses to carry out, to the Indian education. At that time, it was the Forest Service for the RECORD, as extent not otherwise provided, title IX, Part stated by myself and others that we follows: A, Subpart 1 of the Elementary and Second- would support this amendment. The ary Education Act of 1965, as amended, and DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, section 215 of the Department of Education reason that we are in favor of this is FOREST SERVICE, Organization Act, $52,500,000. the following: Washington, DC. First, it does restore the $52,500,000 to Hon. CHARLES F. BASS, The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the Indian education. The previous amend- House of Representatives, Washington, DC. ment was a larger amount. DEAR REPRESENTATIVE BASS: The Presi- gentleman from Oklahoma? dent’s FY 1996 Budget included $1,000,000 for There was no objection. Second, it offsets from administra- land acquisition within the White Mountain The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursu- tive costs as opposed to program reduc- National Forest. The funding request is in- ant to House Resolution 189, the gen- tions. tended to allow for a partial purchase of the tleman from Oklahoma [Mr. COBURN] I think this is a very important ele- Bretton Woods property. We are currently will be recognized for 5 minutes, and a ment. What it really means is that this working with the landowners and the Trust Member opposed will be recognized for money will actually go to programs for for Public Land to complete an appraisal of 5 minutes. the Indian children and will not be the property. spent on administrative costs. This property is a priority for acquisition. The Chair recognizes the gentleman National Forest System lands about the from Oklahoma [Mr. COBURN]. One of the things we have tried to do property on three sides and we believe devel- (Mr. COBURN asked and was given in this bill is to get more money on the opment is likely if we are unable to pur- permission to revise and extend his re- ground and less in administrative-type chase. The property would qualify for emer- marks.) functions. gency and inholdings land purchase funding, Mr. COBURN. Mr. Chairman, there is Third, the money is directed to local as currently identified in the Department of no one in this House who is more com- schools only and no special programs Interior and Related Agencies FY 1996 Ap- mitted than I to cutting unnecessary are funded. In other words, it gives the propriations bill. However, the current fund- spending and balancing the budget. I school districts the flexibility to de- ing level of $7,100,000 is inadequate to meet sign programs for the Indian children our emergency acquisition needs, and we are strongly support streamlining pro- unable to commit how this funding will be grams and cutting the bureaucracy in that will perhaps meet their needs in utilized. Washington. However, as written, this unique ways. Brent Handley of my staff is available to bill cuts more than just bureaucracy in Mr. YATES. Mr. Chairman, will the work with you if you have any additional the Office of Indian Education. It guts gentleman yield? questions. He can be reached at 205–0945. grant money for schools and for chil- Mr. COBURN. I yield to the gen- Sincerely, dren. tleman from Illinois. GORDON H. SMALL, Mr. YATES. Mr. Chairman, how will for Director of Lands. My amendment does not restore the Office of Indian Education. However, it these funds be distributed? If there is Mr. BASS. Mr. Chairman, I ask unan- sends money directly to those schools no longer an Office of Indian Edu- imous consent to withdraw the amend- who depend on it for educating their cation, who will receive the money for ment. students. Again, the Coburn amend- distribution to the various school dis- The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is ment restores money for schools, not tricts that are to receive them? there objection to the request of the for bureaucracy. Although the amend- gentleman from New Hampshire? b 1815 ment does not restore the Office of In- There was no objection. dian Education, I am willing to work Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I think, AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. COBURN with the Department of Education to in response to the gentleman from Illi- Mr. COBURN. Mr. Chairman, I offer see and to assure that the grant money nois [Mr. YATES], it would be done an amendment. is administered. through the BIA or some other admin- The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The The Coburn amendment pays for istrative function. And what we are Clerk will designate the amendment. these school grants by reducing an off- trying to do is to avoid overhead costs The text of the amendment is as fol- setting amount from the general ad- and get the money out to the children lows: ministration accounts within the For- and to the schools. Amendment offered by Mr. COBURN: Page est Service, an amount for that general It is basically a formula grant, so a 45, line 24, strike ‘‘$1,276,688,000’’ and insert administration account in excess of computer can designate the amount ‘‘$1,266,688,000’’. $1.3 billion. that goes to each school, depending on Page 66, strike lines 11 through 15 and in- the evidence the school would present sert the following: Balancing the budget includes bal- as to the number of Indian children Department of Education ancing priorities. If money for school- children is more important than money that are enrolled in that particular OFFICE OF ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY school district. EDUCATION for bureaucracy, then you should vote Mr. YATES. If the gentleman would INDIAN EDUCATION for the Coburn amendment. We must as we bring this budget continue to yield, does the amendment For necessary expenses to carry out, to the by the gentleman from Oklahoma [Mr. extent not otherwise provided, title IX of the down and control the spending not Elementary and Secondary Education Act of throw babies out with the bath water. COBURN] provide for that duty to be un- 1965, $52,500,000, to be allocated to local edu- In educating our children, there can- dertaken by either BIA or some other cational agencies. not be a higher priority for this coun- agency? AMENDMENT, AS MODIFIED, OFFERED BY MR. try. We must spend the dollars wisely, Mr. REGULA. It is structured in a COBURN we must spend it on the children, not way that it will take care of getting Mr. COBURN. Mr. Chairman, I ask on bureaucracies. the money to the school districts on a unanimous consent that my amend- It is my hope that the Congress will per capita basis. That has been histori- ment be considered as modified and re- honor this amendment and will make cally the case. ported in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. the necessary correction in this appro- Mr. YATES. But my question, Mr. The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The priations bill so that school children Chairman, is there in the gentleman’s Clerk will report the modification. throughout this country will receive amendment a provision that will have The Clerk read as follows: the appropriate dollars required to edu- some authority providing the distribu- Amendment, as modified, offered by Mr. cate themselves. tion? COBURN: Page 45, line 24, strike Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, will the Mr. REGULA. That would be in the ‘‘$1,276,688.000’’ and insert ‘‘$1,266,688,000’’. gentleman yield? agency known as the Office of Indian H 7032 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE July 17, 1995 Education and that office would be re- I agree thatÐin most casesÐsome money By way of background, this project sponsible for distributing the money on is better than no money. But to cut a limited was initially authorized in 1987 and has a formula basis. program which has proven to work is not been continually funded since then on Mr. YATES. Mr. Chairman, I thank good. It should be our charge to find the agreement between the National Park the gentleman. money to fund the Office of Indian Education Service and the State of Georgia. The Mr. REGULA. I think this discussion at a level which will at least maintain the cur- land acquisition necessary for this brings this out, and that is that this rent level of solvency. route has been substantially completed amendment will greatly reduce admin- If not here today, then through the con- and construction has begun. istrative overhead in the office. In the ference process. The State of Georgia has already age of computers, it is fairly easy to Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, I rise spent $7 million on this project under distribute funds that are on a per cap- in support of my esteemed colleague, Mr. TOM its agreement with the Park Service. ita basis and are strictly by formula. COBURN's amendment to the Interior appro- It is my understanding, Mr. Chair- For all of these reasons, we support the priations bill. His amendment restores funding man, that the gentleman from Ohio has amendment. to local schools which receive funding from consulted with the Park Service and The CHAIRMAN. Does any Member the Department of Education to support the that there is an agreement with the di- rise in opposition? special educational needs of Alaska Native or rector of the Park Service to use dis- Mr. YATES. Mr. Chairman, I claim American Indian students. While Mr. COBURN's cretionary Federal Highway Adminis- the time in opposition to the amend- amendment does not restore the Office of In- tration dollars to fund this project. ment. dian Education, it provides for program funds Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, the The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman within the Department of Education to schools gentleman from Georgia is correct. Be- from Illinois [Mr. YATES] is recognized who provide academic tutoring, personal coun- cause I believe it is important to con- for 5 minutes. seling, career counseling and other services to tinue to fund projects such as this one Mr. YATES. Mr. Chairman, I yield Alaska Native and American Indian students on which construction has begun, I myself such time as I may consume. Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. Chairman, will who are at risk. As a former educator, I be- have contacted the director of the Na- the gentleman yield? lieve it is vital that native students be given a tional Park Service on this issue. Mr. YATES. I yield to the gentleman fair opportunity to achieve their highest poten- I have been assured by the director of from Montana. tial. I urge my colleagues to vote for the the National Park Service that he will Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. Chairman, it Coburn amendment to restore $52 million for use $4.544 million in discretionary Fed- seems to me that this additional the Department of Education program funding eral Highway Administration dollars money for Indian education is well to schools who help disadvantaged children allotted to the Park Service to proceed worthwhile. I think the committee has meet high standards. with construction of the project. recognized that they are incorrect to Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Chairman, I rise in I might add that the highway money chop Indian education, although I strong support of the Coburn amendment to is a separate pool that is allocated share the ranking member’s concern restore $52.5 million to the Office of Indian from the Committee on Transportation that without an Office of Indian Edu- Education. As I noted during debate on the specifically for highway projects that cation, you will have trouble getting Obey amendment last week, over a century affect parks. this money to the schools. ago the United States entered into treaties Mr. DEAL of Georgia. I thank the By the way, the Office of Indian Edu- with many native American Indian tribes. My gentleman from Ohio. cation money did not go to the schools. congressional district contains portions of eight AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. STEARNS It did not follow the schools. It follows sovereign Indian nations, including the Navajo Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Chairman, I offer the students. That is the value of it, Nation, America's largest reservation. an amendment. because it will follow them off of the Although I would prefer restoring the entire The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will des- reservation. $80 million cut from this important program, I ignate the amendment. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gen- am grateful for the opportunity to restore a The text of the amendment is as fol- tleman restoring the money and under- good portion of these funds. I believe that if lows: standing the error that the subcommit- this amendment should fail to be adopted, Amendment offered by Mr. STEARNS: Page tee made. Congress would be reneging on an important 72, line 19, strike ‘‘$82,259,000’’ and insert Mr. YATES. Mr. Chairman, like the promise made to native American children. I ‘‘$74,033,100’’. chairman of the committee, I have no hope that my colleagues will join me in keep- Page 73, line 4, strike ‘‘$17,235,000’’ and in- objection to this amendment and I ing our treaty obligations by supporting the sert ‘‘$15,511,500’’. think it ought to be adopted. Coburn amendment. Page 73, line 6, strike ‘‘$7,500,000’’ and in- sert ‘‘$6,750,000’’. Mrs. CLAYTON. Mr. Chairman, I wish to The CHAIRMAN. The question is on commend my colleague from the other side of the amendment, as modified, offered by The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House the aisle, Congressman COBURN, for his the gentleman from Oklahoma [Mr. Resolution 189, the gentleman from amendment on funding for the Office of Indian COBURN]. Florida [Mr. STEARNS] and a Member Education. However, I have some concerns The amendment, as modified, was opposed will each be recognized for 10 about this amendment. agreed to. minutes. First, the amount addressed hereÐ$52.5 The CHAIRMAN. Are there further The Chair recognizes the gentleman million is not adequate to reinstate the Office amendments to title II? from Florida [Mr. STEARNS]. of Indian Education, and instead gives the Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Chairman, I yield money to the local Indian education programs. I ask unanimous consent to strike the myself such time as I may consume. I Some program areas will benefit, some may last word for the purposes of engaging think the gentleman from Wisconsin not. in a colloquy with the gentleman from [Mr. OBEY] was here Friday night say- Second, I am concerned about the source Ohio [Mr. REGULA]. ing, ‘‘Let us bring the Stearns amend- Mr. COBURN has earmarked to secure this The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, ment forward,’’ so I appreciate the gen- $52.5Ðworthwhile programs under the gen- the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. tleman advertising the Stearns amend- eral administration of Forest Service will be DEAL] is recognized for 5 minutes. ment. sacrificed. There was no objection. Mr. Chairman, I think many of my I filed an amendment which will restore the Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, colleagues know what this is about. funding level to the current $81 million be- I would like to engage the gentleman This is about a reduction to the Na- cause I believe in the Office of Indian Edu- from Ohio [Mr. REGULA] in a colloquy tional Endowment for the Arts. I rise cation and the programs which it offers. I can- with regard to the source of continued today to offer this amendment to H.R. not concede that the programs will be as well funding for an ongoing project which 1977. It cuts an additional $10 million run as they were when monitored by the Of- involves the construction for a bypass from the fiscal year appropriations for fice of Indian Education. This office serves route around the Chickamauga-Chat- 1996 for the NEA. unique cultural and academic needs of Indi- tanooga National Military Park, which I want to recognize, of course, my ans. These needs will not be adequately met is the oldest and largest military park colleague on the other side of the aisle, at a funding level of $52.5 million. in the country. the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H 7033

YATES]. Both he and I have discussed ways, a Los Angeles performing arts Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance this in the past for a number of years, center, does. As reported in the news- of my time. and I have great respect for him and paper, the center received $15,000 this Mr. YATES. Mr. Chairman, I rise in great respect for his opinion. But I year from the NEA. I have here a bro- opposition to the amendment of the think the time has come now to bring chure, if people in the House would like gentleman from Florida [Mr. STEARNS]. this debate forward to a higher level. to look at this brochure. It has all the The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman I know that people on both sides of lurid details and the photographs that from Illinois [Mr. YATES] is recognized the aisle have different opinions on will help my colleagues understand for 10 minutes. this, but I think we are now at a point that there has not been good steward- Mr. YATES. Mr. Chairman, I yield of not only fiscal responsibility, but we ship. myself such time as I may consume. are talking about good stewardship. My colleagues will notice in the left- Mr. Chairman, here again, like the So as I said before, I have offered re- hand corner of the brochure, there is swallows that return annually to ductions to the NEA funding for many the good seal of approval from the Na- Capistrano, the gentleman from Flor- years and I believe that at this time, in tional Endowment for the Arts. I think ida [Mr. STEARNS] has made his annual this time of fiscal crisis, we must put most of my colleagues would realize return to his attack on the NEA. This each and every Federal program under that this brochure, which talks about time, he wants to cut it by an addi- the microscope. the performing arts schedule out at tional 10 percent. The Committee has And so my colleagues bear with me, Santa Monica, is not the kind of lit- already cut it by 40 percent. The NEA let us take a good look at this pro- erature the taxpayers should be sup- has literally been crippled by the gram. Is this program vital to our Na- porting. amount of money that the committee tion’s well-being or could it be reduced This is sexually explicit homosexual will be taking from it. and phased out? H.R. 1977, as reported, art material and it is entitled, and I We also know that this bill will kill reduces funding for the NEA 39 percent am reading right off the brochure, the arts in 2 years, there will be no from the fiscal year 1995 levels of $167 ‘‘Ecco Lesbo—Ecco Homo,’’ series of more NEA, according to our bill. million; a small but timed step in the plays. Apparently, the chief purpose of The question is whether you will lis- right direction. this festival is to provoke conserv- ten to the gentleman from Florida [Mr. My amendment would cut closer to atives and religious Americans with STEARNS] in his attack on the NEA. what I believe the majority want; re- their presentation. The gentleman has pointed to one duce, saving further, saving the tax- Mr. Chairman, I am not going to go grant, one grant by NEA out of 4,000. payers $77 million. In addition, my into all the details, but for some of my Out of 4,000 grants that it makes annu- amendment moves us one step closer to colleagues I just want to take one mo- ally, he has pointed to just one of full and total phaseout of the NEA. ment to read what one of the scheduled them. This is the first of a 2-year phaseout. performances on July 2, in fact from b 1830 Under my amendment, the NEA would June 28 to July 2, they are talking He says nothing about the grant of be eliminated during this, the 104th about pain, regret, self-pity, doom, and the NEA to the symphonies. He says Congress. quote, ‘‘Sex With Newt Gingrich’s nothing about the grants of the NEA to Unlike the agreement reached and Mother.’’ outlined in the rule, my amendment I bring that forward not because it is chamber music. He says nothing about would not guarantee the NEA a fiscal inflammatory—which it is—but to the grants of the NEA to the theaters. year 1997 funding level of $99 million. It point out this is just a small sample of He says nothing about the grants of the would give the NEA only those funds the things that are in this brochure. NEA to educational institutions to necessary for the agency to close its These are performances that are occur- bring the arts to the curricula of door with all deliberate speed. ring in July and August: The Funny school children. Will you accept what the gentleman The amendment also, as I mentioned Gay Males in July 5 through 9, and it from Florida [Mr. STEARNS] says about earlier, strikes a strong blow for fiscal just goes on and on with things that I the NEA, or will you listen to what all responsibility. I think, my colleagues, think are just too lurid to talk about, of the Presidents of the United States we must demonstrate tonight that we even on a Monday night. are serious about reducing spending Mr. Chairman, we could say to our- since 1965 have said in favor of the and only fund those projects that are selves, ‘‘Where is Jane Alexander? Let NEA? President Kennedy was very absolutely necessary. us talk to her about this. She is the strongly in favor of the NEA. President Ask yourself this question: Does the chairwoman of the NEA.’’ Well, she has Johnson was strongly in favor of the NEA defend Americans against inva- written a letter to all my colleagues. NEA. President Nixon strongly sup- sion? Does it protect Americans from She argued that NEA paid only for gen- ported the NEA. President Ford, Presi- crime? Does it shield them from eco- eral administrative support to the dent Carter, President Bush, and Presi- nomic hardship? In other words, does it Highways Arts Center and none of the dent Clinton, all of them favored Fed- do these things that are important for money went to the performing artists. eral support for the arts. As a matter the Federal Government to do for its Furthermore, she goes on to say of fact this is what President Nixon citizens? ‘‘Federal funding is simply a reflection said about the arts, and I quote from Simply put, the NEA has not proved of the community they are attempting December 1969, ‘‘The attention and sup- itself necessary of this Federal funding. to serve with our help.’’ But the major- port we give the arts and the human- In a world where every American fam- ity of taxpayers do not agree. ities, especially as they affect our ily now owes $80,000 of the national She actually defends this lurid junk young people, represent a vital part of debt, every penny counts and in this by claiming that such performances our commitment to enhancing the type of world, we must look at the are an exemplification of Los Angeles. quality of life for all Americans.’’ NEA. I do not think this is. I think my col- The gentleman from Florida [Mr. Many of my colleagues might say to leagues from Los Angeles should be of- STEARNS] spoke about the fact that we themselves, ‘‘Well, the NEA has done a fended. I know I am. find ourselves in stringent budget cir- lot of good projects.’’ But, Mr. Chair- There is no argument here. By giving cumstances. This is what President man, over the years there has been a Highways one taxpayer dollar, the Gov- Nixon said at a time of severe budget great deal of controversy from this ernment and its Federal arts agency stringency: ‘‘Doubling of the appropria- agency. implicitly supports the Highways Arts tion for the arts and humanities might This agency continues to have con- Center. They put the NEA sealer on seem extravagant. However, I believe troversy. This very summer, the NEA this flyer, so we have to endorse it. the need for a new idea has a compel- has been embroiled in controversy sur- After all, we wrote the check. My col- ling claim on our resources. Studies in rounding its support, but financially leagues, it is wrong and there are no the humanities will expand the range and philosophically, of Highways, a Los two ways about it. of our current knowledge about the so- Angeles Performing Arts Center. Mr. Chairman, I would like to stop at cial conditions underlying the more Mr. Chairman, I am sure most people this moment to allow the other side an difficult and far-reaching of the Na- in the House do not know what High- opportunity, before I continue. tion’s domestic problems.’’ That was in H 7034 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE July 17, 1995 a speech that President Nixon made to cent of Americans felt the NEA should dowment for the Arts by 40 percent, the Congress. be reduced drastically. A poll done by which is clearly too large a reduction. And so, Mr. Chairman, I hope that CNN in June said 54 percent said it Therefore, I would strongly urge the the House will recognize that the NEA should be eliminated. House to vote against the Stearns has already taken a beating. It has Let me just tell the gentleman from amendment. I know that there are taken a beating by our committee. It Montana [Mr. WILLIAMS], and I ask him those who want to play politics with has been cut 50 percent already. An- the question rhetorically, he does not this issue. However, the endowment, if other cut of $10 million will cripple it have to answer it, in this grant that viewed in any objective way, has been further. I do not think the House wants went to Highways on July 24 they are an enormous success. to do that. going to show a performance of ‘‘Boys Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to And so I urge the House to reject the Are Us, the next installment in our the gentleman's amendment to cut funding for amendment offered by the gentleman continuing series of hot summer nights the National Endowment for the Arts [NEA]. from Florida [Mr. STEARNS]. with hot fags.’’ Now, on August 14, This action would be highly irresponsible and Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to there is going to be ‘‘dyke night, our I believe against the interests of the American the distinguished gentleman from Mon- series of hot nights with hot dykes. people. tana [Mr. WILLIAMS]. Mr. Chairman, this has the seal of ap- For those in this body concerned and con- Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. Chairman, I proval of the NEA. This is a rhetorical scious of deficit reduction, let me point out that thank the ranking member for yielding question. There is the seal of the NEA. the Interior Appropriation Subcommittee has me this time. There has got to be public stewardship already drastically reduced funding for the Arts The gentleman from Florida asked here somewhere down the line. I say to for fiscal year 1996, by 40 percent. The NEA's some good questions. He asks if the the gentleman from Montana [Mr. WIL- base funding has gone down from $171 mil- NEA is vital. Most Americans can an- LIAMS], in all deference to him, the lion in fiscal year 1994, to a further reduced swer that for him. The answer is ‘‘yes.’’ American people do not believe we can- base of $162 million in fiscal year 1995, to It is vital to American culture. It is not eliminate this program. only $99.4 million in the fiscal year 1996 bill vital to American enlightenment. Mr. YATES. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 that is being brought to the floor today. In the past 25 years of success, ex- minute to the distinguished gentleman Let me also remind you that the funding traordinary success of culture and the From New York [Mr. HOUGHTON]. level for the arts agency as reported out by arts of this country are testimony to (Mr. HOUGHTON asked and was the subcommittee is consistent with the level how vital it is. given permission to revise and extend proposed for fiscal year 1996 in H.R. 1557, He asks if the continuation of the his remarks.) the reauthorization bill for the NEA that was NEA is in the wishes of the majority. Mr. HOUGHTON. Mr. Chairman, la- prepared by Chairman GOODLING and the Eco- The majority have answered that time dies and gentlemen, I do not know why nomic and Educational Opportunities Commit- and again in poll after poll. The answer we are whipping this horse again. The tee. So the NEA has given to deficit reduction. is overwhelmingly ‘‘yes.’’ The Amer- House voted a few days ago to phase In fact, the NEA has given more than its ican people support the National En- out the NEA in 2 years, period, para- share, and we have nearly crippled the agen- dowment for the Arts and its continu- graph, end of story. cy's ability to be viable at the levels we have I do not agree with it. I do not think ation. reported out in this bill. it was a good idea. But that was the Those who believe the NEA funding should He asks if it defends America against vote. be reduced further or eliminated are saying to invasion, and again the answer is Now we are going at this thing again. this Nation and their constituents that we ‘‘yes.’’ It defends us against the inva- It is absolutely crazy. Is an agreement should not invest in our culture and in creativ- sion of misunderstanding. Any pro- an agreement? I do not know around ity. To be against the arts agency's existence motion of the arts does. It protects us here anymore. is to say that we should not support ballets, against the invasion of ignorance. Fed- I would like to feel that vote last symphonies, or theatre performances. It's time eral promotion of the arts does that. week was an agreement. We ought to to look at the real truth and the real value of He asks if it shields us from eco- hold to it. the NEA, and move beyond the scapegoating nomic hardship, and the answer is I do not think the Stearns amend- for convenience of this important cultural insti- ‘‘yes.’’ In major cities and small towns ment is worthwhile approving. tution for our Nation. across this country, its cultural insti- Mr. YATES. Mr. Chairman, I yield I Let's examine the real record, and stop tutions have risen up and been shielded minute to the distinguished gentleman viewing this agency through a prism of distor- from economic hardship because of the from Washington [Mr. DICKS]. tion. Since its creation in 1965, the NEA has National Endowment for the Arts. (Mr. DICKS asked and was given per- awarded over 100,000 grants and less than 40 And, finally, he raised the question of mission to revise and extend his re- have been considered to be very controver- obscenity. Four years ago this House, marks.) sial. It is estimated that the Endowment costs the U.S. Senate, and under signature of Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I want to each American just 64 cents a year. However, the President of the United States, for stand and say that I believe that we with this modest investment, the agency helps the first time made obscenity funded should continue to support the Na- enhance the quality of life for our citizens, by by the NEA illegal, and if they are tional Endowment for the Arts. If you supporting theatres, touring dance companies, doing it, if they are doing it, action can go back as far as 1964, when the endow- folk festivals, arts education, orchestras, mu- be taken against them. Obscenity is ment was created, and you look at the seums, and a wide variety of other programs. not protected speech. The Supreme private sector involvement since that Many widely acclaimed programs began Court has found, and this House and time, the NEA’s impact has been dra- with the talent of individuals who had received the U.S. Senate and President Bush matic. seed money from the NEA, and many rural made obscenity by the NEA illegal. Because we put in a few seed dollars areas of our Nation would not be able to enjoy I know many of the Members on that into the Arts through the NEA, we arts programs without outreach by the Endow- side have recently come to this Cham- have seen a dramatic increase in pri- ment. ber, but obscenity is not permitted by vate funding for the Arts, and we have We must recognize that the small invest- the NEA. It is illegal. The NEA can be seen arts institutions spring up all over ment made by the Federal Government in taken to court. There are restrictions. this country, and not just in the big funding the NEA creates tremendous leverage Is the NEA vital? Absolutely. Do not eastern cities. I believe that if you look in obtaining private investment. For every dol- kill it tonight. It is vital to this coun- at the numbers, they will demonstrate lar spent by the Endowment, it attracts $11 in try and to the cultural improvement of that for every 1 Federal dollar we in- investment from the private sector. In fact, this country. vest in the Arts, $11 are invested from many private sector contributors rely heavily Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Chairman, I yield the private sector. That is a dramatic on the NEA's grant selection process as a myself 1 minute. indication of the success of this part- guide to the kinds of programs that should be The gentleman from Montana [Mr. nership between the public and private supported. WILLIAMS] should realize that a poll sector. Endowment support has helped to increase done by the Los Angeles Times in the Again, the subcommittee has already audience support for all art forms. For exam- early part of this year showed 69 per- reduced funding for the National En- ple, the annual audience for professional July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H 7035 dance has grown from 1 million to more than Mr. DICKS. If the gentleman will Mr. YATES. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 16 million over the past 28 years. Audiences yield, I am, too. I would like to. I real- seconds to the gentleman from Massa- for the work of professional opera companies ize realities. chusetts [Mr. TORKILDSEN]. have grown to over 7.6 million, compared to Mr. STEARNS. These are all rhetori- Mr. TORKILDSEN. Mr. Chairman, I only 5 million a decade ago. Non-profit thea- cal questions. You can use your time. thank the gentleman for yielding me ters serve an audience that has grown to over You worked as hard as you could to this time. 20 million. Symphony performance attendance represent a 2 percent cut as the maxi- We have all heard the term ‘‘throw- has risen to over 27 million annually. All of this mum the NEA could take, The gen- ing the baby out with the bathwater.’’ has occurred with seed support from the NEA. tleman from Illinois [Mr. YATES] said 1 I think that is what this amendment Each year radio programs reach millions of percent was all he could accept. does. Americans bringing the best of the arts to By golly, now, we are taking 39 per- I think some of the critics of NEA urban and rural communities through such En- cent. I am asked for another 10 percent have legitimate points, but those criti- dowment-funded series as ``American Jazz tonight, another 10-percent cut. I ask cisms have been addressed. Radio Festival'' and ``Mountain Stage.'' people on this side to realize there has Obscenity is no longer fundable, as it The NEA's Underserved Communities Initia- got to be some stewardship when the should not be. Certainly, that is tive, created in 1990, has awarded grants in chairwoman of the NEA says it is all progress that has been made in this every State to broaden public access to art in right to give money to this. area. rural, inner-city, and artistically underserved Mr. YATES. Mr. Chairman, I yield But while grants are talked about for areas. such time as he may consume to the NEA funding, most people do not real- Also, support for the arts is support for the gentleman from California [Mr. FARR]. ize far more funding goes to education economy. The NEA's modest budget has an- (Mr. FARR asked and was given per- programs. Consider the NEA places nual generated matching funds estimated at mission to revise and extend his re- thousands of teachers in schools to over $1.2 billion. These moneys permeate the marks.) teach young people art. economy. At least 1.3 million full time jobs are Mr. FARR. Mr. Chairman, I rise in I understand the gentleman’s concern supported by the arts; $25.2 billion is earned opposition to this amendment. Invest for budget restraints. I urge Members through salaries, wages, and entrepreneurial in creativity, do not cut it. to vote against this amendment and income; local governments receive $790 mil- Funding for the National Endowment for the support responsible funding for the lion in taxes and fees; State governments re- Arts is an investment in our culture, our civili- arts. ceive $1.2 billion; and the Federal Govern- zation, our future, which must be protected. Mr. YATES. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 ment receives $3.4 billion in income tax reve- The background material that my office has minute to my good friend, the gen- nue. received against the NEA is tantamount to tleman from Ohio [Mr. REGULA], the It is clear that the outreach and support propaganda and is untrue and offensive and distinguished chairman from the com- granted by the NEA to the arts has an incred- adds nothing to honest debate. mittee. ible ripple effect throughout our economy, and The truth is, the NEA enables struggling Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I thank restricting or eliminating the NEA's ability to performers to bring their art to the masses. the gentleman for yielding me this perform that outreach would be both economi- In my district in Monterey, CA, the Endow- time. cally and culturally devastating. ment has awarded eight grants totaling I simply want to point out to the In my home State of Washington, many arts $160,000. Members that what was alluded to, a and cultural institutions have benefitted from It is not much, but with those funds, the poll, that people would like to reduce NEA grants, including: Tacoma's Broadway Monterey Peninsula Museum of Art and the funding for the NEA; we have reduced Theatre, the Tacoma Art Museum, the Cen- Monterey Jazz Festival were able to survive it $63 million from 1995 levels. That is trum Foundation, the Washington State Arts Prop 13 and an economy in flux. And despite a 40-percent reduction. Commission, the Before Columbus Founda- those financially troublesome times, the peo- It was said that the people would like tion, the Pacific Northwest Ballet, the Bain- ple of the Monterey Bay area knew affordable this ended. In 2 years, it is over. This is bridge Island Arts Council, the Seattle Art Mu- arts were always available to them. It was the a phasedown, and in 2 years the NEA seum, the Spokane Symphony Society, the NEA that guaranteed that access. would no longer exist. Washington State Historical Society, and the The oddity, Mr. Chairman is that of Third, it is subject to authorization, Seattle Children's Theatre Association. $160,000, hundreds and hundreds of people and the agreement is that, hopefully, Not just in my district, but throughout the got a chance to experience music, or theater the authorization committee will limit Nation, the National Endowment for the Arts or art, while at the same time, the Republicans these grants during this phasedown of [NEA] is serving our Nation well. It is important are proposing tax breaks for more than that. NEA to institutional grants, such as for our future, and it should receive the sup- There's something wrong with that equation, the concert on the mall. I do not know port of this Congress because that is what the Mr. Chairman. how many watched this on July 4, but American people expect of us, and we should The majority is right when they say we have if you saw the credits, one of the spon- not let them down. to set spending priorities. But I want to know soring agencies, was the National En- Reject this amendment, and any other why they define priority as meaning only those dowment for the Arts. That was a good amendments offered today to cut or eliminate options that destroy middle class access to example of what they can do with these the arts. Let's do what's right for the Nation, government programs. funds. let's support the NEA. Defense contractors haven't lost access. Also, there are many worthy edu- Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Chairman, I yield Stockbrokers and bankers haven't lost ac- cation programs where groups go into myself 1 minute to respond to the gen- cess. the schools, and so all I am saying is tleman from Washington [Mr. DICKS]. Let's set priorities but let's set them in favor that in the committee we have taken The gentleman from Washington will of the people. The budget bulldozer weaves the steps that have been shown to be remember our debate in prior times. He out of control when it turns over the poor, runs what the public wants by the polling will remember that I tried to cut the over children, runs over the elderly, and now that was described by the gentleman NEA by 5 percent, and his side said we is set to run over artists, musicians, and ac- from Florida. could not cut it 5 percent, we could tors. The CHAIRMAN. Each side has 1 only cut it 1 percent. We had a vote on The arts are something to be cultivated and minute remaining. that. Then we went up to 2 percent and encouraged in our youth. A ``yes'' vote on the Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Chairman, I yield the 2.5. Stearns amendment sends a message that myself the remainder of my time. But I would say, in all deference to there is something wrong with art, that per- Mr. Chairman, this is a very impor- the gentleman, you have to admit now sons with artistic abilities should hide their tal- tant vote. The agreement that was you are saying that you are not nec- ents and be ashamed of their creativity. reached on the rule is self-actuating. It essarily supporting, but you acknowl- Censorship and irresponsible deficit reduc- was done in the middle of the night. edge a 40 percent cut is something you tion are ugly things that do not have a place Now, however, we have the opportunity are not arguing against. You are not in this chamber or our country. to put this vote on the House floor, an here saying restore more money to the I urge you all to vote ``no'' on this amend- up or down, on taking this program and NEA. ment! eliminating it in 2 years. H 7036 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE July 17, 1995 It is accountable to the public? No, I America cannot say we don’t care for I believe, a smokescreen, covering a darker do not think it is. This kind of lit- creativity here. agenda, which strikes directly to the heart of erature that the NEA is supporting is Mr. Chairman, if we ever say to the the universality of art and, most importantly, of wrong. Pentagon, You make a mistake, we the potential which art possesses to unify our The NEA betrayed the people who won’t give you any more money, I diverse cultures. It is true that art often sur- made its existence possible. Would you would sure like to be here to hear it. prises, provokes, and even angers the viewer. get reelected tomorrow if you betrayed Mr. Chairman, today I rise in strong opposi- By definition, artists seek to express thoughts, the public trust? No. tion to the Stearns amendment. As Chair of feelings and perspectives that may never have Sure, you have done a lot of good the Arts Caucus, I have watched in amaze- been seen or heard before. The artists' unique things. But if you continue to betray ment year after year, as Mr. STEARNS attacks perspective can act as a societal lens which the public trust day in and day out, the pittance that the National Endowment for brings its problems and flaws into sharper year in and year out, you are not going the Arts receives. And all this from an agency focus. These expressions can be the catalyst to get reelected. NEA should not be re- whose entire budget is below what is allocated of debate and of conflict, they can be the in- elected. for military bands. sights promoting understanding. This is an important vote. You will While Federal funding for the National En- As we are witnessing from today's debate have to vote up or down. It is for a 2- dowment for the Arts costs a mere 64 cents over the value of public funding for our na- year phaseout. My colleagues, we de- a year, per person, it is no secret that for each tional arts and cultural institutions, the vital so- serve this vote, and I appreciate the $1 the NEA spends, $11 of economic activity cietal role of the artist is becoming more dif- leadership giving it to me. results. The non-profit arts industry alone con- ficult in today's angry climate. On both ends of Can you really say the NEA has exer- tributes $36.8 billion to the U.S. economy and the political spectrum across the full range of cised good stewardship of your public provides over 1.3 million jobs to Americans American society, it is now becoming almost money? Send a message to this organi- nationwide. routine to challenge and attempt to suppress zation. Make this agency know they The arts support more jobs than either the any kind of expression one finds objectionable are not being responsible. Vote for de- legal services sector or the police and fire- for any reason. Art is just one of the many cency, morality, and stewardship, and fighter sector. These jobs have a tremendous forms of expression threatened by the rising vote ‘‘yes’’ on the Sterns amendment economic impact, they provide $790 million in tide of intolerance in America today. These to the NEA. It cuts a further 10 per- local government revenue, $1.2 billion in State battles are becoming a proxy for political dif- cent. That is all. It phases the NEA government revenue, and $3.4 billion in Fed- ferences and social conflicts that should be down in 2 years. eral income tax revenue. Based on these discussed openly and worked out rather than numbers alone, we cannot afford not to fund b 1845 removed from the public viewÐand support. the arts. Bashing the NEA has become a high profile, Mr. YATES. Mr. Chairman, I yield Business, tourism, restaurants, and hotels low cost way, for the GOP revolutionaries to the remaining minute to the gentle- thrive on the arts. Further reductions in fund- shift the political focus to some ``cultural elite,'' woman from New York [Ms. SLAUGH- ing for the NEA would have adverse implica- rather than tackle our society's economic and TER]. tions on both constituents and the cultural social inequalities. Opponents of public fund- (Ms. SLAUGHTER asked and was agencies in our districts. In my district of ing for the arts argue that the arts are a frill given permission to revise and extend Rochester, NY, the National Association of for an elite. This statement is a part of a delib- her remarks.) Local Arts Agencies found that non-profit arts erate misinformation campaign. Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Chairman, I organizations spent approximately $124 million Intellectually elite cultural institutions from thank the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. annually and supported more than 4,000 full- the Metropolitan Opera in New York, to the YATES] for yielding this time to me, time jobs. Los Angeles Philharmonic, receive less than 1 and I have so little time, I want to be What my colleagues on the other side fails percent of their yearly budgets from the NEA; as concise as I can. to understand year after year, is that most im- they'd hardly feel a cut. Direct grants to indi- This is not a debate about any money portantly, the NEA provides equal access and vidual artistsÐthe targets of the revolution- at all. This is purely philosophy. Any- opportunity to the people of our Nation and aries from the GOP, total only 4 percent of the time we spend $160 million in this specifically to the people of our congressional NEA pie. House and get back $3.4 billion, we districtsÐmany of whom would otherwise be The biggest victims of a maimed NEA will make a pretty good deal, so it does not deprived from experiencing the arts in Amer- be the smaller arts organizationsÐincluding, have anything to do with money. It ican society. There are people all over this say, the Atlanta Opera and Center for Pup- simply has to say, what is Government country who without the NEA would not have petry Arts, both of which use NEA funds and doing in this? What Government al- access to some our Nation's greatest cultural perform in the Speaker's own district. ways does, it is leveling the playing treasures. Now, the cultural watchdogs of our revolu- field when hundreds and hundreds of I am sure that the constituents in Mr. tionary GOP, have combed NEA files for a people can go to Central Park and STEARNS' district value the money that the new victim to justify their pursuit of cultural watch a Shakespeare performance that Studio Theater of Sarasota received (fiscal correctness and purity. They have targeted a they would never have an opportunity year 1995) so that it could bring its Write a performing arts center from southern Califor- to see otherwise, when the kids in my Play Program to Jacksonville, Ocala, nia, called ``Highways'', Inc. You've heard the colleague’s district, Mr. STEARNS’, go Belleview, and Green Coves Springs, FL. This attacks on Highways, let me share with you to concerts that they would not have valuable NEA program helps strengthen the some information on this community cultural any other opportunity to. It is impor- language skills and creative thought of at-risk center which the protectors of cultural purity tant, and let me tell my colleagues students, minority, and financially disadvan- have not provided to you. Highways, Inc., pre- something as crass as I can say this be- taged youth. These are the people who really sents more than 200 performances of music, cause it is pretty terrible, and I am depend on the NEA. dance and theater each year. It serves its au- ashamed. The arts serve as a medium of documenta- dience with programs, workshops and profes- Mr. STEARNS, every child in this tion, the essence of the American experience sional training. Highways serves the Los An- country that studies art for 4 years, is recorded through art. Art remains a living geles community, which is comprised of their SAT scores, verbal scores, go up record of civilization and society. Every civili- groups with widely varying ethnic/cultural, geo- 57 percent, their math scores go up 45 zation judges the civilization before it by the graphic, economic, and social backgroundsÐ percent. Can you match that? It is not art it has left behind. Are we going to leave as well as the physically challenged, and vic- your children, Mr. STEARNS, who are anything behind? I urge my colleagues to vote tims of abuse. Highway's programs reflect the going to be hurt. It’s going to be the against further cuts to the National Endow- make-up of its home community, and address children in every nook and cranny of ment for the Arts. Vote no on the Stearns the goals of fostering mutual respect for the the United States who will not have amendment. diverse beliefs and values of all persons and any opportunity to develop who they Mr. TORRES. Mr. Chairman, the orches- groups. are. The children who create do not de- trated, deliberate assault against public sup- The rich participation of all culturally and stroy, and this is the only way we port for American arts and cultureÐled by my ethnically diverse constituencies of Los Ange- reach children at risk, and it is cheap colleagues from the other side of the aisle; the les has made this theater an invaluable school at the price, and the United States of self-described conservative revolutionariesÐis, for citizensÐdescribed by some as the highest July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H 7037 function a theater can fulfill. The Los Angeles lion in economic activity. Arts programs create growth of top quality manufacturing by spon- Drama Critics Circle recognized the special 1.3 million jobs, and return $3.4 billion to the soring the Mac Baldridge Awards and provid- importance of Highways with an award in Federal Treasury through income taxes. ing tax credits for research and development. 1995. The majority of Americans say they want It has provoked great achievement in science NEA seed money has brought private sector the Federal Government to continue support by sponsoring national merit scholars and funds from groups such as: The Lila Wallace- for the arts: According to a recent Lou Harris challenging people and organizations to excel Readers Digest Fund, the Rockefeller, Getty, poll, 60 percent of Americans believe that the and invest in research. The Federal Govern- Annenberg, Irvine, Warhol, and Norton Fami- arts should receive assistance from the Fed- ment plays a key role in fostering a rising lies, the Pepsi and Target Corporations, the eral Government. Fifty-six percent said they standard of excellence in every aspect of our California Arts Council, the Los Angeles Na- would be willing to pay $15 of their own society. tional State/County Partnership, the Los Ange- money to help government support the arts. Likewise in the arts. Opponents of NEA are les Department of Cultural Affairs, and the The NEA is not an elitist for the upper class: overlooking the value of the NEA's role as Santa Monica Arts Commission. The NEA increases community access to the bringing experienced, brilliant minds to the The defenders of cultural purity have tar- arts and culture. The NEA supports commu- evaluation of our symphony orchestras, thea- geted Highways programs which reflect the di- nity programs where families can experience ters, and arts projects of all kinds. One of the verse sentiments of the Los Angeles commu- the arts. I invite anyone who thinks the NEA most important aspects of receiving an NEA nity. So Highways is now suspect because it funds elitist programs to visit the Puppet Co. grant is the imprimatur of quality it conveys. reflects sentimentsÐand opinionsÐwhich are Playhouse in Glen Echo Park, just a few miles NEA has the breadth and expertise to validate unpopular to our guardians of cultural purity. from the Capital. The facility that houses the both the quality of vision and quality of organi- Highways is now being used as a vehicle to Puppet Co. is a two-hundred seat theater cre- zation of specific arts organizations and attack the NEA because it has been a forum ated out of a portion of an historic ballroom at projects. Few local communities, not even all for the city's diverse voices. Highways is com- Glen Echo Park. States, can mobilize an organization that is mitted to a critical principle. The audience is usually made up of children sufficiently knowledgeable in all areas of the I would urge my colleagues to pay close at- accompanied by their families and teachers, arts to judge the quality of grant applications. tention to the principle which is the subject of representing the cultural and economic diver- Without NEA, fewer private funds will flow to this attack. The principle is that a community, sity of Maryland, Virginia, and the District of the arts because many contributors are not in and a nation, can be enriched, uplifted, and Columbia. An NEA grant allows the Puppet a position to judge the value of projects and unifiedÐnot torn apartÐby our differences as Co. to keep the ticket prices low enabling have relied on NEA for guidance. people, if these differences are articulated, many young families to attend the perform- Not only does the NEA play a very valuable shared and understood. Simply put, that is ances. The Puppet Co. is run by four dedi- national role in stimulating private support for what the arts do best. In attacking NEA cated associates who work very hard for mod- the arts and the development of arts organiza- through Highways the assault is aimed at the est salaries, in the true spirit of keeping their tions of international repute, but it has enabled very dream and promise of our united diver- company non-profit. I think most taxpayers the arts to help our children in the inner cities. sity. As spoken so eloquently by the artistic di- would be pleased to know that they support An NEA grantÐgiven to the Bushnell for Lan- rector of the Mark Taper Forum in Los Ange- such a worthwhile project. guage Arts Education for Elementary School les: Mr. Chairman, I know that the appropria- StudentsÐis creating new options in the inner- The NEA must continue its work, and con- tions bill before us will eventually phase out city schools of Hartford, helping kids make tinue supporting highways, so that we can be government support for the Arts. The NEA sense of their harsh world, grow in self-es- sure of properly continuing the democratic needs time to reorganize and adjust to the teem through being able to express their experiment, the alchemical process of self- provisions in the Interior Bill. I urge my col- hopes and fears, and see a whole range of government, and the great debate: where did leagues to vote against the Stearns amend- career opportunities that they could not pos- we come from? where are we going? what ment. sibly see through the adults in their lives. kind of people are we? what kind of people Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Chair- In sum, no nation in history has developed should we be? If the right-wing revolution- a great culture, or a strong spiritual life, with- aries and protectors of cultural purity truly man, I rise in strong support of NEA funding deplore what they see as a culture of trashy and regret the narrow 2-year window this bill out some significant government involvement, values—I would think they would want to in- provides for the reorganization and restructur- not to determine the message but to assure crease, rather than reduce the NEA seed ing of support for the arts in this great Nation. the resources of growth and to stimulate the money which is promoting a higher culture, First, supporting the arts is as much sound competition that produces greatness. Just as promote understanding, and provide the des- economic policy as the Government building the Federal Government funds basic research, perately needed bridges of unity between the the interstate highway network, funding air- pays for a transportation network and funds diverse cultures and communities of thought ports, or paying for basic research in agri- educational opportunity for special needs kids, which comprise this great country. culture, energy, health, or any other area. so the Federal Government must assure the Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to resist Not-for-profit arts organizations, many lever- continuation of those small dollars that enable these waves of cultural purity and correctness, aged by small amounts of Federal dollars, orchestras and theaters to compete for na- to stay the course of over 30 years, and con- generate $37 billion in economic activity and tional recognition, leverage private funds, and tinue our policy of supporting public funding $3.4 billion in Federal tax revenues every make the arts a far stronger component of for our arts and cultural groups. year. The not-for-profit arts industry provides local economies offering both jobs and inspira- Mr. Chairman, if the spirit of this country is $1.3 million Americans with jobs and is a key tion to our people. not its foremost national interest, what is? And component of the complex of attractions that Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Chairman, I rise today when government abdicates its responsibility has made tourism big business in our big, di- to vehemently oppose this misguided amend- to nourish that spirit, who is being served? I verse, beautiful and creative Nation. ment. I believe the National Endowments for urge my colleagues to defeat this misdirected Since NEA was funded, the number of per- the Arts and Humanities provide a valuable amendment. forming arts companies, museumsÐchamber service both to groups and individuals in the Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Chairman, I am op- orchestras, local art leaguesÐand other arts artistic community, but also to the American posed to the Stearns amendment which would organizations has grown from 50 to 900 in my people. reduce funding for the National Endowment for State, with all the impact on the economy and Annually, New Jersey receives $2.7 million the Arts [NEA] by $10 million. cultural strength of our towns and cities that from the NEA to conduct programs like the I wholeheartedly believe that government dramatic growth implies. cultural diversity initiative, folk art apprentice- should support the arts: Americans value the But the arts are not just good business, and ships, and arts education programs for teach- arts. Other great nations fund the arts. We preserving this industry that has grown as a ers and students. NEA grants are made to the spend 64 cents per capita for the NEA. That result of Federal incentives, is not just good Jersey City Museum, the American Boychoir is 50 percent lower than our major allies economic policy. Preserving the NEA is about School, the New Jersey Ballet Company, the spend on the arts. more than money. It is also about quality and Newark Museum, the New Jersey Symphony The Federal Government can afford to fund culture. Orchestra, and the Paper Mill Playhouse. NEH arts and cultural programs at a time of fiscal The highest quality product in any sector is grants have supported projects for the New restraint: Funding for cultural arts programs is the result of great knowledge, good commu- Jersey Historical Society, Rutgers University, two one-hundredths of one percent of the nications, and competition. The Federal Gov- New Jersey Institute of Technology and the budget. The not-for-profit arts create $37 bil- ernment has broadened and accelerated the Foundation for New Media in Hoboken. H 7038 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE July 17, 1995 If the NEA and NEH were privatized, large I have received literally hundreds of letters ing arts funding as a means of assuring that institutions would survive, but many commu- from the people I represent in support of con- funding for the arts was authorized prior to nity-based programs, touring exhibits, and tinued Federal support for the arts and hu- consideration of appropriations. mid-size and smaller institutions would be crip- manities. One of my constituents from South- With that said, I do not think that we should pled by the cuts. field, MI, wrote and told me how much our Na- be eliminating the Endowment for the Arts nor The Endowments provide access to the tion's art and culture meant to her immigrant do I think we should be cutting as deep as we richness of our culture for the poorest of our grandmother during the Great Depression. are. I support the proposal in the other body people. In supporting artists and writers they She writes: sponsored by Senator JEFFORDS, chairman of open the door for all of us to learn and experi- Rep. Levin, how well I remember my immi- the Labor and Human Resources Subcommit- ence their work. grant grandmother taking me for a walk on tee on Education, Arts and the Humanities, In New Jersey each year, 8.5 million people Sundays during the depression, and pointing and cosponsored by Senator KASSEBAUM, the visit museums, performances, or art exhibits; out with great pride the museum (Detroit In- chairwoman of that full committee that author- stitute of Arts) and the Main Detroit Public 3.5 million New Jerseyans view or listen to izes the arts for 5 years at reduced funding broadcast programs; and 3 million school chil- Library in her own language. We’d go in and spend hours gazing at the paintings. levels without a phase-out or elimination. And, dren visit cultural attractions on field trips or My grandmother would ask me to read the I hope that we are able to move toward the participate in school-sponsored art in edu- names of the artists for her since she was un- Senate bill when we do go to conference. cation programs. able to read or write English. However, I commend the chairman of the Wealthy communities will always enjoy the She soon learned the names by heart and Interior Appropriations Subcommittee for his as my younger sister and brother grew older generosity of art patrons. But national pro- efforts to protect funding for the NEA and for grams sponsored by the Endowments dis- and joined us, she was able to tell them the names of many artists and paintings. using our authorizing bill as an original guide- seminate resources for these activities I hope I have, in some way, convinced you line for that funding. Faced with a $4.7 trillion throughout the Nation, in every community. that these institutions, aforementioned, are debt, $200 billion annual deficits, and fierce Thanks to the Endowments, the creative en- absolutely necessary to maintain our stand- opposition to all funding for the arts, Chairman ergy once confined to a few cities is finding ard of achievement in the humanities which REGULA saved as much money possible. expression in the minds and hands and voices is so important for an enlightened society. Mr. Chairman, there has been much name of a diverse people in every community. Mr. Chairman, I am amazed by the mis- calling and finger pointing in this debate over The NEA is able to generate $11 of activity placed priorities of this Congress. This House the arts. As in the debate over the flag, it is for every 1 dollar of Federal funding and the recently voted to build two more B±2 bombers unfortunate that there is little tolerance for NEH requires many grants to have $1 to $4 at a cost of over $1 billion apiece. The Sec- those with deeply held visceral convictions re- dollars in non-Federal funding for every $1 of retary of Defense does not want these planes. garding these important issues. This is not a Federal funding. To highlight just how effective the B±2 is expensive, unneeded, and, accord- matter of partisan politics. That is evident by funding is, consider the fact, that the annual ing to recent news reports, the B±2 may not the expression of a diversity of opinions on budget for the Lincoln Performing Arts Center be nearly as stealthy as advertised. both sides of the aisle. Republicans do not is greater than the total Federal funding re- The House is willing to spend billions on a favor censorship or limitation on the freedom ceived by the NEA. bomber we do not need that does not work. At of expression, just as Democrats do not. The limited funding received by the Endow- the same time, beginning in just 2 years, the ments is carefully regulated. Since becoming That brings me to my central point: That is, majority is unwilling to spend even a dime on the limitations that a great many people, in- Chairperson, Jane Alexander has successfully our country's arts and humanities. These are implemented steps to tighten and strengthen cluding myself, feel that necessarily must not my priorities and I don't think these are the come with the expenditure of Federal dollars the Endowment's grant and reporting proce- priorities of the vast majority of the American dures. The NEA has made a concerted effort have little to do with censorship and every- people. thing to do with sponsorship. to assure that grants are artistically meritori- Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong ous. To assure adherence, if the NEA finds No one doubts the right of the Federal Gov- opposition to the Stearns-Crane amendment. ernment to proscribe how Federal dollars are that a grantee has failed to meet congres- Republicans are trying to run roughshod spent in the hundreds of programs created by sional or Endowment requirements the En- over the majority of the American people. dowment may suspend payments, terminate a A nationwide poll shows that 60 percent of Congress over the years. Congress explains grant, recover grant funds already awarded, Americans want Federal support for the arts. in excruciating detail how federal funds must and declare an applicant ineligible for any fu- And why not? The arts attract tourist dollars, be spent in everything from education pro- ture funding. stimulate business development, spur urban grams to farm programs. Every Federal agen- The arts also generate important economic renewal, and improve the overall quality of cy must operate within the confines of legisla- activity. The arts provide over 1.3 million full- lifeÐthey are an investment in our commu- tive restrictions and the intent of Congress. time jobs to Americans nationwide paying nities and in our children. This is as it should be . . . And, this is the $25.2 billion in salaries, wages, and entre- Some of my colleagues justify terminating way it should be with the National Endowment preneurial income. Local governments receive this worthwhile program in the name of budget for the Arts. This is not inconsistent with free- $790 million in taxes and fees, State govern- austerity. Yet cultural funding costs only about dom of speech or artistic expression. ments receive $1.2 billion, and the Federal 64 cents a year per capita and helps generate As with any other federally funded organiza- Government receives $3.4 billion in income $37 billion in economic activity, including over tion, project or program, the Government is tax revenue. These returns are far greater $3 billion in Federal income taxes. able to fund or not fund art as it chooses. than the $167 million operating budget for the Mr. Chairman, this is not deficit reductionÐ Does this mean that Congress should be in NEA. Perhaps, most importantly, the arts revi- it's a mean-spirited attempt to do away with the business of determining what is and what talize downtown business areas attracting con- what benefits the American people. I urge my is not art? Absolutely not. However, Congress ferences, conventions and increased tourism, colleagues to defeat his amendment. has the right and, yes, the duty to proscribe and boosting the value of commercial and res- Mrs. ROUKEMA. Mr. Chairman, I rise today standards and selection parameters to deter- idential real estate. The elimination of funding in support of Chairman REGULA's bill and mine that the taxpayers' money is spent ac- for the arts will have a definitive economic im- against the Stearns amendment that would cording to its wishes. pact on our communities. make additional cuts in the National Endow- In deed, obscenity and blasphemy are no While I share the belief that we need to bal- ment for the Arts. longer tolerated by the chairs of these pro- ance the Federal budget, we must consider Let me begin by saying that I am truly dis- grams. the benefits of modest Federal funding for the appointed in the events that took place late Past funding by the Endowment of the Endowments, the ability it has to generate pri- last week regarding this bill and, specifically, Mapplethorpe and Serrano exhibits and, most vate funding, and the income it generates for funding for the NEA. Those Members who op- recently, the Highways Inc. grants to a per- local economies. Lastly, we must not forget pose any arts funding are entitled to their posi- forming arts center in Santa Monica, CA, the unique ability of the Endowments to touch tion, but it is a position that should be debated which my colleagues will continue to hear the minds and hearts of those who benefit on the House floor. Putting NEA funding into about this evening, exhibits a clear violation of from their endeavors. a special category and changing authorization the intent of Congress. Certainly, refusing to Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong conditions should be debated, not mandated. subsidize obscene art is reasonable exercise opposition to the amendments before the Today, in this debate democracy wins! of the prerogative of Congress. House to further cut funding for the National As a member of the authorizing committee, It was for reasons such as these that we Endowments for the Arts and Humanities. I supported Chairman GOODLING's bill provid- enacted the Arts, Humanities, and Museums July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H 7039 Amendments of 1990. These strong reforms American citizens from attacks on morality amendment will reduce funding by ap- improved the NEA grant process and allowed here at home, but the issue goes much deep- proximately $1 million for fiscal year NEA funds to be recovered if that art was er. 1996, leaving over $5 million in tax- deemed obscene ``in the final judgment of a It is incumbent upon every Member of this payer subsidies in addition to approxi- court.'' I have long argued that it is the con- body to ensure that Federal funds are being mately $2 million in public support. stitutional duty of Congress not to subsidize spent according to congressional intent. And, This will leave the Wilson Center obscenity as it is defined by the Supreme in the case of the National Endowment for the ample funding to continue to fulfill Court in Miller versus California. Beyond that, Arts, on a few occasions, as I have already their functions until offsetting private I believe it is possible and reasonable for Con- mentioned, the public trust was violated and support is identified. gress to adopt and expand the Miller decision Federal funds were misspent. Therefore, we The House budget resolution passed through statutory language that can withstand have a duty to continue to correct these prob- by this Congress assumed that the cen- judicial scrutiny. In fact, I was successful in lems. ter’s funding would be totally termi- 1992 in changing the statutory standards. Many would argue that out of the over nated. We know that there is a big dif- The primary need for this is to ensure that 100,000 plus grants awarded through the Na- ference between no funding and $6 mil- Federal funds are spent according to congres- tional Endowment, only a handful have been lion. It is time that this Congress live sional intent. This is what we are elected to controversial. And, this is admittedly a good up to its commitment to balance the do. And, in fact, the 1992 Interior Appropria- record. Over the past 30 years, the Endow- budget and reduce funding. tions bill added an authorizing statute stating ment has done well in its grant-making proce- In the well is a graph that will show that, when awarding future grants, ``general dures, and recent reforms have revamped the my colleagues how different the Wood- standards of decency and respect for diverse entire grant-making process so as to prevent row Wilson International Center is beliefs and values of the American public'' scandals of years past. from other centers, Presidential cen- must be considered. Just like every other agency, the National ters, that have been established. The Also part of the 1990 reforms, the Chair- Endowment for the Arts is not perfect. It too Woodrow Wilson Center started with a person of the NEA was given final authority to has had its share of controversy and question- good idea, but became very heavily fed- approve each application and, in instances able spending. But, it has been the role of the erally funded. I say to my colleagues, If when a project is determined obscene ``in the NEA to leverage, not replace, the private fund- you’ll look, 76 percent of its budget is final judgment of a court,'' the Chairperson is ing that allows the NEA to make valuable con- Federal funding, while all of the other required to recover those funds. In past dis- tributions to communities throughout the coun- Presidential foundations are totally cussions that I have had with Jane Alexander, try. private-funded. If you look at the staff- Chairwoman of the NEA, she acknowledged I strongly support continued funding and op- ing, you’ll also see that it is very help- that these reforms greatly enhanced the re- pose this Stearns amendment which further fully staffed with very little money sponsibility of her office. And, we must con- savages the Arts. going out to grants. What we believe is it is time to con- tinue to hold her completely accountable for I urge my colleagues to prevent this from vert this, give it a chance; it has a wor- each and every grant that the NEA makes so happening. Support the arts, and support thy objective, but downsize the funding that lewd and objectionable works of art are Chairman REGULA's bill. Oppose the Stearns a little bit; and encourage it to move not subsidized by the Federal Government. amendment. We also passed more specific reforms that The CHAIRMAN. The time of the toward private funding. I would urge my fellow colleagues to substantially changed the NEA decisionmaking gentlewoman from New York [Ms. support this. This amendment is sup- process. For example, the NEA application SLAUGHTER] has expired. ported by the National Taxpayers must include a detailed project description, The question is on the amendment Union, Citizens Against Government date of completion, interim reports,and a final offered by the gentleman from Florida Waste, and Americans for Tax Reform. report describing the applicants compliance [Mr. STEARNS]. Mr. YATES. Mr. Chairman, I rise in with regulations that ensure artistic merit and The question was taken; and the opposition to the amendment offered which clearly indicate that obscenity neither Chairman announced that the noes ap- by the gentlewoman from Washington peared to have it. has artistic merit nor is protected speech and, [Mrs. SMITH]. therefore, should not be funded. Moreover, the Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Chairman, I de- Mr. Chairman, I think this is an out- policy meetings held by the members of the mand a recorded vote. rageous and a grossly unfair amend- National Council on the Arts who help to de- The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the ment. In our subcommittee in the past, termine grant recipients must be open to the rule, further proceedings on the amend- as the gentleman from Ohio can tes- public including written records of meetings, ment offered by the gentleman from tify, we have appropriated funds for re- discussions, and recommendations. And, the Florida [Mr. STEARNS] will be post- membering Republican Presidents. reforms require the GAO to conduct studies poned. Four Republican Presidents come to evaluating the roles of the NEA, State, and The point of no quorum is considered mind immediately. President Taft, local arts agencies in making arts funding withdrawn. President McKinley, President Gar- most efficient. Are there further amendments to field, even President Harding were re- In 1994 alone, these reforms helped to di- title II? membered appropriately in our com- rect 56 grants totalling almost $2.4 million to AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MRS. SMITH OF mittee. New Jersey for various dance, theater, or- WASHINGTON The Woodrow Wilson Institution is a chestra, museum and other projects through- Mrs. SMITH of Washington. Mr. living institution that is a memorial to out the State. And, widespread support over Chairman, I offer an amendment. the 28th President of the United the years for the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will des- States. I think that as one of our productions such as ``Driving Miss Daisy'' and ignate the amendment. greatest Presidents the effort by the ``A Chorus Line,'' and the Fourth of July con- The text of the amendment is as fol- gentlewoman is subject to very strong cert on the Washington Mall were all made lows: criticism. The Woodrow Wilson Memo- possible by the National Endowment for the Amendment offered by Mrs. SMITH of rial does very good work; as a matter Arts. So, certainly, not all NEA funds are Washington: Page 72, line 12, strike of fact, the Woodrow Wilson Institute misspent. ‘‘$6,152,000’’ and insert ‘‘$5,140,100’’. has already been cut by 40 percent in However, as in the case of the misspending Mrs. SMITH of Washington. Mr. this bill, and the gentlewoman’s of Federal dollars, whether it is in the housing Chairman, I yield myself such time as amendment could cut it even more industry or the defense industry, Congress has I may consume. than that. This is the Nation’s official the duty to search out and punish fraud and Mr. Chairman, my amendment re- memorial to its 28th President. Would abuse. How can we justify continuing to spend duces taxpayer-supported funding for the gentlewoman consider cutting the billions of taxpayer dollars on defense pro- the Woodrow Wilson International Cen- appropriation for the Washington grams that are unable to meet minimum test ter. This center is something for all Monument, or the Lincoln Memorial, requirements while banning an endowment Americans to be proud of. However it is of the Jefferson Memorial? Of course with current funding of $168 million? Yes, I not something that all Americans she would not. know the argument of protecting American citi- should continue to support to the tune Mr. Chairman, the Wilson Center zens from attacks abroad versus protecting of over $6 million every year. This uses its modest appropriation, and it is H 7040 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE July 17, 1995 a modest appropriation, for a very wide The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman United States, a distinguished scholar, variety of donors, effectively doubling from Texas [Mr. STENHOLM] is recog- an outstanding university president, the value of its appropriation. As nized for 30 seconds. and a brilliant advocate of inter- President Ronald Reagan once said, (Mr. STENHOLM asked and was national understanding. Such a center, this unique national institution exists given permission to revise and extend continues the congressional resolution, because Congress chose not to erect a his remarks.) symbolizes and strengthens the fruitful traditional memorial to the 28th Presi- Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, I relationship between the world of dent, but instead to charter a living in- thank the gentlewoman from Washing- learning and the world of public affairs. stitution for outstanding scholars. The ton for yielding this time to me, and I It would be a suitable memorial to the work of this organization symbolizes rise in support of her amendment. spirit of Woodrow Wilson. the yearnings by Americans to under- Mr. Chairman, I think this is another I regret my good friend, the gen- stand the past and to bring the lessons one of these efforts in which we have to tleman from Texas [Mr. STENHOLM], of history to bear on the present. That make priority decisions. I think this is finds himself in agreement with those is the statement by President Ronald a responsible amendment because it supporting the amendment to cut the Reagan. does not suggest shutting down what Woodrow Wilson Center. He finds that I urge the House to strongly reject apparently is a very worthwhile orga- this is a worthy institution. A $1 mil- the amendment offered by the gentle- nization. It cuts $1 million and sug- lion cut unfortunately will severly woman. gests that it should go the private harm the institution. It would reduce Mrs. SMITH of Washington. Mr. route, as many other similar-type in- the number of scholars that would be Chairman, I yield such time as he may stitutions. able to attend the institution. It would consume to the gentleman from Ohio I can concur that it is a worthwhile impair its important operations. [Mr. REGULA]. endeavor, but this is a time for Mr. Chairman, I would hope that the Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I would prioritization, and it seems this is a amendment would be defeated. point out that we did take a $2.7 mil- very reasonable amendment to be Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, will the lion cut below 1995, but part of that taken at this time, and I urge its sup- gentleman yield? was originally designated for a move of port. Mr. YATES. I yield to the gentleman the center, and in the gentlewoman’s Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the from Ohio. amendment she eliminates postage for Smith-Metcalf amendment to H.R. 1977, the Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I ask the ‘‘Wilson Quarterly’’ which the sub- Interior appropriations bill for fiscal year 1996. the gentleman, ‘‘Would you agree that scriber should pay, eliminates paid in- First, I would like to commend my colleagues the Institution would still, with this ternships for college students—we have from Washington for identifying this amend- amendment, have $5.7 million to oper- eliminated those on the Hill—cuts sti- ment and for their hard work in ferreting out ate, and since it is housed in the pends for foreign national scholars— low-priority spending. Smithsonian, its overhead and operat- their own government should pay This amendment reduces $1 million from ing costs are not large, and therefore those—cuts a portion of other services, the Woodrow Wilson International Center's there would be a considerable fund of and cuts a portion of grants and sub- current $6 million appropriation. money for the scholars? sidies, and I think in the time of tight While I believe that the Woodrow Wilson Mr. YATES. I say to my colleague, budgets this in no way denigrates the Center is a worthwhile organization, the Fed- ‘‘If you cut the center by a million dol- memory of Woodrow Wilson, but I eral Government can no longer afford to fund lars, the opportunity to invite scholars think it is a practical matter, it is eco- every good idea. Therefore, organizations from all over the world to participate nomically responsible, and I, therefore, such as the Woodrow Wilson Center are find- in its activities will be forever lost.’’ am pleased to accept the amendment ing themselves in competition with other Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I on our side. worthwhile programs. As we are trying to set Mr. YATES. Mr. Chairman, will the reasonable budget priorities, we should try to rise today to support the Woodrow Wilson gentlewoman yield? encourage more significant support from the International Center for Scholars. The Wilson Mr. REGULA. I yield to the gen- private sector on programs where this type of Center is the nation's official memorial to tleman from Illinois. relationship makes sense. Woodrow Wilson, our 28th President. It was Mr. YATES. The gentleman recalls; Several other foundations similar to the established by the 90th Congress, on the rec- does he not, the truth of my assertion Woodrow Wilson Center, such as the James ommendation of a bipartisan Commission. that previously four Republican Presi- Madison Memorial Fellowship and the Harry The Wilson Center conducts activities that dents—the truth of my assertion about S. Truman Scholarship, do not rely on the strengthen relations between the academic the fact our committee has appro- Federal Government for their existence. They world and the world of public affairs. Using the priated funds to reestablish the homes have sought, and found, significant outside words of the Appropriations Committee, the of Presidents Taft, McKinley, Garfield, support. The purpose of this amendment is to Wilson Center's role as ``an international insti- and Harding? Those are memorials to encourage the Woodrow Wilson Center to fol- tute for advanced study, as well as a facilitator those Presidents. We had recognized low the example set by these other founda- for discussions among scholars, public offi- them as memorials to those Presidents. tions and seek support from outside organiza- cials, journalists and business leaders on This is the memorial to Woodrow Wil- tions as their primary source of funding. major long-term issues facing America and the son. This memorial should not be I strongly urge my colleagues to support the world'' is a fitting tribute to President Wilson's cut—— Smith-Metcalf amendment. lifelong commitment to this type of exchange. Mr. REGULA. I simply say they do Mr. YATES. Mr. Chairman, I yield Unlike any other advanced study center or not offer stipends or internships or myself the balance of my time. think tank, the Wilson Center is both non-par- have a quarterly. Those are nice-to-do The CHAIRMAN. The Chair recog- tisan, and focused on topics that cross na- things. It does not go to the question of nizes the gentleman for 21⁄2 minutes. tional boundaries and academic disciplines. It the memorial itself. Mr. YATES. Mention has been made, is also unique in its extensive outreach to the Mrs. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Mr. Chairman, of the fact that this is public. Accordingly, it has enjoyed the support Chairman, I would again like to make an unusual memorial in that the me- of every President since Lyndon Johnson. a comment on the chart in front of us, morials to Presidents Taft, McKinley, The Wilson Center has already received a and my colleagues can see clearly this Garfield, and Harding did not make 40% cut from the President's fiscal year 1996 is a different memorial, but there will grants to scholars; that is true, but request. We must cut no further. Congress still be sizable amounts of Federal this memorial takes the form that it chose to create the Wilson Center, rather than money going to this memorial, and the does because it was created by the Con- a more traditional memorial to the 28th Presi- $3 million that they requested will not gress to do exactly what the Woodrow dent. We must honor that choice by continuing be needed because they will not be Wilson Institute does. Congress decided to support this important institute. moving. that the Woodrow Wilson Institute I urge my colleagues to oppose the Smith Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of would be a living institution, express- amendment and preserve this vital center. my time to the gentleman from Texas ing the ideals and concerns of Woodrow The CHAIRMAN. All time for debate [Mr. STENHOLM]. Wilson as the 28th President of the on this amendment has expired. July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H 7041 The question is on the amendment fields so that they will not be aban- keep up with major advances and inter- offered by the gentlewoman from doned before their time. This certainly national competition in energy tech- Washington [Mrs. SMITH]. is a worthwhile endeavor, but with nology. The report warned of a looming The question was taken; and the such little money available, we cannot crisis if these efforts are not continued Chairman announced that the ayes ap- afford to squander the money the way at current funding levels. Mind you, peared to have it. it is being done. All of our labs should this blue ribbon panel said we should Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I demand be able to propose research and have an continue at current funding levels. a recorded vote. equal chance at getting funding. That In reality, we are 10 percent below The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the way, we can ensure that good science is the level of funding of 1995, 10 percent rule, further proceedings on the amend- the basis for research. below current levels, and we are on a ment offered by the gentlewoman from Under the committee bill, science glidepath, in conformance with the au- Washington [Mrs. SMITH] will be post- has nothing to do with this particular thorizing committee to eventually get poned. program. It is all politics, and pure to zero. But in the meantime, we have pork at that. The report from the Com- b 1900 contractual obligations, we have mittee on Appropriations states, ‘‘The money invested by the private sector AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. KLECZKA committee directs that those fossil en- in energy technology. But I think it is Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Chairman, I offer ergy fuel research funds in the bill al- vitally important that we continue an amendment. located to oil research should be uti- these programs. The CHAIRMAN. The clerk will des- lized at NIPER, and that such work How quickly we forget that just a few ignate the amendment. should be not transferred to any other years ago we sent American service The text of the amendment is as fol- research laboratory.’’ people in harm’s way with a resultant lows: Funding of research programs with loss of life, to say nothing of the ex- Amendment offered by Mr. KLECZKA: Page taxpayer dollars should be done on penditure of funds, to protect our en- 55, line 5, strike ‘‘$384,504,000’’ and insert merit. By not using the competitive ergy sources. We are now dependent, ‘‘$379,524,000’’. merit review, we face the real danger of for more than 50 percent of our domes- The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House putting research in a particular Mem- tic oil on sources outside the United Resolution 189, the gentleman from ber’s district. States. Yet we are saying in this Wisconsin [Mr. KLECZKA] will be recog- That is all this bill comes down to. amendment that we should reduce our nized for 10 minutes, and a Member op- We have simply gone and taken money research on alternative sources, we posed will be recognized for 10 minutes. out of the general research fund and should reduce our effort to stretch a The Chair recognizes the gentleman said that we are not going to allow it gallon of oil further. We should not from Wisconsin [Mr. KLECZKA]. to go out under competitive bid to the worry about energy independence, we Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Chairman, I offer other Federal agencies that have the should not worry about the impact of this amendment on behalf of myself same capability; we are going to select our energy dependence on our foreign and the gentleman from Massachusetts this particular $5 million and put it in policy. [Mr. KENNEDY]. a particular Member’s district. The Mr. Chairman, I say again to my col- Mr.Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to Member that offered this amendment the gentleman from Massachusetts leagues, let us remember the lessons of at the committee designed the program the 1970’s; let us remember the lessons [Mr. KENNEDY]. for his particular district, and it is just Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. of Desert Storm; let us ensure that the simply pork. United States will never again be de- Chairman, I thank the gentleman for Now, I understand that there are a pendent totally on outside sources for yielding. lot of people that are concerned about our energy needs. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong sup- how we spend money in the Congress of Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the port of the amendment offered by the the United States and have run on the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. DAVIS]. gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. KLECZ- basis that they are opposed to pork. I KA] that he and I are offering together would hope that those Members stand Mr. DAVIS. Mr. Chairman, I thank to cut a pork barrel set-aside for the up and vote against the funding that the gentleman for yielding, and I rise National Institute of Petroleum and goes into this particular project for the in opposition to the amendment. When Energy Research, or NIPER. various reasons that I have gone they say pork, last year we had $77 mil- Mr. Chairman, our amendment does through. lion earmarked for oil technology. The not eliminate all funding for NIPER by Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I rise in administration this year asked for $87 any stretch. NIPER would still be able opposition to the amendment. million, and, of course, this $5 million to get funding from the traditional fos- The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is part of the $64 million committee sil fuel accounts. In fact, even with from Ohio [Mr. REGULA] is recognized mark. So that is down from last year this cut, we will be spending over $300 for 10 minutes in opposition. significantly. It is way down from the million for fossil fuel research. With Mr. REGULA. I yield myself such administration’s proposal, and why the taxpayer money, we are supporting time as I may consume. should it not go to the NIPER facility NIPER, paying for research for a Mr. Chairman, how quickly we for- in Barboursville, which I might add, is multibillion dollar industry. This spe- get. For those in this body that were a long way from my district across the cial earmark is corporate welfare for a here in the 1970’s we forget the crisis river in Northern Virginia. Because congressional pork barrel project. that faced America. We forget the long Barboursville, the NIPER there, the There are other Federal energy labs, gasoline lines waiting for gasoline. We National Institute for Petroleum En- the Morgantown Energy Technology forget the industries that were shut ergy Research lab there, has won Center in West Virginia and the Pitts- down, the schools that were curtailed, awards from the National Performance burgh Energy Technology Center in because of a shortage of energy. As a Review, and been awarded by Vice Pennsylvania, that do the same kind of result of that, we passed the Energy President GORE for its privatization ef- research, yet are prevented from com- Policy Act so that we would not again forts, showing how a model facility can peting for this money. be caught short on energy. But how be not just Federal employees working As we reevaluate the mission of our quickly we forget. together, but the private sector work- national labs, we must insist that the In the Washington Post on June 14 of ing in partnership. work being done there is of the highest this year, 1995, is a story headlined, The other two main facilities where possible caliber. The best way to do ‘‘Panel Warns of Crisis if Energy’s this could go, for example, Morgantown this is to have our labs participate in a Funding for Research Is Cut.’’ That and Pittsburgh, tend to specialize in competitive selection process, meaning says it all. The panel, a blue ribbon the coal side. I think that is a good good scientific research would get the panel of analysts, concluded that the reason. funding. Department of Energy’s research and Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to NIPER does research and funding in development has helped, and I empha- this amendment. I think we need to various ways to get more oil out of oil size this, has helped, the United States keep this money in oil research. H 7042 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE July 17, 1995 Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Chairman, I yield what is going on in this bill. This b 1915 2 minutes to the gentleman from Cali- NIPER program has money that is But it is important, Mr. Chairman, to fornia [Mr. BROWN]. going to go into Mr. DAVIS’ district, the rest of us. So I would certainly ask (Mr. BROWN of California asked and and that is why it is written into the Members to oppose the amendment of was given permission to revise and ex- bill the way it is. the gentleman from Massachusetts. Op- tend his remarks.) Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I yield pose the attempt to attack one indus- Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chair- 20 seconds to the gentleman from Vir- try while protecting a different one man, I thank the gentleman for yield- ginia [Mr. DAVIS]. that is important to the sponsor of the ing. Mr. DAVIS. Mr. Chairman, I thank amendment. Mr. Chairman, I have no problems the gentleman for yielding. And finally, Mr. Chairman, the bill whatsoever with the research being Mr. Chairman, first of all, the cor- does not have any sort of line item in done at Barboursville. As far as I know, poration is not in my district. There is favor of NIPER or Bartlesville. In fact, it is excellent research and it deserves a facility in the district of the gen- if you look at the report, the only spe- to be continued. tleman from Virginia [Mr. MORAN]. cific line items with specific funding Second, in the interest of straight I listened with great interest to the going to specific institutions are for talk, this removes the money entirely. remarks of the chairman of the sub- West Virginia and Pittsburgh in Penn- This does not just take it away from committee about how we should not sylvania, when it comes to that fossil NIPER; this removes money for oil and cut energy research, despite the fact energy research. that this bill cuts it substantially. As a petroleum research, and I think that is So, Mr. Chairman, I certainly urge a matter of fact, the budget of the Re- what we are opposed to in the adminis- ‘‘no’’ vote. Let us keep the funding as publican majority provides, if they tration’s mark. This does not just put it has been proposed. It is an absolute cannot abolish the Department of En- it in. reduction. It maintains the historical Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. If ergy, which is doing this research, to ratio between oil and coal. it is no dis- the gentleman from Virginia would cut all of its energy R&D by 20 percent. advantage to either one of them. I yield. That is $5 million out of the $300 I think this is short-sighted. would ask that my colleagues join in million fund that the gentleman put in, My problem is not with the energy voting ‘‘no’’ on the amendment. or that the gentleman from Oklahoma research. If anything, I would probably Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, how [Mr. ISTOOK] put in. increase it. But the fact is I have spent much time remains on each side? Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I yield The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman a number of years trying to develop a 3 minutes to the gentleman from Okla- habit in this House of not making site- from Ohio [Mr. REGULA] has 2 minutes homa [Mr. ISTOOK]. and 40 seconds remaining, and the gen- specific designations for energy or any Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, I thank other research and development tleman from Wisconsin [Mr. KLECZKA] the gentleman from Ohio for yielding. 1 money, but this flies in the fact of Mr. Chairman, I think it is very im- has 4 ⁄2 minutes remaining. Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Chairman, I yield what I have been trying to accomplish portant to understand here that what 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas for a number of years. happens in fossil energy research is [Mr. DOGGETT]. At the same time that this bill spe- that for every one dollar that is being cifically designates a certain amount Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Chairman, I do spent on oil research, and that is all come from Texas, and believe in energy of money for this facility, other similar that the gentleman from Massachu- energy technology centers are under- independence. But I do not think this setts and the gentleman from Wiscon- measure is about energy independence. going vast reorganizations and are sin want to attack, is oil research, for being cut specifically. There will be, It is about pork futures. every one dollar in oil research, there I took a shot at NIPER, which is for example, 90 jobs cut at the Pitts- are two dollars in coal research under what this is all about, it is the Na- burgh and Morgantown Energy Tech- this piece of legislation. I think it is tional Institute for Petroleum and En- nology Centers. They are not being significant to understand that. ergy Research, known by its acronym protected by this bill, as the language For example, for the gentleman from of NIPER, in the Committee on with regard to Barboursville would pro- Massachusetts, we looked it up, and Science. And we came within one vote tect that facility. currently Massachusetts is receiving of eliminating this earmark, which is a I think that is wrong. I think that over $51 million from the Department good indication of how really disputed the Department of Energy should at of Energy for coal research. this whole issue is. least retain the discretion, and we have Mr. Chairman, I submit that had the If energy independence is the goal, urged that in my own Committee on purpose of the gentleman from Massa- then why is the authorizing committee Science and in the energy authoriza- chusetts been to try to be even-handed cutting fossil fuel research by 45 per- tion, energy R&D authorization bill, at anything, then he would propose cent and why is it being reduced in this which we passed not too many weeks that for every one dollar you cut in oil bill? ago in the committee. We had a provi- research, you would cut two dollars in The issue here is not energy inde- sion that required competitive peer re- coal research, and I am certain that he pendence. It is whether or not we are view for all of these kinds of facilities. would volunteer that that should come going to earmark these moneys to be Mr. Chairman, I would strongly urge from the State of Massachusetts, were spent on one research institute of all that we adopt this amendment, not that his objective. those in the country that just happens from the standpoint of cutting energy Mr. Chairman, the only reason that to be in Bartlesville, Oklahoma. research, but from the standpoint of $5 million was added back in commit- When we begin earmarking to these making sure that all programs are tee was to maintain that same two-to- particular institutes and particular fa- peer-reviewed and that we get the best one ratio, two-to-one in favor of coal cilities, we violate the tradition that bang for the buck. research, which has been the ratio for has gone on in the Committee on Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Chairman, I yield many, many, many years. So that is all Science up until this year. And we also 30 seconds to the gentleman from Mas- that is sought to be done with this leg- essentially in doing an earmark are sachusetts [Mr. KENNEDY]. islation, and it is important to under- doing nothing but having a sow’s ear- Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. I stand that, you know what, Mr. Chair- mark. People talk about cutting pork would just like to point out, I heard man, under this bill research money for up here, but this is one of those little the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. oil is being reduced. It is being reduced $5 million piglets that is squealing DAVIS] say the NIPER facility is a long by over $12 million. And yet, for the around this floor tonight. way from his district. It is not, how- gentleman from Massachusetts, that is If you believe we ought to provide ever, so far that the major contractor, not sufficient. He wants to protect not only for energy independence but a as I understand from his district, has coal, but make further reduction in oil. little independence for the taxpayer not bid on this very contract. Now, I realize people in Massachu- and see that this kind of special inter- So if we are going to deal with pork, setts may not care about oil. They may est amendment is not included, then I do not mind dealing with it. I would not care about the energy independ- you vote for the amendment that my just ask to be straightforward about ence that is important to the country. colleagues have offered. July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H 7043 Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. The last campaign by most of us in injection techniques so that the people Chairman, will the gentleman yield? this Chamber was one about pork. of the United States could recover Mr. DOGGETT. I yield to the gen- There were instances like the Law- some additional resources from our tleman from Massachusetts. rence Welk farm of years past, which own domestic supply and thereby en- Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. people just were abhorred over. Now hance our energy independence. Chairman, I want to answer the gen- here the gentleman from Oklahoma, I might also point out that most of tleman from Oklahoma [Mr. ISTOOK]. who he himself says pork is pork, even these projects have a very sizable This happens to be a boy from Massa- if it lives at home, goes to the commit- amount of private money in them. chusetts that spent some time in the tee he serves on and puts in an addi- Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Chairman, will oil business. I have frac wells and I un- tional $5 million above and beyond the the gentleman yield? derstand exactly what this technology committee level to squirrel it away, to Mr. REGULA. I yield to the gen- is designed to do and how much is earmark it for his district and an en- tleman from Wisconsin. available in this country to get more tity in his district. Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Chairman, I oil out of existing wells. I say to my colleagues, all 435 of us agree with all the gentleman says. The fact of the matter is, I would be would like to bring home the bacon, However his mark coming before the in favor of this kind of oil research. I but in this atmosphere, we cannot. For committee was a $59 million appropria- would just like to see it go out to bid. a person who is opposed to it to put it tions. If in fact he wanted more dollars I do not want to see it to go to one in, I think that is inexcusable. There is in that line, why did not the commit- guy’s district and be denied from other $59 million left in this portion of the tee from the git-go put in the $64 mil- Members’ districts that have the same oil research part of the bill for oil re- lion or $84 million or whatever. capabilities of doing the research that search, fossil research that will be put Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, it was is in your district. That is all I am ask- out by bid. And if, in fact, the program the feeling of the majority of the full ing for. is as good as the gentleman indicates, committee that we needed some addi- Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I yield they will be competitive. They will win tional funding for this technology. In 1 minute to the gentleman from Okla- a piece of that $59 million. But that is fact, we have many wells that are no homa [Mr. ISTOOK]. not what happened in committee. longer productive. Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, I just The gentleman introduced an amend- Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Chairman, if the want to establish that this was put out ment and first he wanted to take the gentleman will continue to yield, why for bid. It was bid only just about a money from the endowment for the was the $5 million earmarked for one year ago. So this is the product of bid- arts. He changed his mind and project in Oklahoma? ding. scratched that and just out of thin air Mr. REGULA This was the amount Furthermore, this institution has found $5 million and put it into that that was offered as an amendment in been involved in privatizing and reduc- line of the budget. the full committee and accepted by the tion of the number of government em- I am saying to you, that is not the members of the full committee. ployees and the research is at the gov- way you talk in your campaign. It is Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of ernment-owned institution. not the way the balance of us talk. my time to the gentleman from Okla- Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. However, when the campaigns are over, homa [Mr. ISTOOK]. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? at that point in time, you forget about The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman Mr. ISTOOK. I yield to the gen- that and when no one is looking, you from Oklahoma [Mr. ISTOOK] is recog- tleman from Massachusetts. put in a little bacon for your district. nized for 15 seconds. Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. I am saying, if NIPER is as good as you Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, the bill Chairman, why did the gentleman have say, they can compete, they can be suc- speaks for itself. It is a reduction in to write NIPER into the legislation, if cessful for a portion of the $59 million. the funding. It maintains simply the it was put out to bid? Why did we put in the $5 million cut? two-to-one ratio in favor of coal with Mr. ISTOOK. Reclaiming my time, The only way you get at this pork oil. It is clear that it is $12,914,000 Mr. Chairman, NIPER is not mentioned project, the only way that we, under below last year’s. It is not increasing in the legislation. the rules of the House, can get at it is anything. And the amendment did not Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. to take an amendment, reduce the ap- line item $5 million for NIPER. Chairman, it most certainly is. propriation reflecting your amendment The CHAIRMAN. The question is on Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, the bill in committee by $5 million, thus we the amendment offered by the gen- does not have any mention of NIPER. take down the entire energy research tleman from Wisconsin [Mr. KLECZKA]. It only mentions it during the report and development budget from $384 mil- The question was taken; and the language. The report language has spe- lion to some $379 million; clearly, not Chair being in doubt, the committee cific line items for the institutions in devastating to the appropriation, but divided and there were—ayes 21, noes West Virginia and in Pennsylvania. recognizing the $5 million add-on that 16. The language is only reflective of was provided in committee is not fair, Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, I de- what the Committee on Science has al- is not equitable, should not be done. It mand a recorded vote and, pending ready established, what the Depart- is descried by everyone on the House that, I make the point of order that a ment of Energy has already estab- floor. quorum is not present. lished. It is not creating anything. When we find it, when it is bills like The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the Frankly, the amendment does not the one we are talking about today, at rule, further proceedings on the amend- specify where any cut would be made. that point in time I think the House ment offered by the gentleman from It is trying to attack oil funding in has to stand up and say what is good Wisconsin [Mr. KLECZKA] will be post- general to protect coal. for Oklahoma is good for Wisconsin. If poned. Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Chairman, I yield it is not good for Oklahoma, Wisconsin The point of order no quorum is con- myself the balance of my time. should not do it either. I ask the Mem- sidered withdrawn. Mr. Chairman, what the gentleman bers to adopt the amendment which in Mr. YATES. Mr. Chairman, I ask from Oklahoma, the author of the essence would strike this one pork unanimous consent to strike the last amendment in committee, states is not project. word. really accurate. In fact, if it was accu- Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I yield The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, rate, the committee report language myself such time as I may consume. the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. would not have to read, ‘‘The commit- I want to make it clear to the Mem- YATES] is recognized for 5 minutes. tee recognizes the accomplishments of bers, this technology, this money that There was no objection. NIPER and directs that these research goes into the technology is used to Mr. YATES. Mr. Chairman, the gen- funds in the bill be allocated to oil re- take wells that are no longer produc- tlewoman from North Carolina sought search to be used by NIPER and such tive and put them back into produc- time to speak on the amendment relat- work should not be transferred to an- tion. It includes enhanced fracturing ing to Indian education. Unfortunately, other research laboratory.’’ techniques. It would include advanced there was not enough time that could H 7044 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE July 17, 1995 be allotted to her to make her com- basic scientific research is a respon- money. We have contracts, and if we ments. sible Federal function. It is quite a violate those contracts, we are going to She seeks to have her comments in- stretch to put the clean coal boon- be subject to lawsuits. We have closing serted into the RECORD during the dis- doggle under the banner of basic re- costs. In the meantime, we will be los- cussion on the Indian education search. In fact, the bill appropriates $12 ing enormously valuable research. amendment. million more than the President even The Blue Ribbon Committee on en- I ask unanimous consent that that requested. If we pass the bill, we will ergy R&D says this in their report: may be done. spend more on this program than even Federal energy R&D has been cut by 75 per- The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection the administration wants. cent since the late 1970s. Currently the Japa- to the request of the gentleman from Mr. Chairman, once again, I urge my nese Government spends more than twice as Illinois? colleagues to support this amendment. much on energy R&D as does the United There was no objection. We can and must do better than adding States, AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. TIAHRT millions of dollars to programs of dubi- and keep in mind, that Government Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Chairman, I offer ous nature. Let us reject the concept of has half the population to serve. an amendment, amendment No. 65. appropriating money that has not been They go on to say: ‘‘Energy is fun- The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will des- authorized. Let us listen to the chair- damental,’’ and let me emphasize this, ignate the amendment. man of the committee, who arrived at Energy is fundamental to the ability of in- The text of the amendment is as fol- the responsible funding level for fossil dustrial societies to function. Global energy lows: energy, and follow the bold example of demand arising mainly from developing Amendment offered by Mr. TIAHRT: Page the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. KASICH], economies is expected to grow by 40 percent 55, line 5, strike ‘‘$384,504,000’’ and insert of making tough choices. is 15 years. ‘‘$220,950,000’’. Let us stop asking middle-class tax- This report goes on to say, b 1930 payers to fund research of some of Trends in the world oil markets point to The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to H. Res. America’s most profitable companies. growing stress and tension. Oil demand is ex- panding rapidly, and projected to grow by 30 189, the gentleman from Kansas [Mr. Exxon, G.E., DuPont, Amoco, Westing- house deserve our credit for being in- percent. In less than 5 years oil demand in TIAHRT] and a Member opposed will Asia will outstrip all of North America. each be recognized for 10 minutes. dustry leaders, but they do not need The Chair recognizes the gentleman our subsidies. Mr. Chairman, I have to say if we care about the future of this Nation, if from Kansas [Mr. TIAHRT]. I come from a district in a State, Mr. (Mr. TIAHRT asked and was given Chairman, that is a large oil and gas we care about preserving jobs, we have permission to revise and extend his re- producer. No industry has had to sac- to care about energy. I do not believe marks.) rifice more in the changing market. I there is a job in our society that is not Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Chairman, in this have received phone calls and letters in some way dependent on energy. amendment I seek to restore the appro- from small energy producers in my dis- Energy is the lifeblood of an indus- priation to the level authorized by the trict who are struggling. How can we trial society. It fuels all that we do. Committee on Science. The chairman look at them and tell them we are Energy lights this room tonight. En- of the committee, the gentleman from broke and cannot help, but then give ergy, through many different ways, is a Ohio [Mr. KASICH], in the House budget millions to subsidize the big energy part of the industrial fabric of this Na- resolution had set the fossil energy companies? tion. I think it is foolish to not con- program at $150 million for 1996. The Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues, tinue research, to keep our Nation en- Committee on Science then, after care- if they are serious about deficit reduc- ergy-independent. ful deliberation, reviewing all research tion, then let us vote to keep the au- We remember when OPEC decided to and development programs, authorized thorized levels for funding. I urge my put an embargo on the shipment of oil even more funding at $220 million. The colleagues to support this amendment and raise the price. We had long lines Interior appropriations bill, however, and help end corporate welfare. Join at the gasoline stations. We do not adds an extra $170 million to the level me and the gentleman from Pennsylva- want to repeat that. Yet, we are authorized by the gentleman from nia [Mr. WALKER], the gentleman from ‘‘sleepwalking into a disaster,’’ as Sec- Pennsylvania [Mr. WALKER] in the Ohio [Mr. KASICH], the chairman, the retary Hodel said in a recent op-ed Committee on Science. subcommittee chairman [Mr. piece. What we are trying to do in Mr. Chairman, it is important for the ROHRABACHER], the National Taxpayers funding this research is ensure that we American people to realize that money Union, and Citizens for a Sound Econ- can use resources that are available in is spent in Congress after the rigorous omy to make the tough choices and the United States, that we can enhance authorization process. The committees stand up for the future of our children. wells that produce oil and gas, but are in Congress study the issues, hold long Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I rise in no longer functioning because of lack hearings and vote on the funding levels opposition to this amendment. of technology, that we can use coal to after long and tough debates. This The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman produce electricity. process is not perfect, but it is the from Ohio [Mr. REGULA] is recognized The gentleman in his arguments said process that usually results in respon- for 10 minutes. we already know how to burn coal effi- sible compromise. Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, once ciently. That is true. However, we do To add $170 million more to the level again, let me point out that we have not know how to burn coal cleanly, and authorized by the Committee on already cut 10 percent from this budg- we just passed a clear Air Act a short Science is excessive and thumbs the et. We are on a glidepath to achieve the time ago in an effort to improve the nose at the Committee on Science. We goals outlined by the authorizing com- quality of our air, and one of those worked hard to follow fiscal respon- mittee. I have communicated repeat- ways we do that is to burn coal in a sibility principles, because we want to edly with the gentleman from Penn- clean manner, an environmentally safe balance the budget for the future of sylvania [Mr. WALKER], the chairman manner. That research is important. this country and for the future of our of the Science Committee, and it is our I would also point out that we did not children. understanding as a result of our con- add any new budget authority in clean Almost one-half of the increase to versations that we will get to the au- coal. That is not the issue. The money the fossil energy program goes to the thorized level in a period of 4 or 5 here that is being proposed for reduc- clean coal program. The clean coal pro- years. tion does not impact on clean coal. It gram is to study technology that has However, let me point out to all is not part of this amendment. That is, been around for decades. The question Members here, that are listening and nevertheless, a very important feature is not if we can burn coal more effi- viewing, that we have contractual obli- of our enery research. ciently; the question is can we afford gations. These projects, over 300, have Mr. Chairman, I think we should be it; and clearly, we simply cannot. been established with the private sec- very careful in this budget, that we do Mr. Chairman, the chairman of the tor. In many instances, the private sec- not do things that will precipitate a committee eloquently explains that tor is putting up the bulk of the crisis down the road, that will cripple July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H 7045 the ability of future generations to provide several hundred million dollars R&D could put our Nation at risk. have adequate supplies of energy, to through a fossil R&D surcharge that Task force Chairman Daniel Yergin, have the jobs that go with energy, to funds the Gas Research Institute and President of Cambridge Energy Re- have the freedom from involvement in the Electric Power Research Institute, search Associates and a Pulitzer Prize- military conflicts that result from the so here we are, the people are being winning author, stated that, ‘‘the absence of access to energy sources. double taxed for these very same re- wholesale demolition of [DOE’s R&D For all of these reasons, I think it is search and development programs, this programs] would not only hurt Ameri- a great mistake at this point to reduce very same welfare for corporations, ca’s energy position but contribute to a our reseach. We are a nation that has welfare for the rich. ‘brewing R&D crisis’ in the United prospered because of science. We are Mr. Chairman, I urge Members to States. the world’s leader because we have de- save the taxpayers some money, sup- In conclusion, I want to point out that Fed- veloped technology in many different port the authorization process. Let us eral energy R&D is only about one-half of one fields, and certainly energy should be a bring some responsibility to the proc- percent of the Nation's annual energy expend- vital concern to all of us, because the ess. We are just starting out now. Let itures. Since 1978, DOE R&D has been re- quality of life, the quality of the air we us make sure that appropriators and duced by 75% in constant dollars. Let's not be breathe, the quality of our standard of authorizers work together, and vote for shortsighted about our long-term economic living, will be very strongly tied to our this amendment. Support the Tiahrt well-being. Vote to maintain fossil R&D. ability to have access to energy. Let us amendment. Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 not make the mistake of the 1970’s. Let Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I yield minutes to the gentlewoman from Cali- us ensure that we do adequate re- 2 minutes to the gentleman from Penn- fornia [Mrs. SEASTRAND], a Member of search. sylvania [Mr. DOYLE]. the Committee on Science. Mr. Chairman, we recognize that we Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Chairman, I rise Mrs. SEASTRAND. Mr. Chairman, I need to get out of the business. Our today in strong opposition to the support the Tiahrt amendment. This proposal gets on the glidepath to Tiahrt amendment, and in support of amendment would authorize appropria- achieve exactly what the Committee fossil energy research funding con- tions of $22.95 million, which is consist- on Science has put in their authoriza- tained in this bill. ent with the level contained in H.R. tion. As I said, the chairman and I have First of all, I would like to thank the 1816, the Civilian Energy Research and discussed this and have a consensus subcommittee chairman, Mr. REGULA, Development Act of 1995, reported out that we have to get there, but we have and ranking member, Mr. YATES for of the Committee on Science on June to recognize that we have close-down their continued commitment to this 22. important area. and contractual costs that would oth- All of this was done with the thought What is fossil energy research? We all erwise result if we were to pass this of definitely giving dollars to research, know what fossil energy is, oil, gas amendment. and balancing the budget. However, I and—our most abundant domestic re- I have a list here. There are over 30 am amazed to see what has now come source—coal. But I get the sense that States that would be severely impacted out of the Committee on Appropria- many Members who seem anxious to by this amendment in terms of lost tions, which definitely increases appro- cut research in these areas do not un- jobs, in terms of lost research projects, priations to such areas such as coal, up derstand the type of work that is going but most importantly, all of the people $11.3 million above even what the De- on. of the United States would be severely partment of Energy requested, and up Especially in the area of coal re- impacted if they were to have a dimi- $76 million above what the Committee search, we are talking about extremely nution of their access to energy of all on Science authorization of $49.9 mil- innovative research that is being un- forms in the years ahead. lion was. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance dertaken by small companies through- of my time. out the country. b 1945 Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 Without the help of the Federal Gov- minutes to the gentleman from Califor- ernment, these small companies would Oil appropriations were up $20.5 mil- lion above the Committee on Science nia [Mr. ROHRABACHER], the distin- be unable to undertake these impor- guished chairman of the Subcommittee tant research efforts. Do we really authorization of $63 million; gas appro- on Energy and Environment of the want to accept the status quo in our priations, $113 million, up $53.9 million Committee on Science. ability to utilize our coal resources—or above the Committee on Science au- Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman, do we want to take advantage of our thorization of $59.8 million. I heard the saying a long time ago that brainpower to make cleaner, more effi- I want to state that the Committee government is the most efficient meth- cient use of our most abundant energy on Science, which I serve on, ade- od known to man of turning pure en- resource. quately funded basic research. In addi- ergy into solid waste. Unfortunately, By cutting the fossil energy budget, tion, we have dollars now that are that is the feeling I get when I see the you are killing Advanced Clean Fuels funding institutes such as the Electric way we are handling our budget deci- Research in both direct and indirect Power Research Institute and the Gas sions. We are taking a perfectly good liquefaction—work that is going on Research Institute, provided they do economy and we are trashing it by right now in Louisiana, New Mexico, this research with surcharges on util- being irresponsible. That is one of the California, New Jersey, and elsewhere. ity customers. This is being done. reasons that I am supporting the You are also killing work in Ad- Appropriations are funding far be- Tiahrt amendment. vanced Clean/Efficient Power Sys- yond what the Committee on Science The Committee on Appropriations tems—such as important work on Ad- decided would be appropriate levels. has again seen fit to add $163 million in vanced Research & Environmental Where are these dollars going? The cor- funds not authorized by the Committee Technology that is taking place in porate giants. on Science. In the case of coal pro- Texas, Illinois, Massachusetts, Colo- Exxon in 1994 made sales of over $101 grams, the figure is $126 million. That rado, Ohio, and elsewhere. billion with profits of $5 billion. Gen- is 21⁄2 times the authorized level. There Let me also point out how much eral Electric had 1994 sales of nearly are millions of dollars earmarked in these programs have already been cut. $65 billion with profits of $4.7 billion. this bill that the Department of En- The fossil R&D line in the bill rep- Dupont, profits again of $2.7 billion in ergy never requested. These funds will resents a cut of over 100% from FY 1995 1994. We can go to Amoco, Westing- not be for basic research in fossil fuels in a program that has been decimated house, and so on. technology. Rather, it will be used for over the last decade. My point here is that this amend- large demonstration projects sponsored Just last month, the Yergin Commis- ment, the Tiahrt amendment, is a com- in many cases by some of our largest sion, an independent task force on stra- mitment to basic research and, most corporations, corporate welfare. tegic energy research and development, importantly, a balanced budget, what The Members should know that elec- found that energy R&D is essential to the American people asked for in the tric and gas utility customers already the U.S. Economy and that cutbacks in last election. H 7046 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE July 17, 1995 Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I yield Committee bill. Thus, the Science Committee bines, an additional $8 million to the 1 minute to the gentleman from Cali- bill does not meet even the first test of being administration’s request for molten fornia [Mr. BROWN], the ranking mem- aÐquoteÐ``House-passed authorization bill.'' carbonate fuel development. ber of the Committee on Science with If the Science Committee had truly wanted to All of these are in a $1 billion indus- jurisdiction on this issue. affect the process, it would have reported its try, when I have to go back to Kansas (Mr. BROWN of California asked and authorization bills in May and brought them to and talk to my little energy developers was given permission to revise and ex- the floor before appropriations action began. who get no help from the Federal Gov- tend his remarks.) Even then there is an important legal dif- ernment, out there trying to make a Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chair- ference between a House-passed bill and one living pumping wells, stripper wells. man, I rise in strong opposition to the that is signed into law. This difference was They get no help, yet we give millions Tiahrt amendment. recognized in the Republican Conference on of dollars to these big energy corpora- Mr. Chairman, coal research is ex- House Rules. The conference reaffirmed that tions. tremely important. It may not be the only authorization levels in public law can bind We heard about commitments to con- highest priority, but it ranks up appropriations actions. And, such binding ac- tracts. We have gone and reviewed this. amongst highest priority for energy re- tion assumes that points of order are not This is not beyond what was authorized search and development in this coun- waived against appropriations bills, as was by the Committee on Science. Beyond try. done for consideration of H.R. 1977. that, we have a commitment to the The chairman of the Subcommittee Certainly the decisions of a majority of the American people. on Appropriations has already de- Committee on Science are entitled to some re- Of course we care about energy. We scribed in great detail how we need to spect and deference by the Members. At the do not want to have another energy cut energy research as little as possible same time, Members have an obligation to ex- crisis, but we are not killing research in order to achieve energy independ- ercise their own independent judgment on the and development that would go to help ence and energy security for this coun- wisdom of those recommendations; certainly, supply more energy. What we are doing try. the House has never operated to rubber- is, we are cutting out the corporate Mr. Chairman, I particularly want to stamp the product of any Committee. pork. One hundred seventy million dol- call attention to the assertion made But Members should not be confused by the lars additional in research and develop- that this does not conform to the au- argument that the appropriations bill exceeds ment to billions of dollars in revenue thorization. There is no authorization the authorization for these energy R&D pro- that these corporations have is not for this bill. grams. They do exceed the recommendations going to drive them into bankruptcy. A majority of the members of the of a majority of the Science Committee mem- This is supported by the gentleman Committee on Science have voted bersÐnothing more and nothing less. The fact from Pennsylvania [Mr. WALKER], the under the leadership of the gentleman is that this is the first vote of the full House to chairman. It is over the resolution of from Pennsylvania [Mr. WALKER] to consider these issues. There is nothing to bind the Committee on the Budget, it is cut the amount authorized in a bill Members actions in lawÐincluding nothing in over the resolution of the Committee that we passed out, but the House the budget resolution since report language is on Science. It is supported by the gen- should know, and this has as a matter also not binding. tleman from Ohio [Mr. KASICH], the of fact been adopted by the Republican I urge Members to reject the Tiahrt amend- chairman, by the gentleman from Cali- Conference, that the Conference ment. fornia [Mr. ROHRABACHER], the chair- reaffirmed that only authorization lev- Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 man of the subcommittee. This is prac- els in public law can bind appropriation minute to my good friend, the gen- tical common sense to go back to the action and such binding action assumes tleman from Maryland [Mr. BARTLETT]. research and development that was au- that points of order are not waived (Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland asked thorized by the Committee on Science against appropriation bills as they and was given permission to revise and and not add in any additional pork. have been done in this case. extend his remarks.) Mr. Chairman, I yield back the bal- Please vote ‘‘no’’ on the Tiahrt Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland. Mr. ance of my time. amendment. Chairman, I rise in support of this Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I yield Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment with some sense of frustra- such time as he may consume to the Tiahrt amendments eliminating research and tion. I certainly support energy re- gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. WARD]. development funds at the Department of En- search, particularly coal research. (Mr. WARD asked and was given per- ergy. While both of these amendments can, That is not the issue here. I am a mem- mission to revise and extend his re- and should, be opposed simply on their mer- ber of the authorizing committee. We marks.) its, I would like to briefly address the claim have developed a balanced program. Mr. WARD. Mr. Chairman, I rise to that these amendments reduce spending lev- My concern is where will the money state my opposition to this amend- els to their allegedly authorized levels. go that is saved here? When we violate ment. Mr. Chairman, I have long argued for the the orderly authorization/appropria- Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I yield importance of the authorization process. The tion process, we create chaos. Thus, I 15 seconds to the gentleman from Ala- authorizing committees are the expert commit- support this amendment because it bama [Mr. CALLAHAN]. tees and certainly their views are entitled to supports the process we should be fol- (Mr. CALLAHAN asked and was some deference by the members. But the sin- lowed in this House. given permission to revise and extend gle step of reporting a bill from a House au- Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Chairman, I yield his remarks.) thorizing committee does not constitute an au- myself the balance of my time. Mr. CALLAHAN. Mr. Chairman, I thorization. An authorization bill must pass the Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to point rise in opposition to the Tiahrt amend- House and the Senate and be signed by the out that it was referred to here earlier ment and urge Members to vote ‘‘no.’’ President. As we all know, this sometimes un- that this was not authorized. If that is Either we are going to have the tech- tidy democratic process often wreaks signifi- the situation, then apparently none of nology that this country deserves or cant changes in what the original House com- this bill has been authorized. we are going to transport it overseas. mittee reported. In the case of the Science We have gone through the authoriza- This amendment would deny this coun- Committee's authorization of the Department tion process in the Committee on try the opportunity to create jobs to of Energy's research and development pro- Science. We have looked at the basic participate in the world environment grams, we are barely through step one. research and development. This was with respect to technology. I urge a Simply put, the claim that Science Commit- done. We came in at the $220 million ‘‘no’’ vote on this amendment. tee actions to date equate in some way to an level. Now we are coming with an addi- Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I yield authorization is false. It is true that the tional $170 million. myself the balance of my time. Science Committee has reported a bill with We are even outspending the admin- Mr. Chairman, I urge Members to dramatically lower numbers for fossil and con- istration on the coal programs. We are vote ‘‘no’’ on the Tiahrt amendment. A servation R&D that contained in the appropria- adding $24 million for special interests vote ‘‘no’’ is to preserve jobs in the tions bill before us today. However, the House for the liquefaction process, adding $36 United States. A vote ‘‘no’’ is to pre- as a whole has never considered the Science million to General Electric for gas tur- serve research in a majority of the July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H 7047 States of this Nation. A vote ‘‘no’’ is to fered by the gentleman from Kansas Smith (WA) Tanner Wamp Solomon Tate Watts (OK) maintain our energy independence. A [Mr. TIAHRT]. Souder Tauzin Weldon (FL) vote ‘‘no’’ is to prevent these jobs and The Chair will reduce to 5 minutes Spence Taylor (NC) Weller this research from going overseas. the time for any electronic vote after Stearns Thornberry Wicker I strongly urge Members to vote the first vote in this series. Stenholm Tiahrt Young (AK) ‘‘no’’ on this amendment. Stockman Traficant Young (FL) AMENDMENT NO. 72 OFFERED BY MR. STEARNS Stump Vucanovich Zimmer Mr. POSHARD. Mr. Chairman, I rise in The CHAIRMAN. The pending busi- Talent Walker strong opposition to the Tiahrt amendment to ness is the request for a recorded vote NOES—227 the Interior Appropriations bill. on amendment No. 72 offered by the The fossil fuel research accounts in this bill Abercrombie Gephardt Moran gentleman from Florida [Mr. STEARNS] Ackerman Gibbons Morella have been taking continued and direct hits on which further proceedings were Andrews Gilchrest Murtha which the coal industry cannot survive. In postponed and on which the noes pre- Baesler Gillmor Nadler Baldacci Gilman Neal southern Illinois we have hundreds of people vailed by voice vote. who once worked good jobs that paid well in Ballenger Gonzalez Oberstar The Clerk will redesignate the Barcia Goodling Obey the coal mines which provided power to the amendment. Barrett (NE) Greenwood Olver economy of this Nation. They've been laid off Barrett (WI) Gunderson Owens The Clerk redesignated the amend- because we don't have the clean-coal tech- Bass Hall (OH) Pallone ment. Beilenson Hamilton Pastor nology necessary to burn the tremendous re- Bentsen Hansen RECORDED VOTE Payne (NJ) sources of coal which are available to meet Bereuter Hastings (FL) Payne (VA) the energy needs of this Nation. The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has Berman Hefner Pelosi I strongly urge a ``no'' vote to help the coal been demanded. Bevill Hilliard Peterson (FL) Bilbray Hinchey Pickett mining families of this Nation and to provide PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY Bishop Hoekstra Pomeroy for a thriving domestic energy industry. Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I have a Blute Hoke Poshard Mr. FAZIO of California. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Boehlert Holden Quinn parliamentary inquiry. Bonior Horn TIAHRT's amendment would cut energy con- Ramstad The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will Borski Houghton Rangel servation R&D from $411.2 million to $230.1 state it. Boucher Hoyer Reed million. The fiscal year 1995 level was $468.5 Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I am con- Brown (CA) Jackson-Lee Regula million. Brown (OH) Johnson (CT) Rivers fused. Could the Chair remind us who Brownback Johnson (SD) Large cuts have already been taken. Energy Roemer prevailed on this vote? Was it the ayes Bryant (TX) Johnson, E. B. Roukema R&D has fallen 75 percent since the late and the noes? Bunn Johnston Roybal-Allard Burr Kanjorski 1970's, in constant dollars. The committee's The CHAIRMAN. The noes prevailed. Rush bill already contains a 23 percent cut in en- Cardin Kaptur Sabo A recorded vote was ordered. Castle Kelly Sanders ergy R&D relative to the President's request. Clay Kennedy (MA) The vote was taken by electronic de- Sawyer Clayton Kennedy (RI) Total U.S. energy efficiency R&D costs each Schiff vice, and there were—ayes 179, noes 227, Clyburn Kennelly taxpayer about $5.50 per year and saves Schroeder not voting 28, as follows: Coleman Kildee Schumer them $65. Collins (IL) Kleczka [Roll No. 512] Scott This amendment would cut critical programs Conyers Klink Serrano AYES—179 Costello Knollenberg assisting in the development of new, clean Shaw Coyne Kolbe transportation technologies including electric Allard Ehrlich McHugh Sisisky Danner LaFalce Archer Emerson McIntosh Skaggs vehicles. Davis LaHood Armey Ensign McKeon Skeen It would cut the Federal Energy Manage- de la Garza Lantos Baker (CA) Everett Metcalf Slaughter ment Program, which installs money-saving Baker (LA) Ewing Mica DeFazio LaTourette DeLauro Lazio Spratt equipment in Federal buildings, saving tax- Barr Fields (TX) Miller (FL) Stokes Bartlett Franks (CT) Molinari Dellums Leach payers $4 in Federal operating expenses for Deutsch Levin Studds Barton Frisa Montgomery Stupak every $1 spent. Bateman Funderburk Moorhead Dicks Lewis (CA) Dingell Lewis (GA) Tejeda These are just to mention a few of the pro- Bilirakis Gallegly Myers Thomas Bliley Ganske Myrick Dixon Lincoln grams which will help to reduce our depend- Doggett Lipinski Thompson Boehner Gekas Nethercutt Thornton ence on foreign oil in the future. Bonilla Geren Neumann Dooley Livingston The bottom line is this cut would be penny Doyle LoBiondo Thurman Bono Goodlatte Ney Torkildsen wise and pound foolish. Brewster Gordon Norwood Dunn Lofgren Durbin Longley Torres I urge the committee to oppose the Tiahrt Browder Goss Nussle Torricelli Bryant (TN) Graham Ortiz Edwards Lowey amendment. Engel Luther Towns Bunning Gutknecht Orton Upton The CHAIRMAN. The question is on Burton Hall (TX) Eshoo Manton Oxley Velazquez Buyer Hancock Packard Evans Markey the amendment offered by the gen- Vento Callahan Hastert Parker Farr Martini tleman from Kansas [Mr. TIAHRT]. Visclosky Calvert Hastings (WA) Paxon Fattah Mascara Volkmer The question was taken; and the Camp Hayes Petri Fawell Matsui Waldholtz chairman announced that the noes ap- Canady Hayworth Pombo Fazio McCarthy Walsh Chabot Hefley Porter Fields (LA) McDade peared to have it. Ward Chambliss Heineman Portman Filner McDermott Waters Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Chairman, I de- Chapman Herger Pryce Flake McHale Watt (NC) mand a recorded vote. Chenoweth Hilleary Quillen Flanagan McKinney Weldon (PA) The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the Christensen Hobson Radanovich Foglietta McNulty Foley Meehan White rule, further proceedings on the amend- Chrysler Hostettler Riggs Clement Hunter Roberts Forbes Meek Whitfield ment offered by the gentleman from Coble Hutchinson Rogers Fowler Menendez Williams Kansas [Mr. TIAHRT] will be postponed. Coburn Hyde Rohrabacher Fox Meyers Wilson Frank (MA) Mfume Wise SEQUENTIAL VOTES POSTPONED IN COMMITTEE Collins (GA) Inglis Ros-Lehtinen Combest Istook Rose Franks (NJ) Miller (CA) Wolf OF THE WHOLE Cooley Johnson, Sam Roth Frelinghuysen Mineta Woolsey The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the Cox Kasich Royce Frost Minge Wyden rule, proceedings will now resume on Cramer Kim Salmon Furse Mink Wynn Gejdenson Mollohan Yates those amendments on which further Crane King Sanford Crapo Kingston Saxton proceedings were postponed in the fol- Cremeans Klug Scarborough NOT VOTING—28 lowing order: Cubin Largent Schaefer Bachus Gutierrez Rahall Amendment No. 72 offered by the Cunningham Latham Seastrand Becerra Harman Reynolds Deal Laughlin Sensenbrenner Brown (FL) Jacobs gentleman from Florida [Mr. STEARNS]; Richardson DeLay Lewis (KY) Shadegg Clinger Jefferson Stark amendment No. 47 offered by the gen- Diaz-Balart Lightfoot Shays Collins (MI) Jones Taylor (MS) tlewoman from Washington [Mrs. Dickey Linder Shuster Condit Maloney Tucker SMITH]; amendment No. 31 offered by Doolittle Lucas Skelton Ehlers Martinez Waxman Dornan Manzullo Smith (MI) English McInnis Zeliff the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Dreier McCollum Smith (NJ) Ford Moakley KLECZKA]; and amendment No. 65 of- Duncan McCrery Smith (TX) Green Peterson (MN) H 7048 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE July 17, 1995 b 2013 Cardin Heineman Pombo Gonzalez Manton Sanders Castle Herger Pomeroy Goodlatte Matsui Schroeder The Clerk announced the following Chabot Hilleary Porter Gutierrez McDermott Schumer pair: Chambliss Hilliard Portman Hastings (FL) McKinney Scott On this vote: Chapman Hobson Poshard Hefner Meek Serrano Chenoweth Hoekstra Pryce Hinchey Menendez Skaggs Mr. Jones for, with Mr. Richardson Christensen Hoke Quillen Horn Mfume Spratt against. Chrysler Holden Quinn Houghton Miller (CA) Stokes Hoyer Mineta Clement Hostettler Radanovich Studds Mr. BARCIA and Mr. WHITFIELD Jackson-Lee Mink Coble Hunter Ramstad Tejeda changed their vote from ‘‘aye’’ to ‘‘no.’’ Coburn Hutchinson Johnson (SD) Mollohan Regula Thompson Collins (GA) Hyde Johnson, E.B. Murtha Messrs. FRANKS of Connecticut, Riggs Thornton Combest Inglis Kanjorski Nadler Rivers Torres BONO, and BROWDER changed their Condit Istook Kaptur Neal Roberts Torricelli vote from ‘‘no’’ and ‘‘aye.’’ Cooley Johnson (CT) Roemer Kennedy (MA) Oberstar Kennedy (RI) Obey Towns So the amendment was rejected. Costello Johnson, Sam Rogers Kennelly Olver Traficant Cramer Johnston Rohrabacher The result of the vote was announced Kildee Ortiz Velazquez Crane Kasich Ros-Lehtinen as above recorded. Knollenberg Owens Vento Crapo Kelly Roth Cremeans Kim Kolbe Pallone Volkmer PERSONAL EXPLANATION Roukema Cubin King LaFalce Payne (NJ) Waters Royce Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. Cunningham Kingston Lantos Pelosi Watt (NC) Salmon 512, I was not present because my flight was Danner Kleczka Lazio Rahall Williams Sanford 1 Davis Klink Leach Rangel delayed 3 ¤2 hours by severe thunderstorms. Sawyer Wise de la Garza Klug Lewis (GA) Reed Had I been present, I would have voted Saxton Woolsey Deal LaHood Linder Rose Wynn Scarborough Lofgren ``no.'' DeFazio Largent Roybal-Allard Yates DeLay Latham Schaefer Lowey Sabo PERSONAL EXPLANATION Schiff Deutsch LaTourette NOT VOTING—24 Mr. JONES. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. Diaz-Balart Laughlin Seastrand 512, I was inadvertently detained. Dickey Levin Sensenbrenner Becerra Harman Reynolds Had I been present, I would have voted Dooley Lewis (CA) Shadegg Clinger Jacobs Richardson Doolittle Lewis (KY) Shaw Collins (MI) Jefferson Rush ``yes.'' Dornan Lightfoot Shays Cox Jones Stark ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE CHAIRMAN Doyle Lincoln Shuster Ehlers Maloney Taylor (MS) The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the Dreier Lipinski Sisisky English Martinez Tucker Duncan Livingston Skeen Ford McInnis Waxman rule, the Chair announces that he will Dunn LoBiondo Skelton Green Moakley Zeliff reduce to a minimum of 5 minutes the Edwards Longley Slaughter period of time within which a vote by Ehrlich Lucas Smith (MI) b 2023 Emerson Luther Smith (NJ) electronic device will be taken on each Ensign Manzullo Smith (TX) The Clerk announced the following amendment on which the Chair has Eshoo Markey Smith (WA) pairs: postponed further proceedings. Everett Martini Solomon On this vote: Members should also be aware that Ewing Mascara Souder Mr. Jones for, with Mr. Richardson Fawell McCarthy Spence the paging system in the Democratic Fields (TX) McCollum against. Stearns Mr. Zeliff for, with Mr. Waxman against. cloakroom is inoperative this evening, Flanagan McCrery Stenholm so Members should be very aware that Foley McDade Stockman Mrs. LOWEY changed her vote from Forbes McHale Stump ‘‘aye’’ to ‘‘no.’’ the votes will be taken and they may Fowler McHugh Stupak So the amendment was agreed to. not be able to be notified by the cloak- Fox McIntosh Talent room. Members should please keep that Frank (MA) McKeon Tanner The result of the vote was announced in mind. Franks (CT) McNulty Tate as above recorded. Franks (NJ) Meehan Tauzin AMENDMENT NO. 47 OFFERED BY MRS. SMITH OF Frelinghuysen Metcalf PERSONAL EXPLANATION Taylor (NC) Frisa Meyers Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Chairman, on roll- WASHINGTON Thomas Funderburk Mica The CHAIRMAN. The pending busi- Thornberry call No. 513, I was not present because Furse Miller (FL) Thurman 1 2 ness is the request for a recorded vote Gallegly Minge my flight was delayed 3 ⁄ hours by se- Tiahrt on amendment No. 47 offered by the Ganske Molinari vere thunderstorms. Gekas Montgomery Torkildsen Had I been present, I would have gentlewoman from Washington [Mrs. Upton Geren Moorhead voted ‘‘No.’’ SMITH] on which further proceedings Gilchrest Moran Visclosky were postponed and on which the ayes Gillmor Morella Vucanovich PERSONAL EXPLANATION prevailed by voice vote. Gilman Myers Waldholtz Mr. JONES. Mr. Chairman, on roll- Walker The Clerk will redesignate the Goodling Myrick call No. 513, I was inadvertenly de- Gordon Nethercutt Walsh amendment. Goss Neumann Wamp tained. The Clerk redesignated the amend- Graham Ney Ward Had I been present, I would have ment. Greenwood Norwood Watts (OK) voted ‘‘yes.’’ Gunderson Nussle Weldon (FL) Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. RECORDED VOTE Gutknecht Orton Weldon (PA) The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has Hall (OH) Oxley Weller Chairman, earlier this evening, July 17, been demanded. Hall (TX) Packard White 1995, I was unvoidably detained because Hamilton Parker Whitfield A recorded vote was ordered. of circumstances beyond my control. Hancock Pastor Wicker Due to a malfunction with the air traf- The CHAIRMAN. This is a 5-minute Hansen Paxon Wilson fic control system at the Cincinnati vote. Hastert Payne (VA) Wolf Hastings (WA) Peterson (FL) Wyden airport, my connecting flight to Wash- The vote was taken by electronic de- Hayes Peterson (MN) Young (AK) ington was postponed. Unfortunately, vice, and there were—ayes 286, noes 124, Hayworth Petri Young (FL) having arrived here just moments ago, not voting 24, as follows: Hefley Pickett Zimmer I was informed that I missed two roll [Roll No. 513] NOES—124 call votes to the Fiscal Year 1996 Inte- AYES—286 Abercrombie Bryant (TX) Durbin rior Appropriations Bill (H.R. 1977). Allard Bartlett Brewster Ackerman Clay Engel Had I been present at the time the Andrews Barton Brown (OH) Baldacci Clayton Evans votes were called, I would have voted Archer Bass Brownback Bateman Clyburn Farr Armey Bentsen Bryant (TN) Beilenson Coleman Fattah ‘‘yea’’ on rollcall vote 512 and ‘‘yea’’ on Bachus Bevill Bunn Bereuter Collins (IL) Fazio rollcall 513. Baesler Bilbray Bunning Berman Conyers Fields (LA) AMENDMENT NO. 31 OFFERED BY MR. KLECZKA Baker (CA) Bilirakis Burr Bishop Coyne Filner Baker (LA) Bliley Burton Bonior DeLauro Flake The CHAIRMAN. The pending busi- Ballenger Blute Buyer Borski Dellums Foglietta ness is the demand for a recorded vote Barcia Boehlert Callahan Boucher Dicks Frost on amendment No. 31 offered by the Barr Boehner Calvert Browder Dingell Gejdenson Barrett (NE) Bonilla Camp Brown (CA) Dixon Gephardt gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. KLECZ- Barrett (WI) Bono Canady Brown (FL) Doggett Gibbons KA] on which further proceedings were July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H 7049 postponed and on which the ayes pre- Torres Volkmer Wise delayed 31¤2 hours by severe thunderstorms. vailed by voice vote. Torricelli Waldholtz Woolsey Had I been present, I would have voted ``Yes.'' Towns Walsh Wyden The Clerk will redesignate the Traficant Ward Wynn PERSONAL EXPLANATION amendment. Upton Waters Yates Mr. JONES. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. The Clerk redesignated the amend- Velazquez Watt (NC) Young (FL) Vento Weldon (PA) Zimmer 514, I was inadvertently detained. Had I been ment. Visclosky Williams present, I would have voted ``Yes.'' RECORDED VOTE NOES—160 AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. TIAHRT The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has Archer Gekas Myrick The CHAIRMAN. The pending busi- been demanded. Armey Gilchrest Nethercutt ness is the request for a recorded vote A recorded vote was ordered. Bachus Gillmor Ney on amendment No. 65 offered by the Baesler Gilman Norwood The CHAIRMAN. This is a 5-minute Baker (CA) Goss Ortiz gentleman from Kansas [Mr. TIAHRT] vote. Baker (LA) Graham Oxley on which further proceedings were The vote was taken by electronic de- Barr Gutknecht Packard postponed and on which the noes pre- Barrett (NE) Hall (OH) vice, and there were—ayes 251, noes 160, Parker vailed by voice vote. Bartlett Hall (TX) Paxon not voting 23, as follows: Barton Hansen Pombo The Clerk will redesignate the Bereuter Hastert Pryce amendment. [Roll No. 514] Bilbray Hastings (WA) Quillen Bilirakis Hayes The Clerk redesignated the amend- AYES—251 Radanovich Bliley Hayworth ment. Abercrombie Franks (NJ) Menendez Regula Blute Herger Ackerman Frelinghuysen Mfume The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has Boehner Hilleary Riggs Andrews Frisa Miller (CA) Bonilla Hobson Rogers been demanded. Baldacci Frost Miller (FL) Bono Hoekstra Ros-Lehtinen A recorded vote was ordered. Ballenger Funderburk Mineta Boucher Hostettler Rose Barcia Furse Minge The vote was taken by electronic de- Brewster Houghton Salmon Barrett (WI) Ganske Mink Brownback Hoyer Sawyer vice, and there were—ayes 144, noes 267, Bass Gejdenson Mollohan Bryant (TN) Hunter Scarborough not voting 23, as follows: Beilenson Gephardt Murtha Bunn Hutchinson Schaefer Bentsen Geren Nadler [Roll No. 515] Bunning Istook Schiff Berman Gibbons Neal Burr Johnson (CT) Seastrand AYES—144 Bevill Gonzalez Neumann Buyer Johnson, Sam Shadegg Bishop Goodlatte Nussle Allard Ganske Neumann Callahan Kelly Shaw Boehlert Goodling Oberstar Andrews Goss Norwood Calvert Kim Bonior Gordon Obey Shuster Archer Graham Nussle Camp Knollenberg Borski Greenwood Olver Skeen Baker (CA) Gutknecht Obey Castle Kolbe Browder Gunderson Orton Smith (MI) Ballenger Hancock Paxon Chenoweth Largent Brown (CA) Gutierrez Owens Smith (TX) Barcia Hastings (WA) Peterson (MN) Christensen Latham Brown (FL) Hamilton Pallone Smith (WA) Barr Hayworth Petri Chrysler Laughlin Bryant (TX) Hancock Pastor Souder Barrett (NE) Hefley Pombo Coburn Lewis (CA) Burton Hastings (FL) Payne (NJ) Stockman Barrett (WI) Heineman Portman Coleman Lewis (KY) Canady Hefley Payne (VA) Tate Bartlett Herger Ramstad Combest Lightfoot Cardin Hefner Pelosi Tauzin Barton Hilleary Reed Crapo Linder Chabot Heineman Peterson (FL) Taylor (NC) Bass Hinchey Riggs Cubin Livingston Chambliss Hilliard Peterson (MN) Tejeda Bereuter Hoekstra Roberts Danner Lucas Chapman Hinchey Petri Boehlert Hoke Rohrabacher Davis Manzullo Thomas Clay Hoke Pickett Bono Horn Ros-Lehtinen DeLay McCollum Thornberry Clayton Holden Pomeroy Brownback Hostettler Roth Diaz-Balart McCrery Tiahrt Clement Horn Porter Bryant (TN) Inglis Royce Dickey McDade Vucanovich Clyburn Hyde Portman Burr Jacobs Sabo Doolittle McIntosh Walker Coble Inglis Poshard Burton Johnson, Sam Salmon Dreier McKeon Wamp Collins (GA) Jackson-Lee Quinn Camp Kasich Sanders Dunn Metcalf Watts (OK) Collins (IL) Jacobs Rahall Canady Kennedy (RI) Sanford Ehrlich Meyers Weldon (FL) Condit Johnson (SD) Ramstad Castle Kim Scarborough Ensign Mica Weller Conyers Johnson, E.B. Rangel Chabot Kingston Schumer Everett Molinari White Cooley Johnston Reed Chenoweth Klug Seastrand Ewing Montgomery Whitfield Costello Kanjorski Rivers Christensen Kolbe Sensenbrenner Fawell Moorhead Wicker Cox Kaptur Roberts Chrysler LaHood Shadegg Fields (TX) Moran Wilson Coyne Kasich Roemer Coble Largent Shays Franks (CT) Morella Wolf Cramer Kennedy (MA) Rohrabacher Coburn Latham Smith (MI) Gallegly Myers Young (AK) Crane Kennedy (RI) Roth Collins (GA) Leach Smith (NJ) Cremeans Kennelly Roukema NOT VOTING—23 Cooley Lewis (GA) Souder Cunningham Kildee Roybal-Allard Cox Lincoln Spence de la Garza King Royce Allard Ford Moakley Crane Linder Spratt Deal Kingston Rush Bateman Green Reynolds Crapo Lipinski Stockman DeFazio Kleczka Sabo Becerra Harman Richardson Cunningham LoBiondo Stump DeLauro Klink Sanders Brown (OH) Jefferson Stark Danner Luther Talent Dellums Klug Sanford Clinger Jones Tucker Deal Manzullo Tate Deutsch LaFalce Saxton Collins (MI) Maloney Waxman DeFazio Martini Taylor (MS) Dicks LaHood Schroeder Ehlers Martinez Zeliff DeLay McCarthy Tiahrt Dingell Lantos Schumer English McInnis Deutsch McHugh Torkildsen Dixon LaTourette Scott Dickey McIntosh Upton Doggett Lazio Sensenbrenner b 2031 Doolittle Menendez Velazquez Dreier Metcalf Vento Dooley Leach Serrano The Clerk announced the following Dornan Levin Shays Duncan Meyers Visclosky Doyle Lewis (GA) Sisisky pair: Ensign Miller (CA) Waldholtz Duncan Lincoln Skaggs On this vote: Filner Miller (FL) Walker Durbin Lipinski Skelton Foley Minge White Edwards LoBiondo Slaughter Mr. Waxman for, with Mr. Jones against. Franks (NJ) Myrick Wyden Emerson Lofgren Smith (NJ) Mr. Richardson for, with Mr. Zeliff against. Funderburk Nadler Zimmer Engel Longley Solomon Mr. FRANKS of Connecticut and Mr. Eshoo Lowey Spence NOES—267 Evans Luther Spratt EHRLICH changed their vote from Abercrombie Blute Buyer Farr Manton Stearns ‘‘aye’’ to ‘‘no.’’ Ackerman Boehner Callahan Fattah Markey Stenholm Mr. CREMEANS and Mr. LAZIO of Bachus Bonilla Calvert Fazio Martini Stokes Baesler Bonior Cardin Fields (LA) Mascara Studds New York changed their vote from Baker (LA) Borski Chapman Filner Matsui Stump ‘‘no’’ to ‘‘aye.’’ Baldacci Boucher Clay Flake McCarthy Stupak So the amendment was agreed to. Bateman Brewster Clayton Flanagan McDermott Talent The result of the vote was announced Beilenson Browder Clement Foglietta McHale Tanner Bentsen Brown (CA) Clyburn Foley McHugh Taylor (MS) as above recorded. Bevill Brown (FL) Coleman Forbes McKinney Thompson PPERSONAL EXPLANATION Bilbray Brown (OH) Collins (IL) Fowler McNulty Thornton Bilirakis Bryant (TX) Combest Fox Meehan Thurman Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. Bishop Bunn Condit Frank (MA) Meek Torkildsen 514, I was not present because my flight was Bliley Bunning Conyers H 7050 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE July 17, 1995 Costello Hutchinson Pickett The result of the vote was announced In the procedures in the U.S. House Coyne Hyde Pomeroy Cramer Istook Porter as above recorded. of Representatives, chapter 27, section Cremeans Jackson-Lee Poshard PERSONAL EXPLANATION 27.1 states the following: ‘‘It is fun- Cubin Johnson (CT) Pryce Mr. JONES. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. damental that it is not in order to Davis Johnson (SD) Quillen amend an amendment previously de la Garza Johnson, E. B. Quinn 515, I was inadvertently detained. DeLauro Johnston Radanovich Had I been present, I would have voted agreed to. Thus the text of a bill per- Dellums Kanjorski Rahall ``yes.'' fected by amendment cannot thereafter Diaz-Balart Kaptur Rangel PERSONAL EXPLANATION be amended.’’ Dicks Kelly Regula Dingell Kennedy (MA) Rivers Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. b 2045 Dixon Kennelly Roemer 515, I was not present because my flight was Doggett Kildee Rogers Mr. Chairman, this amendment seeks delayed 31¤2 hours by severe thunderstorms. Dooley King Rose Had I been present, I would have voted to amend text previously amended, and Dornan Kleczka Roukema is therefore not in order. I respectfully Doyle Klink Roybal-Allard ``no.'' ask the Chair to sustain my point of Dunn Knollenberg Rush PERSONAL EXPLANATION Durbin LaFalce Sawyer order. Edwards Lantos Saxton Mr. CLINGER. Mr. Chairman, due to inclem- The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman Ehrlich LaTourette Schaefer ent weather, my connecting flight from Pitts- Emerson Laughlin Schiff from Massachusetts [Mr. KENNEDY] burgh was delayed 4 hours. As a result, I wish to be heard on the point of order? Engel Lazio Schroeder missed four rollcall votes earlier this evening. Eshoo Levin Scott Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Evans Lewis (CA) Serrano If I had been present, I would have voted Yes, Mr. Chairman, I would. Everett Lewis (KY) Shaw ``nay'' on rollcall vote No. 512, ``yea'' on rollcall The fact of the matter is this amend- Ewing Lightfoot Shuster vote No. 513, ``nay'' on rollcall vote No. 514, Farr Livingston Sisisky ment was filed. It was previously ap- Fattah Lofgren Skaggs and ``nay'' on rollcall vote No. 515. proved by the Parliamentarian. Every- Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I ask Fawell Longley Skeen thing was in order. The Committee on Fazio Lowey Skelton unanimous consent to strike the last Rules devised the rule which essen- Fields (LA) Lucas Slaughter words. Fields (TX) Manton Smith (TX) tially, although it appears to have The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, Flake Markey Smith (WA) made this amendment in order, on a Flanagan Mascara Solomon the gentleman from Washington [Mr. technical basis, is being objected to. Foglietta Matsui Stearns DICKS] is recognized for 5 minutes. The reality is that all we are trying Forbes McCollum Stenholm There was no objection. Fowler McCrery Stokes Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I would to do is knock out high-cost timber Fox McDade Studds sales. This is an attempt to continue to Frank (MA) McDermott Stupak like to engage the distinguished chair- Franks (CT) McHale Tanner man of the Subcommittee on Interior, keep corporate welfare in this bill, and Frelinghuysen McKeon Tauzin to try to get by on a technical amend- Frisa McKinney Taylor (NC) if he could tell the Members, we have some concern about what the plan into ment to knock this amendment out. Frost McNulty Tejeda Mr. Chairman, I just cannot tell the Furse Meehan Thomas the evening is. Gallegly Meek Thompson Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, will the Members how strongly I object to those Gejdenson Mfume Thornberry gentleman yield? that are not going to allow this issue Gekas Mica Thornton to even be debated on the House floor. Gephardt Mineta Thurman Mr. DICKS. I yield to the gentleman Geren Mink Torres from Ohio. I paid attention to every single rule. Gibbons Molinari Torricelli Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, it is the The only thing that has happened is be- Gilchrest Mollohan Towns cause, on a voice vote earlier this Gillmor Montgomery Traficant plan at this juncture to go forward and Gilman Moorhead Volkmer complete the bill tonight. We think evening, an amendment was passed Gonzalez Moran Vucanovich that we can probably get it done in which knocked $10 million out of this Goodlatte Morella Walsh about 3 hours. We will roll the votes on bill, the number that I have written Goodling Murtha Wamp into the bill has been changed, and Gordon Myers Ward an hourly basis. So essentially, give or Greenwood Neal Waters take 10 minutes or so, when we get two therefore, I am not allowed to offer the Gunderson Nethercutt Watt (NC) or three amendments in about an hour, amendment. Gutierrez Ney Watts (OK) we will vote on those, a 15-minute vote Mr. Chairman, this is technocratic Hall (OH) Oberstar Weldon (FL) politics at its worst. It essentially de- Hall (TX) Olver Weldon (PA) and then five-minute votes to follow on Hamilton Ortiz Weller however many amendments. Then we nies anybody the ability of having an Hansen Orton Whitfield will go on an hour and roll again until open debate about a critical issue be- Hastert Owens Wicker fore this country, and I would very Hastings (FL) Oxley Williams we get finished. Hayes Packard Wilson The CHAIRMAN. Are there further much appeal that the Parliamentarian Hefner Pallone Wise amendments to title II? would rule in my favor and against the Hilliard Parker Wolf gentleman from Ohio [Mr. REGULA]. AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. KENNEDY OF Hobson Pastor Woolsey Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I re- Holden Payne (NJ) Wynn MASSACHUSETTS Houghton Payne (VA) Yates Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. spectfully submit that the gentleman Hoyer Pelosi Young (AK) from Massachusetts [Mr. KENNEDY] has Hunter Peterson (FL) Young (FL) Chairman, I offer an amendment, amendment No. 55. discussed the merits of his amendment, NOT VOTING—23 The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will des- but he has not addressed the point of Armey Ford Moakley ignate the amendment. order. I think the rules clearly state Becerra Green Reynolds The text of the amendment is as fol- that this amendment is not in order at Berman Harman Richardson this time, or during the balance of the Chambliss Jefferson Stark lows: Clinger Jones Tucker Amendment offered by Mr. KENNEDY of bill. Collins (MI) Maloney Waxman Massachusetts: Page 45, line 24, strike The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman Ehlers Martinez Zeliff ‘‘$1,276,688,000’’ and insert ‘‘$1,263,234,000’’. from Massachusetts [Mr. KENNEDY] English McInnis Page 47, line 5 strike ‘‘$120,000,000’’ and in- wish to be heard further on the point of b 2041 sert ‘‘$114,980,000’’. order? The Clerk announced the following POINT OF ORDER Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. I pairs: Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I rise to would like to be heard further on the On this vote: a point of order. point of order, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Jones for, with Mr. Moakley against. The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will Again, Mr. Chairman, I would just Mr. Richardson for, with Mr. Zeliff against. state his point of order. like to point out that I know that the Mr. WELLER and Mr. DOGGETT Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I make gentleman from Ohio [Mr. REGULA] is a changed their vote from ‘‘aye’’ to ‘‘no.’’ a point of order against the gentle- fair-minded individual. We have Mr. HINCHEY and Mr. VENTO man’s amendment because it seeks to worked closely on a number of other is- changed their vote from ‘‘no’’ to ‘‘aye.’’ amend a paragraph previously amend- sues Mr. Chairman, I would just point So the amendment was rejected. ed. out that this is really a technical way July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H 7051 of knocking out and closing off debate the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. This It is going to cost approximately $100 on an important issue. reserve has been in operation since the million to move it into another SPR The reality is that if we are inter- 1970s, and this in one case here, we are, location. The only place we could find ested in being able to reduce the in essence, cutting $100,000,000 in order $100 million was to sell 7 million bar- amount of money that this bill spends, to save the reserve, because in its wis- rels. Instead of losing $100 million, we because inadvertently there was a vote dom, the committee decided they will move 63 million and sell 7 million that prior to this time took place wanted to sell 7 million barrels of this first. This is a last-in-first-out. What which knocked out $10 million, we are particular oil in order to try and gain went in the last, the last 7 million that not going to be allowed to again open $100 million for the operation of the went in was $17.50 a barrel, not $33. The this bill and knock out further funds SPR. market today is close to that amount. because of this technical rule, which Mr. Chairman, I think if we look at Therefore, logically, for environmental dates back prior to the establishment some of the past situations we have reasons, for practical reasons, we have of a Committee on the Budget. Why had with the Middle East oil situation no choice. We do not have another $100 not allow this debate to go forward and where prices escalated, by dipping into million. have an up-or-down vote? I would ap- the reserve we were able to hold that The gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. peal to the gentleman from Ohio to amount down, and the second thing is TAUZIN] mentioned national security. withdraw his point of order and to if we sell that oil, we have about $33 in Let me tell the Members, we have SPR allow us to have the debate. it. If we sell it we may get $16 or $17. because of national security. However, Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, let me That does not make a lot of sense to if we do not take care of the SPR fa- say, and again I respectfully submit me as far as this whole situation is. I cilities, and I am talking about the that any Member can offer a point of just do not think economically we are hardware that is there to pump out the order. If I were to withdraw, there will thinking right, that this is the way to other 520 million barrels. We have 590 be another Member offer a point of do it. million barrels total. We want to sell order. The gentleman well knows this Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance only 7 million barrels out of a total of rule has been in place for along time. It of my time. 590. The Secretary of Energy strongly was not established just in this par- Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I claim endorses the sale, because if we do not the time in opposition to the amend- ticular term. It was a rule that was put sell this oil, the Secretary will have to ment, but I would like to withhold the in place by the gentleman’s party. I take $100 million out of the rest of her use of my time so the gentleman from think we have to respect the rules of budget which is designed to take care Louisiana [Mr. TAUZIN] can speak. of the SPR facilities. the House. Clearly, this is subject to a The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman point of order. If I as chairman of the Some of this equipment is almost 20 from Ohio [Mr. REGULA] will be recog- committee were not to raise it, we years old. It has to be replaced. If we nized in opposition to the amendment. do not, in a period of national security have a lot of other Members ready to The Chair recognizes the gentleman crisis, it very possibly will not work. do so. from Louisiana [Mr. TAUZIN]. Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, will the The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is pre- Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, I yield gentleman yield? pared to rule on the point of order. For myself 1 minute. Mr. REGULA. I yield to the gen- the reasons stated by the gentleman Mr. Chairman, the amendment before tleman from Washington. from Ohio [Mr. REGULA] the adoption the House today is to strike from the Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, let me ask of the Coburn amendment precludes bill the provisions that would allow the the gentleman, is he saying if we do the offering of the amendment of the Government to sell 7 million barrels of not sell the oil then we are going to be gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. our Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Why over our 602(b) allocation, and there- KENNEDY] as printed in the RECORD on earth would we want to sell 7 mil- fore we are going to have to cut back a under the Chair’s rulings of March 15 lion barrels of the Strategic Petroleum whole series of other programs that are and 16 of this year, so the point of Reserve, especially when we are going funded under this budget, whether it is order is sustained. to sell it at one-half the price we ac- the Forest Service or the Park Service, Are there further amendments to quired it for? Why would we want to or heaven forbid, individual Member title II? sell one drop of that oil when we know projects that have been funded in this AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. SCHAEFER how critical it is, how critical it was bill? Mr. SCHAEFER. Mr. Chairman, I during the Persian Gulf conflict, in Mr. REGULA. Reclaiming my time, offer an amendment. maintaining the price of oil for Ameri- Mr. Chairman, the gentleman is abso- The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will des- cans, so that Saddam Hussein could lutely correct. We have no extra ignate the amendment. not beat us at home economically when money. We are right to the allocation, The text of the amendment is as fol- he could not beat us in the field of bat- which is, of course, about 11 percent lows: tle. less than last year. Amendment offered by Mr. SCHAEFER: Page Mr. Chairman, this amendment needs If we do not sell the 7 million barrels 57, line 7, strike ‘‘$287,000,000’’ and all that to be adopted. We are more dependent to pay for taking care of SPR the other follows through ‘‘Reserve’’ on line 21, and in- on foreign oil today than ever in our money in the budget is going back into sert the following: $187,000,000, to remain history. DOE has recently confirmed it maintaining the SPR facilities in top- available until expended, which shall be de- to the President, and said maintenance notch condition. Therefore if there is rived by transfer of unobligated balances of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve is an energy crisis, if there is a threat to from the ‘‘SPR petroleum account’’. essential to national security. This is a national security, we can get the oil The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman bad move. This amendment corrects it. out of the ground. If we fail to have the from Colorado [Mr. SCHAEFER] is recog- Members ought to vote for it. sale, as provided in the bill, we do not nized for 10 minutes. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance know where the $100 million will come Mr. SCHAEFER. Mr. Chairman, I of my time. from. yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I yield I know where it will come from, it Louisiana [Mr. TAUZIN] and I ask unan- myself such time as I may consume. will come from letting the rest of the imous consent that he may use that Mr. Chairman, this is a budget-bust- SPR facilities deteriorate. We have no time as he so wishes. er. Let me say it loud and clear, this is extra money to do it so it is clearly a The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection a budget-buster. We have in Weeks Is- budget-buster. If Members are main- to the request of the gentleman from land 70 million barrels of oil. Weeks Is- taining our reductions in the budget, if Colorado? land leaks, so this is an environmental we are for maintaining an environ- There was no objection. vote. A vote for this amendment is mentally safe SPR we have to vote Mr. SCHAEFER. Mr. Chairman, I against the environment, because this ‘‘no’’ on this amendment. yield myself such time as I may leaking causes water to go into the oil. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance consume. Mr. Chairman, I am offering It allows seepage, and everybody of my time. this amendment today to protect a val- agrees, we have to move the 70 million Mr. SCHAEFER. Mr. Chairman, I uable asset of this country, and that is barrels. yield 1 minute to the gentleman from H 7052 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE July 17, 1995

Virginia [Mr. BLILEY], chairman of the to repeat it. This House has debated portant policy issue. I think 435 Mem- Committee on Commerce. time after time the energy crisis which bers ought to vote on it. If you want to Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I yield we had in the 1970’s and 1980’s. To deal let SPR deteriorate, vote for the 1 minute to the gentleman from Vir- with that, one of the principal weapons amendment. If you want to maintain ginia. we achieved was to set aside the Stra- the facilities in first-class condition The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman tegic Petroleum Reserve, which was and not bust the budget, vote against from Virginia [Mr. BLILEY] is recog- supposed to constitute 1 billion barrels. the amendment. nized for 2 minutes. We have 592, less than half of what it If you care about the environment, (Mr. BLILEY asked and was given is. vote against the amendment, but these permission to revise and extend his re- This bill, in an improper procedure facilities are leaking at Weeks Island. marks.) which had to be sanctified by an immu- There is agreement that we have to Mr. BLILEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in nity bath given by the Committee on move the 70 million barrels to another support of the amendment offered by Rules, which waived points of order location. It costs money to move that the gentleman from Colorado [Mr. against this particular proposal, which oil. SCHAEFER] and the gentleman from would be subject to a point of order as Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 Louisiana [Mr. TAUZIN]. legislation in an appropriation bill, has minute to the gentleman from Massa- Mr. Chairman, we are all aware of presented us a device which will en- chusetts [Mr. MARKEY]. the difficulties in balancing the budg- courage this country to buy oil at Mr. MARKEY. I thank the gentleman et. Sometimes in balancing the budget, $33.50 a barrel and sell it for $15. The for yielding me the time. we have to look for creative solutions net cost of this kind of folly is two- Mr. Chairman, the Strategic Petro- to make ends meet. Today we are see- fold. One, it is going to cost this coun- leum Reserve is aptly named. Strategic ing a budget-balancing act that is just try $106 billion that we are going to comes from its military importance to about as creative as we can get. We are lose. The total cost of what we are our country. The reason that we need balancing the budget by buying high going to sell is going to be double that. the Strategic Petroleum Reserve is and selling low. H.R. 1977 allows the The loss is $106,500,000. that it calms our economic, our finan- sale of 7 million barrels low in order to However, the real loss is if this coun- cial and our energy marketplaces dur- raise $100 million to close a Strategic try gets into some kind of a crunch, be- ing military crisis, during crises in the Petroleum Reserve facility and to pay cause when this country produces less Middle East. It gives the United States for some of the operations of the re- than half the oil that it uses, the one time to think. It allows our financial maining facilities. mechanism we have to protect our in- markets the time to be able to absorb The average cost of acquiring and dustry, to protect our military, to en- the shock which is coming out of the storing oil in the reserve is $33.50 a bar- able us to protect the force that is nec- Middle East. rel. Because of current oil prices, we essary to defend ourselves, and to ad- More important than the B–2 bomber, will probably get about $15 per barrel. dress the problem of stabilizing the pe- more important than the Strategic De- This is foolishness. It is just plain com- troleum market, is the Strategic Pe- fense Initiative, the Strategic Petro- mon sense that buying high and selling troleum Reserve. Adopt the amend- leum Reserve in a modern world, where low will never balance the budget. Dur- ment, reject the language of the bill, most of the risks are going to come ing the Persian Gulf crisis, this oil was and let us get down to the business of from places that we can identify that vital. If we have another crisis, it will legislating wisely. send shocks throughout our system, it be vital again. If we do this today, we is needed in order to give us the time b will be doing it forever. 2100 to think. It tells our enemies that they Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, will the Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I yield cannot panic our economy the way in gentleman yield? myself 2 minutes. the 1970’s we were panicked. Mr. BLILEY. I yield to the gen- Mr. Chairman, let me make it clear Let us vote not to reduce it. If we tleman from Ohio. again, the last 7 million barrels cost us need to spend the money, let us find it Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I would $17.50, not $33. That is a straw man. from the other defense items which are ask the gentleman, where does he sug- That is just put out there to confuse less important than the role which the gest we get the $100 million to take the issue. The real cost is $17.50. Strategic Petroleum Reserve has care of the balance of the SPR facili- But the real cost in terms of national played over the last 20 years in telling ties, the 583 million barrels that will be security will be a diminution of the our enemies they cannot spook us. left? ability to use the balance of the 583 Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I re- Mr. BLILEY. Mr. Chairman, I am million barrels of oil if we do not take serve the balance of my time. sure that the distinguished chairman care of the SPR facilities. The facili- Mr. SCHAEFER. Mr. Chairman, I of the subcommittee, who has long ex- ties are wearing out, and they need to yield 11⁄2 minutes to the gentleman perience on this committee, knows ex- be replaced. This is information I get from Illinois [Mr. HASTERT]. actly where to get it if he needs to get from the Secretary of Energy. The SPR Mr. HASTERT. Mr. Chairman, this is it. facilities, when called upon to respond a common sense issue. It is about eco- The fact of the matter is if we sell to a national crisis, will not be able to nomics and it is about common sense. this today for this case, next year when do so. First of all, this debate about being an we have an even more difficult time to Because we do not have $100 million environmental issue, that is ridiculous. balance the budget, we will be back without the sale, therefore we have no You pump water into this well to raise selling more, and pretty soon there will choice but to take that $100 million out the oil to pump it out in the first place. be nothing in the SPR, and when we of the money designed to maintain There is not one drop of oil that has have a crisis, as we surely will in the SPR in top quality condition. It will gone out of this reserve into any natu- future, with oil disruptions, and we have an enormous impact on the abil- ral environment, so let us not talk need this SPR, it will not be there. I ity to use SPR in the future. about that. thank the gentleman for yielding time I know this sounds easy to vote to The second point is we have to have to me. not sell the oil and let somebody else a billion barrels of oil to protect our Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 worry about the $100 million. Some- military, to protect our economy minute to the distinguished gentleman body, I do not know exactly who, but I against what could happen, our trust in from Michigan [Mr. DINGELL], the know what the Secretary of Energy the Middle East. We do not know what ranking minority member of the Com- will do. She will not be able to take those people are going to do. We do not mittee on Commerce. care of SPR. Therefore, I think it know what is going to happen to us in (Mr. DINGELL asked and was given would be a very poor judgment. the Middle East. permission to revise and extend his re- I have no objection to the Committee But if we give it away, we do not marks.) on Rules bringing this out, even have the billion barrels of oil. We have Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Chairman, he who though it is subject to a point of order 591 million barrels. What happens is, does not learn from history is doomed in protecting it. I think it is a very im- sure, the last 7 million cost $17.50 a July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H 7053 barrel. But there are 591 million barrels mediately, and no new money has been the budget implications for the SPR that cost us $33 a barrel, so the average appropriated to reserve this year. I program?’’ I believe in SPR. I have cost of that barrel of oil is about $32.27. fully expect next year when a $250 mil- been working for years in that commit- If we want to sell something for $15 lion bill comes up, you know we are tee to put oil in SPR, but what are the that we bought for $32, I have got a lot going to jump into that giant piggy implications if you do not get author- of good deals for you. But in order to bank in Louisiana and find some more ity to sell Weeks Island oil and use the keep the integrity of our economy, the dollars somewhere. proceeds? integrity of our defense and the integ- Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Chairman, will Answer, Secretary of Energy: If the rity of the whole SPR system, we have the gentleman yield? Department does not obtain authority to defeat what is there. We have to Mr. SCHAEFER. I yield to the gen- to sell 7 million barrels of Strategic pass the Schaefer amendment. I ask for tleman from Michigan. Petroleum Reserve oil and use the pro- an expedient effort to do so. Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Chairman, the ceeds, the Department would nec- Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 amount of the sale is $200-plus million. essarily reduce Strategic Petroleum minute to the gentleman from New The amount which is wasted in selling Reserve site security, reduce the Jersey [Mr. PALLONE], ranking minor- at half the cost the government paid guards, reduce the security, draw down ity member of the Subcommittee on for it is over $100 million. That is the readiness of delivery systems, machin- Energy of the Committee on Com- economy we are practicing here to- ery will be in disrepair, curtail mainte- merce. night. nance and life extension activities and Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I have Mr. SCHAEFER. The gentleman is defer some Weeks Island decommis- the greatest respect for the gentleman correct. sioning requirements. from Ohio [Mr. REGULA], the chairman, Mr. Chairman, I yield back the bal- Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, will the but I have to say from listening to the ance of my time. gentleman yield? debate today, it is very obvious to me The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman Mr. REGULA. I yield to the gen- that it is inappropriate for us to move from Ohio [Mr. REGULA] has the right tleman from Washington. this Strategic Petroleum Reserve with- to close. Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, in essence Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, I yield out having a hearing, without having what the gentleman is saying is one of myself the balance of my time. action by the authorizing committee. The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman the biggest problems has been getting We have not had a single hearing on from Louisiana is recognized for 1 the oil out of the ground, and we are this issue in our subcommittee. minute. going to undermine the ability to do The talk about the environmental Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, I will that. So this reserve that we think is impact, we do not really know what tell you a quick story. I was privileged going to be there to help us in the cri- the environmental impact is. Just lis- to join senior members of the Congress sis, as a result of striking out your tening to the debate in the last few in a visit to the Persian Gulf right be- amendment, will make it less plausible minutes here, you can see there is fore the outbreak of hostilities there. that the oil will be there because we great variation in terms of how people When we returned, the President will not be able to maintain the strate- feel the environmental impact is going asked us to the White House to seek gic petroleum oil reserve. to be or what it is going to mean to our advice on anything we had noticed, I want to associate myself with the move this reserve component. anything we had seen that he ought to gentleman. I think he is doing the In addition to that, we are talking know about before we entered that pe- right thing here. I think if we cut $100 about a situation now where something riod of crisis. He called upon me for a million out of this bill, we will make a like 50 percent of our oil that we use in word of advice. very serious mistake, because it is this country is imported oil. We know When you are called upon by your going to undermine the bill and put us this is a major problem. President in a period of crisis, you in a situation where we are over our I listened to the gentleman from think long and hard. The one advice I 602(b) allocations. Ohio [Mr. REGULA], the chairman, be- gave the President then was, ‘‘If and Mr. REGULA. Reclaiming my time, fore when he talked about a previous when hostilities break out and the just let me say again, the gentleman amendment and he talked about how price of oil begins to ratchet up rapidly mentioned that there was no problem we do not want to go back to the long as the oil traders take advantage of us, environmentally. There is a problem. lines that existed in the 1970’s during be prepared to announce in that severe This oil is stored in a salt cavern. The the oil crisis. The Strategic Petroleum crisis that the strategic petroleum oil soil is leaching into the aquifer, so Reserve is designed to prevent that is available to our marketplace.’’ there is a problem. from happening again. The President, whether he took my In the absence of being able to sell It makes no sense, at this hour when advice or others, did exactly that. The any of the oil, the Secretary may not we really have not looked at the issue, oil traders, when the outbreak of hos- be able to decommission Weeks Island. when the authorizing committee has tilities occurred, immediately began to We may lose 70 million barrels instead not had a hearing, to move on such an ratchet the price up. The price of oil of 7 to contamination. I have to say to important issue on an appropriations began going up rapidly every day as you again, after the hearing, listening bill. I ask that this amendment by the that crisis accelerated. The President to the testimony, it was my judgment gentleman from Colorado [Mr. SCHAE- announced that the Strategic Petro- in putting together the chairman’s FER] be supported. leum Reserve would be available in the mark that this was responsible man- Mr. SCHAEFER. Mr. Chairman, I American marketplace if it went any agement of SPR. I am an advocate of yield myself the balance of my time. higher and immediately the price SPR. The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman dropped. Mr. YATES. Mr. Chairman, will the from Colorado is recognized for 1 That is how critical this reserve is. gentleman yield? minute. Do not sell a drop of it. Vote for the Mr. REGULA. I yield to the gen- Mr. SCHAEFER. Mr. Chairman, in Schaefer-Tauzin amendment. tleman from Illinois. my last 1 minute, I just want to make Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I yield Mr. YATES. Mr. Chairman, the gen- one point that has not been made at myself the balance of my time. tleman and I were in charge of provid- this point in time. That is, of that $100 Mr. Chairman, I feel like the Lone ing the initial appropriations for the million that we have been talking Ranger on this one. You notice there Strategic Petroleum Reserve. about from the sale of the 7 million has been overwhelming support for it. I Mr. REGULA. The gentleman is cor- barrels of oil, which by the way is in think I am the only one that has spo- rect. the district of the gentleman from Lou- ken, but as chairman of the committee, Mr. YATES. If the gentleman will isiana, only $60 million is going to be I am saying you have to make respon- yield further, we have reviewed the going for closing down Weeks Island. sible judgments when you mark up a Strategic Petroleum Reserve from its The rest of it is for general operations. bill. beginning. We have followed it thor- So we are not talking about some- This is what the Secretary of Energy oughly. We have had oversight hear- thing that we are going to get into im- said in the hearing. I said, ‘‘What are ings. We know just about everything H 7054 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE July 17, 1995 that one should know about it. In this Thus, the text of a bill perfected by amend- State and local resources leverage an case the gentleman from Ohio is ex- ment cannot, thereafter, be amended. additional $200 million for weatheriza- actly right, and I hope the House sus- Mr. Chairman, this amendment seeks tion, doubling the core Federal funds. tains him. to amend a text previously amended Mr. FOX of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chair- Mr. REGULA. Reclaiming my time, I and is, therefore, not in order. man, will the gentleman yield? thank the gentleman for his comments. The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman Mr. SANDERS. I yield to the gen- Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, if the gen- from Vermont [Mr. SANDERS] wish to tleman from Pennsylvania. tleman will yield further, we are say- be heard on this point of order? Mr. FOX of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chair- ing now we have got 590 million barrels Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Chairman, it was man, the fact is we do have an amend- in this reserve. my intention to withdraw this amend- ment before the desk that we would Mr. REGULA. The gentleman is ment and announce my support for an- like to present which would be an correct. other amendment to follow. I would re- amendment for weatherization. Mr. DICKS. And we are talking about spectfully request unanimous consent Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, my 7 million to deal with this emergency to have 5 minutes to explain my posi- point of order is pending here. I do not situation, and we are still going to tion. think we can go to another amend- have a very large and significant re- The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman ment. And I renew my point of order serve. This is less than 1 day’s imports. reserve his point of order? against it. Mr. REGULA. The gentleman is Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, yes, I The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman correct. reserve my point of order. from Vermont [Mr. SANDERS] wish to Mr. DICKS. If the gentleman will The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman be heard on the gentleman’s point of yield further, I think this is a prag- from Vermont is recognized for 5 min- order? matic decision on the part of the chair- utes. Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Chairman, all man. I think we ought to support him. Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Chairman, what over this country we have elderly peo- Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I I, and in a few moments the gentleman ple who must in their homes, in order strongly urge Members to vote against from Pennsylvania [Mr. FOX], are at- to survive, prevent their homes from this amendment. It is good manage- tempting to do is something that is ex- becoming very, very cold or in fact ment and the only alternative we have. tremely important and that is to trans- very, very warm. The Chairman is The CHAIRMAN. The question is on fer $50 million into the low-income aware that today on the front page of the amendment offered by the gen- weatherization assistance program. the Washington Post was an article tleman from Colorado [Mr. SCHAEFER]. I have proposed taking money from about the suffering of so many people The question was taken; and the the Fossil Energy Research Fund. The whose homes have overheated and, in Chairman being in doubt, the commit- gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. fact, 200 deaths have occurred. tee divided, and there were—ayes 8; FOX] has another fund. But what is Mr. Chairman, I will ask for support noes 19. most important is that we replenish of the Fox amendment, which will fol- Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, I de- the fund that has been severely cut. low. This is a humane amendment and mand a recorded vote, and pending that Without this amendment, the bill a cost-effective amendment. It makes I make a point of order that a quorum provides for only half of the weather- no sense to waste energy and to in- is not present. ization funds that were provided for crease human suffering. The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the last year. That is a cut of more than Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I renew rule, further proceedings on the amend- $100 million. my point of order. ment offered by the gentleman from What I am attempting to do, and The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman Colorado [Mr. SCHAEFER] are post- what the gentleman from Pennsylvania from Vermont want to be heard further poned. [Mr. FOX] is attempting to do, is to re- on this point of order? The point of no quorum is considered store $50 million to that fund. Mr. SANDERS. No, Mr. Chairman, I withdrawn. Mr. Chairman, the low-income am finished. b 2115 weatherization assistance program is The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is pre- an enormously sensible and cost-effec- pared to rule on the point of order. For AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. SANDERS tive partnership between the Federal Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Chairman, I offer the reasons stated by the gentleman Government and local and State gov- from Ohio [Mr. REGULA], the adoption an amendment. ernments. What weatherization does in The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will des- of the Kleczka amendment precludes Vermont, and in every state in Amer- the offering of the amendment of the ignate the amendment. ica, is prevent the waste of energy, The text of the amendment is as fol- gentleman from Vermont as printed in whether that energy is oil, gas, elec- the RECORD under the Chair’s rulings of lows: tric, or whatever. Amendment offered by Mr. SANDERS: Page March 15 and 16 of this year. It is enormously inefficient for low- The point of order is sustained. 55, line 5, strike ‘‘$384,504,000’’ and insert income people all over this country to ‘‘$284,504,000’’. AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. SKAGGS Page 56, line 3, strike ‘‘$552,871,000’’ and in- waste fuel because their homes or apartments lack adequate insulation, Mr. SKAGGS. Mr. Chairman, I offer sert ‘‘$652,871,000’’. an amendment, No. 64. Page 56, line 10, strike ‘‘$133,946,000’’ and windows, or efficient heating or cooling insert ‘‘$233,946,000’’. systems. The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will des- Page 56, line 17, strike ‘‘$107,446,000’’ and The Department of Energy reports ignate the amendment. insert ‘‘$207,446,000’’. that this program has a favorable bene- The text of the amendment is as fol- lows: POINT OF ORDER fit-cost ratio of 1 to 1.61. That is, for Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I have a every $1 we invest in weatherization, Amendment offered by Mr. SKAGGS: On point of order against the gentleman’s we get $1.61 in energy savings and eco- page 56, line 3, strike ‘‘$552,871,000,’’ and in lieu thereof insert ‘‘$567,871,000’’; page 56, amendment. nomic benefits. line 10, strike ‘‘$133,946,000’’ and in lieu there- The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will Clearly, if we are interested in saving of insert ‘‘$148,946,000’’; on page 56, line 17, state his point of order. money, that is not the program to cut. strike ‘‘$107,446,000’’ and in lieu thereof Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I make Mr. Chairman, we should be clear ‘‘$120,446,000’’; and on page 56, line 18, strike a point of order against the gentle- that this is a program that works well, ‘‘$26,500,000’’ and in lieu thereof insert man’s amendment because it seeks to not only in northern States but in ‘‘$28,500,000’’. amend a paragraph previously amend- every State in America. It is a national MODIFICATION TO AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. ed. program that provides for the cold SKAGGS In the procedures in the U.S. House weather States and the warm weather Mr. SKAGGS. Mr. Chairman, I ask of Representatives, chapter 27, section States as well. unanimous consent to modify the 27.1, it states as follows: Weatherization assistance is a prime amendment and offer the amendment It is fundamental that it is not in order to example of a successful Federal-State- that I have at the desk in its revised amend an amendment previously agreed to. community partnership. Each year, form. July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H 7055 The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will re- weighed in and strongly support this $9.5 million in the next fiscal year, and port the modification. amendment. that is to defund the NEH. Even the The Clerk read the modification, as We will have to make some sac- most distinguished former chairman of follows: rifices, sacrifices like the Conversation the NEH, Lynn Cheney, has concluded Amendment, as modified, offered by Mr. Kit that the NEH has produced to that the NEH does more harm than SKAGGS: teach folks how to talk to one another. good and should be eliminated. I urge AMENDMENT NO. 64 It is true, the National Endowment for support for this amendment. On page 56, line 3, strike ‘‘$552,871,000’’, and the Humanities spent $1.7 million to Mr. Chairman, again, I want to em- in lieu thereof insert ‘‘$556,371,000’’; page 56, teach the American public how to talk phasize something very strongly, and line 10, strike ‘‘$133,946,000’’ and in lieu there- to each other. that is that I am not against the arts, of insert ‘‘$148,946,000’’; on page 56, line 17, They also, in that same kit, sug- and neither are any of my colleagues strike ‘‘$107,446,000’’ and in lieu thereof in- gested that there are conversation who are in favor of defunding the NEH. sert ‘‘$110,946,000’’. starters from obscure movies like ‘‘Ca- What we are in favor of is finally bal- The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection sablanca’’ that we ought to watch and ancing the Federal budget. to the request of the gentleman from then we all can talk about the movie, I have people in my district, mothers Colorado? and they have spent tax dollars in and fathers who work two jobs to pay There was no objection. order to educate the American public their taxes, and they are willing to Mr. SKAGGS. Mr. Chairman, this so we can all talk to each other. I make some sacrifices. I would argue think that is absurd. amendment would add into the weath- very strongly that if we are serious I, for one, do not really think that we erization program the available monies about balancing the budget, things like need the Federal Government spending now existing underneath our 602(b) al- the NEA and the NEH should be sup- location budget authority of about $3.5 our money to tell us that we should watch ‘‘Casablanca.’’ But I am here to ported by private dollars, not by our million that has been freed up by vir- Federal tax dollars. tue of earlier amendments adopted this tell you that the NEH folks, they have Mr. Chairman, I will reserve the bal- evening. not backed off one bit from their view ance of my time. Mr. Chairman, I could not agree more that the Conversation Kit represents with the arguments made by the gen- the best use of the NEH dollars. The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Illinois [Mr. YATES] is recognized tleman from Vermont [Mr. SANDERS], Consider some of the other ways that and I anticipate being made by the gen- the NEH has spent our tax dollars. for 10 minutes in opposition to the amendment. tleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. FOX]. I They spent $114,000 to Catholic Univer- would like to do much more to increase sity to support the preparation of a (Mr. YATES asked and was given per- weatherization. I think this modest in- database for indexes for Gregorian mission to revise and extend his re- crease is all that is practicable, given chants. They spent $135,000 for 24 col- marks.) the restraints on the bill. I would urge lege teachers to travel to a summer in- Mr. YATES. Mr. Chairman, I yield my colleagues to support it. stitute to chat about sex and gender in myself 1 minute. Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I re- the Middle Ages. Mr. Chairman, NEH and the National spect the effort by a member of the They spent $201,000 for Laurie Endowment for the Humanities is a subcommittee, the gentleman from Conlevit of Filmmakers Collaborative unique organization. It fosters democ- for a feature length documentary of Colorado [Mr. SKAGGS], and we have no racy in this country; it fosters all of objection to the amendment. We think the life and world of the 18th century the elements of democracy in this it is logical. Under the circumstances, midwife, Martha Ballard. They gave country. Every year the National En- it does not have any impact on our $400,000 to Doran H. Ross at UCLA for dowment for the Humanities enables 602(b) allocation. something called the ‘‘Art of Being over 3,200 teachers from all over the Mr. YATES. Mr. Chairman, on our Cuna,’’ which is an expressive culture country to participate in teacher insti- side, we accept the amendment as well. of some islands in Panama. tutes and summer seminars that help Now, many of these projects I am The CHAIRMAN. The question is on them improve their teaching. What do sure, are nice to do if we have got the the amendment, as modified, offered by they teach? These are the teachers who money to do it. I would argue that at a the gentleman from Colorado [Mr. teach history, languages, philosophy, time when we are serious about finally SKAGGS]. ethics, religion, literature, arts. In balancing the Federal budget, that we The amendment, as modified, was other words, the very foundation of a should not be spending hard-earned agreed to. democracy. taxpayers’ dollars on the NEH at this AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. CHABOT This organization as well is currently point. These types of programs, if they engaged in preserving all of the old Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Chairman, I offer are going to be funded, should be fund- an amendment. books that are disintegrating with ed privately through philanthropy, not time. The NEH’s Brittle Books Pro- The CHAIRMAN. The clerk will des- Federal tax dollars. ignate the amendment. gram has already preserved almost But the problem is not just that the three-quarters of a million volumes. The text of the amendment is as fol- NEH wastes tax dollars; it also breeds NEH is an outstanding organization lows: arrogance in the culture bureaucrats of approximately 100,000 grants that Amendment offered by Mr. CHABOT: Page who sneer at the citizens who pay the have been made since 1965 when the or- 73, strike line 16 and all that follows through freight. I recently received a letter page 74, line 15. ganization was created without a from the chief NEH functionary in breath of scandal. The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman Ohio who asserted, and this is his exact Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 from Ohio [Mr. CHABOT] is recognized language, ‘‘If there were no NEH, the minutes to the distinguished gen- for 10 minutes. public intellectual life of Ohio would tleman from California [Mr. Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Chairman, we face shrink considerably.’’ a lot of hard budget choices, but we I have little doubt that he actually ROHRABACHER]. have still got some pretty easy deci- believes that and, perhaps, in his lim- Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman, sions to make as well, like ending the ited circle the intellectual climate is I see some of my old and dear friends National Endowment for the Human- indeed that errant. But the intellectual discussing an issue that I discussed, ities, the NEH. My amendment would life of Ohio is strong, it is vibrant and, which was this issue as well as the Na- do just that. I might add, that it predates 1965, when tional Endowment for the Arts, shortly Mr. Chairman, this amendment will the NEH was formed. We got along just after I first came to Congress. save the taxpayers of this country fine before Federal tax dollars started Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong sup- nearly $100 million and that is why being spent for this back in 1965. port of Mr. CHABOT’s amendment. groups like the National Taxpayers The Appropriations Committee has Union, Citizens Against Government b 2130 done a good thing in this bill by reduc- Waste, Citizens for a Sound Economy, Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Chairman, I know ing the appropriation for the National and Americans for Tax Reform have all a very good way that we can save the Endowment for the Humanities with H 7056 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE July 17, 1995 the intention of completely eliminat- Mr. Chairman, I would agree with the where we would take the Nation in the ing funding in 3 years. However, I be- gentleman that many of these pro- future, as a people, and especially the lieve that this Congress should go fur- grams do matter. My argument is very leadership here in Congress. ther. simple. Despite the fact they matter. That is a broad abstraction. Some The citizens of this country sent a My argument is very simple. Despite specifics: without the Endowment, we strong message to this body last No- the fact they matter, they should be will lose the record of so much of this vember to cut both the size and scope paid for with private dollars, basically country’s past, in the form of the En- of the Federal Government. If we are through philanthropy, not through dowment’s program to preserve the truly serious about reducing the dan- Federal tax dollars. If we are serious newspapers of America. Without the gerously high level of deficit spending, about balancing this budget, these are Endowment, that program vanishes. we must have the courage to cut from the types of programs that we are Without the Endowment, we will not the Federal budget anything that is going to have to take a very close look through the private sector have the not absolutely necessary for the Fed- at. The Federal Government just can- program, now funded through the En- eral Government to do. not afford to go on paying for these dowment, to collect and integrate and When I first ran for Congress in 1988, types of programs, however nice they explain the papers of the great figures I campaigned in support of eliminating might be. If we are going to balance in American history. We are now in the unnecessary Federal programs such as the budget, these are the types of pro- middle of the papers, for instance, of the National Endowment for the Hu- grams that we have to cut Benjamin Franklin. manities, the National Endowment of Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I move These are critical elements in the the Arts and the Corporation for Public to strike the requisite number of American people’s understanding of Broadcasting. The National Endow- words. our roots and therefore their ability to ment for the Humanities, which was Mr. Chairman, I take this time to ex- understand our potential, our future, begun 30 years ago with a $5.5 million plain to the Members what the pro- to guide us in making intelligent judg- appropriation, has exploded into an gram will be for the balance of the ments about where this country should agency which consumed $177 million of evening. The leadership on both sides be headed. Federal money in fiscal year 1995. At a have reached an agreement to continue Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues time when our Government has piled to debate all amendments to Title II to defeat the gentleman’s amendment. Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 up trillions of dollars of debt and is and close out Title II, but the votes on minute to the gentleman from Penn- struggling to fund critical programs Title II, there is one pending and this sylvania [Mr. GOODLING], the distin- such as Medicare, housing and edu- one I am sure will be pending and any guished chairman of the Education and cation, Congress should not continue others, votes on Title II amendments to appropriate precious taxpayer dol- Labor Committee. will all be rolled over to tomorrow. So Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Chairman, I rise lars to subsidize this program. for the Members that are interested, I urge my colleagues to support the in opposition to the amendment. As there will be no more votes tonight. Chabot amendment to zero out funding the authorizing committee, we did the The House meets on Tuesday at 10 for the NEH. We need to show the proper thing. We orderly phased out a.m., and the order will be 1 minute; American people we mean business by the program over a 3-year period so then we are going to do the rule on getting the Federal debt under control. that the private sector could pick up Treasury-Post Office, and Treasury We can’t leave taxpayer-funded arts the very useful things that are done in general debate tomorrow, and then we and humanities in place when we find this program. I might also say that the will return to Interior. We will do the it necessary in the name of balancing committee’s funding is below our au- votes that have been rolled over from the budget to cut programs that are thorized phaseout figures. tonight. There are approximately four much more vital to the lives and Mr. Chairman, let me very quickly or five amendments left for title II. health of needy American citizens. talk about some of the good things. Mr. Chairman, I would congratulate Then we will, of course, finish title III Ken Burns’ Civil War series, Ken the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. CHABOT] and complete the bill tomorrow. Burns’ Baseball series, Historian David for the amendment that he has offered, Mr. Chairman, this is an agreement Brion Davis’ Pulitzer Prize-winning his courage, his responsibility, and that has been reached by leadership on ‘‘Slavery and Human Progress,’’ publi- sense of responsibility for offering this both sides, and I will say at this point cation of the journals of Henry David very positive amendment. two things. Any Members who have Thoreau, ‘‘Archaeological Treasures Mr. DICKS. I yield 1 minute to the colloquies, it would be helpful if we from the People’s Republic of China,’’ distinguished gentleman from Montana could do those tonight to save time to- the seven-part television series ‘‘Co- [Mr. WILLIAMS]. morrow. lumbus and the Age of Discovery,’’ Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. Chairman, I Second, I would ask unanimous con- preservation of important Presidential thank the gentleman for yielding. sent, and this is just for information papers, preservation of brittle books, Mr. Chairman, I say to my col- only, for myself and the gentleman preservation of historic newspapers. leagues, do not kill the NEH. Reflec- from Illinois [Mr. YATES] to each have All of these things are things that are tion matters; the Nation’s memory 5 minutes before we do the roll-over done. I think the phaseout that we matters; publications, translations, re- votes to just refresh the information of have proposed from our committee is search, education matters; identity all of the Members as to what votes the way to do this. matters; conversation counts; distinc- will be coming up, because it will be a Mr. Chairman, let me just say, people tions matter; history matters; the Na- 15-minute plus the fives. got upset, as all of us did, over some of tional Endowment for the Humanities The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection the things that came out on history matters. It is this Nation’s singular ef- to the request of the gentleman from standards. It was not the standards fort to expand and foster the develop- Illinois? themselves, if you look at the stand- ment and availability of these things There was no objection. ards carefully. What came out was the that matter. Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I yield a booklet that went to the teachers for There are a lot of things in America minute to the distinguished gentleman the teaching of the standards. The that matter. You cannot see them, but from Colorado [Mr. SKAGGS]. chairman of this committee, myself, they matter, and they matter more Mr. SKAGGS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in called the chairman of that committee than bridges and highways and B–1’s, opposition to the gentleman’s amend- that wrote those teacher benefit pro- as important as those are. The human- ment. I think the gentleman from Mon- grams and called him on the carpet, ities and those things that it expands tana put the case very well regarding told him to scrub them, told him that and protects and preserves and fosters the fundamental need for any civiliza- no one asked him to write curriculum, matter. Please do not cut or eliminate tion, and certainly our American civ- and then we took the money away from the National Endowment for the Hu- ilization, to make some modest invest- him to do anything else. manities. The humanities matter. ment in understanding its history, Mr. Chairman, I would say the phase- Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Chairman, I yield where this country has been, where our out that our authorizing committee myself 30 seconds. roots are, so we can better understand has done is the way we should go. July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H 7057 Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Chairman, I yield Union, the Citizens Against Govern- Father’s papers on the computer sys- 30 seconds to the gentleman from ment Waste, Citizens for a Sound Econ- tem so that children in public schools Washington [Mr. TATE]. omy and Americans for Tax Reform, all and libraries all over America can read Mr. TATE. Mr. Chairman, first of all, strongly support this amendment to George Washington’s letters and Thom- I would like to commend the gen- defund the National Endowment for as Jefferson’s notebooks in their school tleman from Ohio for bringing this the Humanities. libraries. amendment forward. We have heard a Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 This has been a privilege reserved lot of talk tonight about the impor- minute to the distinguished gentle- only to those in the most elite institu- tance of different programs. What it woman from Florida [Mrs. FOWLER]. tions. That is the kind of thing that really comes down to, it might be 100 (Mrs. FOWLER asked and was given NEH does. That is why it is nationally million here, 100 million there. It adds permission to revise and extend her re- funded, because it serves a national up. marks.) purpose that addresses the needs of all What we are really talking about is Mrs. FOWLER. Mr. Chairman, I rise of our children and adults, to under- burdening our children with more debt. in strong opposition to the amendment stand who we are, how we got here and There might be some great programs by the gentleman from Ohio. to help in the great mission of shaping good ideas, things we really need. But The committee’s bill provides for a 40 America’s future. does my daughter have to pay for this percent cut and the elimination of the I urge opposition to the amendment. huge debt that is coming her way? NEH over 3 years. This allows for an Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Chairman, I yield That is what it really comes down to, orderly end to Federal funding while 30 seconds to the gentleman from Cali- providing the State humanities coun- the future of our children. These may fornia [Mr. ROHRABACHER]. be important programs. But is it that cils an opportunity to finish existing Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman, important that we want to fund an- ongoing projects, to find alternative the gentlemen from Ohio has stated other $100 million to put more of a debt funding sources, or to achieve the nec- over and over again, this is not a ques- and more of a burden on our children. essary reprogramming of State funds. tion about the humanities. It is a ques- As a former chairman of the Florida Let us do it tonight and let us end it. tion of who is going to finance the very Humanities Council, I know that the Mr. Chairman, I urge your support of work that we have heard about. I hope NEH provides important programs in the Chabot amendment. some of you have noticed that there is many of our districts. The NEH is criti- b something in this country besides the 2145 cal in providing funding and seed government and the taxpayers. We Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 money for museums, libraries, lan- have got foundations. We have got uni- minute to the distinguished gentle- guage programs and historical pro- versities. We have not-for-profit and woman from California [Ms. PELOSI]. grams. for-profit people who do things like In Florida, the NEH was responsible Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Chairman, I thank this. Ted Turner, for example, just for helping to replace the library re- the gentleman for yielding time to me. worked and restored so much film that sources, books, maps and other docu- I rise in opposition to this amend- has preserved this part of our history, ments ruined by hurricane Andrew. ment. I am so pleased that the House not one cent of government money. earlier defeated the Stearns amend- In spite of its laudable work, I sup- port phasing out Federal funding for But if the government as going it, I can ment because I put both of these tell you, it would have cost a lot more amendments in the same category. the NEH. Like many other useful feder- ally funded projects, the NEH must money, and it would have cost the tax- They ignore the central fact that the payers more. arts and humanities are important to learn to do more with less and must learn to survive without our scarce Let us leave this up to the private our very existence as a country. sector where it can be done without The poet Shelley once wrote that the Federal tax dollars. I support the committee’s rec- fleecing the taxpayer. greatest force for moral good is imagi- ommendation to eliminate funding for Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I yield nation. So when we talk about the arts the NEH over a 3-year time frame. I such time as he may consume to the and humanities, we are not only talk- urge my colleagues to oppose this gentleman from Vermont [Mr. SAND- ing about those disciplines, we are amendment. ERS]. talking about what they do to and for Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Chairman, I yield (Mr. SANDERS asked and was given people, the confidence they build in our such time as he may consume to the permission to revise and extend his re- young students. gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. LEWIS]. marks.) Mr. Chairman, when I go into their (Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky asked and Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Chairman, I rise neighborhoods, some of the poor neigh- was given permission to revise and ex- to strongly oppose this amendment. We borhoods in my district, the parents tend his remarks.) spend less than any other country in there will say, I know they are con- Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Chair- the world on the humanities. We cerned about jobs and crime, et cetera, man, I rise in strong support of the should continue to fund it. in their neighborhoods, but they will Chabot amendment. Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I yield say, Please do not cut funding from the Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 such time as she may consume to the arts and humanities. This gives our minute to the distinguished gentle- gentlewoman from Texas [Ms. JACK- children hope. woman from Connecticut [Mrs. JOHN- SON-LEE]. They build confidence in themselves SON]. (Ms. JACKSON-LEE asked and was by engaging in the higher ideals of life Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. given permission to revise and extend that they learn through the arts and Chairman, I rise in strong opposition her remarks.) the humanities. So I hope that our col- to the proposed amendment. The gen- Ms. JACKSON-LEE. Mr. Chairman, I leagues will defeat this amendment, tleman from Ohio asks, why should rise to vigorously oppose this amend- with all due respect that I have for the these be federal tax dollars? The an- ment, undermining the NEH which author of the amendment. swer is that there are projects that helps to spread the word of our culture I urge a no vote on this amendment. NEH funds that no private sector and this nation, as I did oppose the un- Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Chairman, I yield group, no corporation, no individual dermining of the NEA, because that, myself 30 seconds. could possibly fund. together with the NEH, is the basis of I agree with the gentlewoman that The brittle books program is a good our nation. the arts and the humanities are very example. NEH will save 12 million Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 important. I agree that they certainly unique items, books, maps, music seconds to the distinguished gentle- have a place. The argument here, the scores from literally crumbling. How woman from Maryland [Mrs. MORELLA]. real question is, should it be Federal can a great nation shape its future if it (Mrs. MORELLA asked and was given tax dollars, $100 million in 1 year of does not have the information through permission to revise and extend her re- Federal tax dollars to go to the Na- which it must understand its past? marks.) tional Endowment for the Humanities? NEH is also developing a project Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Chairman, I rise I think not. The National Taxpayers through which it will put the Founding in opposition in strong opposition to H 7058 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE July 17, 1995 this amendment that would eliminate (Mr. FATTAH asked and was given This amendment would eliminate it. the National Endowment for the Hu- permission to revise and extend his re- The agreement here, as the distin- manities. As has been mentioned, we marks.) guished chairman of the Committee on have teachers throughout the country Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Chairman, I rise in Economic and Educational Opportuni- that have been undergoing courses to opposition to the amendment, notwith- ties, the gentleman from Pennsylvania help to teach. We have had films of the standing my deep respect for the au- [Mr. GOODLING] pointed out, is to phase Civil War, baseball, that we have thor of the amendment. these things out over several years. viewed that have been funded by the Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 To come in here tonight and offer National Endowment for the Human- minute to the gentleman from Massa- this meat-ax approach to end this ities. It is something we cannot afford chusetts [Mr. TORKILDSEN]. thing abruptly like this is unfair to the to eliminate. It has been phased out. Mr. TORKILDSEN. Mr. Chairman, I scholars all over this country who do Let us not terminate it now. rise in strong opposition to this amend- so much for the humanities. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the ment. Some critics think the National This is an important program. It has amendment by Mr. CHABOT to eliminate the Endowment for the Humanities only been able to leverage all kinds of pri- National Endowment for the Humanities presents one point of view. Clearly, vate investment in projects where [NEH]. that is not accurate. The NEH has ex- scholars come from the public sector The NEH budget is $99.49 million. It is less panded educational opportunities in and work with people in the private than one one-hundreths of the Federal budget many traditional and nontraditional sector. and it spends 70 cents per person on the hu- ways. As one speaker alluded to, some- I urge Members to be almost unani- manitiesÐon history, English literature, foreign times that education does take the mous, I hope, tonight in opposition to languages, sociology, anthropology, compara- form of entertainment, such as when this ill-considered amendment. tive religion, and other disciplines. the Civil War series was on television, Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to Remember the ``Civil War'' series by Ken people enjoyed it as entertainment. the amendment being offered by the gen- Burns on public television? I watched it after They also enjoyed it as education. The tleman from Ohio, to strike all funding in the I read an editorial by noted columnist George NEH also does something that the pri- bill for the National Endowment for the Hu- Will, who praised this series as one of the vate sector cannot do, and that is manities [NEH]. I believe that this is a highly best productions in the history of television. present our history and our culture irresponsible amendment which goes against NEH's work preserved the photographs which through the brittle books program. the national interest. Ken Burns used in his award-winning series. Try to imagine that the private sec- The National Endowment for the Humanities Without this NEH support, the film would not tor could microfilm hundreds of thou- [NEH] is one of our most significant cultural in- have been possible, because there would be sands of volumes. There is just not an stitutions, and I believe has the strong support no known corpus of photographs on the Civil incentive in it. Yet if these books are of the American people. Grants provided by War. destroyed through time we are going to the NEH greatly enhance scholarly research, I know that each of us in Congress can lose that part of our history, that part education, and public programs in the Human- point to worthwhile projects in our districts that of our culture. ities. The NEH supports literature, history, are aided by NEH. In my district, the NEH I rise in strong opposition to the preservation of the works of classic scholars, funds numerous educational projects by the amendment. Support responsible fund- archaeology, philosophy, comparative religion, Montgomery County school system. The NEH is the primary source for study ing for the humanities. linguistics, and aspects of the social sciences programs that help teachers learn more about Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Chairman, I yield with humanistic content. The Endowment what they teach and pass it on to their stu- myself the balance of my time. helps ensure that we pass the cultural torch dents. More than a million teachers have par- The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from generation to generation. ticipated in the writing project, an NEH-funded from Ohio [Mr. CHABOT] is recognized In fiscal year 1994 alone, the NEH: Sup- project that brings together teachers at the el- for 30 seconds. ported 70 hours of radio and television, reach- ementary and secondary levels to develop Mr. CHABOT. I think what the gen- ing an audience of 244 million people; enabled successful approaches to teaching writing. It is tleman from California said is the bot- 3,273 teachers from all over the country to estimated that the 1,000 teachers who partici- tom line. We have got almost a $5 tril- participate in teacher institutes, summer semi- pate each summer in NEH-funded summer in- lion debt. These dollars that are going nars, and study grants, offering these teachers stitutes directly impact 85,000 students each to go to the National Endowment for access to the best experts in their discipline; year. the Humanities are being borrowed. 500 scholars received scholarships or stipends The National Endowment for the Humanities They are being borrowed from Amer- to conduct research as a result of NEH efforts. has already absorbed its fair share of budget ican taxpayers all across this country, In the course of its existence, the NEH has cuts. I urge my colleagues to oppose the and we just do not have the money. put forward a brittle books project, which has Chabot amendment. If we are serious about balancing the enabled over 628,000 volumes to be micro- The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman budget, these are the types of cuts that filmed so that their content was not forever from Ohio [Mr. CHABOT] has 1 minute have to be made. This is the type of lost, and its national heritage program has sta- remaining, and the gentleman from vote where we determine who is really bilized and preserved over 26 million archae- Washington [Mr. DICKS] has 2 minutes serious about balancing the budget and ological, ethnographic, and historical objects of remaining. who is not. That is the type of vote importance to our cultural heritage. Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Chairman, I yield that this particular amendment says. The NEH is a strong investment in preserv- 30 seconds to the gentleman from Cali- I strongly support this amendment. ing our national heritage. By supporting such fornia [Mr. DOOLITTLE]. Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I yield projects as the papers of George Washington, Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. Chairman, I such time as she may consume to the Frederick Douglass, and Mark Twain, the NEH rise to strongly support the gentle- gentlewoman from New York [Mrs. helps keep our historical record intact for new man’s amendment. Regardless of what MALONEY]. generations of Americans. NEH is the primary one thinks about the record of the Na- (Mrs. MALONEY asked and was given funding source for these complex research un- tional Endowment for the Humanities permission to revise and extend her re- dertakings, which often require a team of and the controversial programs, the marks.) scholars. fact of the matter is, with a $4.7 tril- Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise The NEH strengthens our communities. A lion national debt, we cannot afford as in opposition to the amendment. strong community requires a sense of its his- a country to be borrowing money for Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I yield tory and traditions. The NEH and State hu- the purpose of entertainment. It is to- myself the balance of my time. manities councils make grants that engage tally inappropriate. It is time to bal- I want to thank all the Members who Americans where they live and work. In 1992, ance the budget. Let the cutting start spoke tonight. This has been a very bi- more than 6 million Americans participated in here. Vote for the Chabot amendment. partisan debate. Our committee oper- reading-and-discussion groups and other local Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I yield ates on a very bipartisan way. We have educational programs through State councils such time as he may consume to the cut back the National Endowment for alone. gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. the Humanities much deeper than I The evidence demonstrates that the NEH is FATTAH]. would like to see by about $40 million. a good economic investment. The cost for the July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H 7059 endowment to each citizen is only 68 cents a liberationÐnot one of rash decision making. an unwarranted attack on an institution that year. It is one one-hundredth of 1 percent of We have already taken well intentioned steps has done nothing more than effectively pro- the Federal budget. The NEH also leverages towards the privatization of NEH, steps which mote the progress of the humanities in the private giving. Many NEH grants require from I applaud. We are moving towards a balanced United States. $1 to $4 in non-Federal money for every NEH budget and are rethinking and addressing The National Endowment for the Humanities dollar. Since the Agency's inception, these problems previously ignored. Must we dare to is the single largest source of support for the grants have attracted $1 billion in private push our limits and risk responsibility? humanities. While humanities activities in our funds in challenge grants alone, and $400 mil- Please ask yourselves, are we willing to Nation would still exist without the NEH, they lion in other matching programs. jeopardize past brilliance and future intellec- would no longer be accessible to the entire I believe that it is also important to point out tual progress? Are we willing to stifle all that country. They would in all likelihood be re- that the National Endowment for the Human- makes America rich? Are we willing to distort served only for the rich who could afford them. ities [NEH] also stimulates local economies. In the purpose of our Founders? I am not. What would the constituents of our districts the home State of the gentleman offering this And because I am not, I ask my colleagues say when there is no NEH to support muse- amendment, ``The Age of Rubens'' exhibition to oppose this amendment and to allow the ums or libraries or to preserve historical docu- in Toledo, OH, broke attendance records dur- NEH the time in which to plan an orderly tran- ments; when there is no longer an NEH to ing 1994 and was credited with pumping $22.8 sition to privatization. Some investments are teach generations to come about history, lit- million into the local economy. Visits to Vir- simply too grand. erature and philosophy, about who we are as ginia's Civil War attractions jumped from 7,000 Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota. Mr. Chair- Americans? Because of the NEH, in fiscal to 45,000 in the month following the airing of man, I rise today to express my strong opposi- year 1994, 3,273 teachers from all over the ``The Civil War.'' tion to an amendment offered by Representa- country were able to participate in teacher in- Let us continue the National Endowment for tive CHABOT which would eliminate funding for stitutions, summer seminars, and study grants, the Humanities. I urge my colleagues to reject the National Endowment for Humanities. As offering these teachers access to the best ex- the amendment. presented, the Interior Appropriations Bill cuts perts in their discipline. Roughly 500,000 stu- Mr. MARTINI. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to the NEH budget nearly in half; a cut which I dents benefited from these teacher programs. urge opposition to the Chabot amendment that believe will devastate many existing edu- We must not neglect the value of the NEH will eliminate all funding for the National En- cational programs nationwide. As the only to our Nation's children. Children who are ex- dowment for the Humanities (NEH). voice for South Dakota in the House of Rep- posed to the humanities learn to foster a dia- Unlike many Federal Government programs, resentatives, I must speak out against the out- log between themselves and the voices of NEH serves as one of America's sound invest- right elimination of programs which help the writers, the visions of artists, and the thoughts ments. Only careful attention to the various people of my State preserve the rich and of historians and philosophers. It is an argu- cultures and religions that form this wondrous unique cultural heritage of South Dakota and ment that should begin in school and continue melting pot can ensure our Nation's future the surrounding great plains States. throughout life. success. NEH embodies Government's com- NEH programs exemplify the types of pub- If Mr. CHABOT's amendment were to pass, mitment to the preservation of America's di- lic-private partnerships that have traditionally thousands of valuable programs across the verse, beautiful, and often fragile culture. fostered a collective dedication to cultural and country would be destroyed. Yet Mr. CHABOT Do not misunderstand, I supported the historical education. The NEH gives State hu- is assaulting the NEH based on a project that budget proposal to phase out funding for NEH manities councils the necessary freedoms to was designed to bring all Americans to- and I support the principles of privatization; meet local educational needs. In the last 5 getherÐleft, right, center; black, white, His- however, when dealing with matters of such years, institutions in South Dakota have re- panicÐto evaluate what they share as Ameri- importance, time and careful planning are ne- ceived $2.7 million from the NEH and the cans. To realize that despite their differences, cessities. Passage of this amendment would South Dakota Humanities Council for library what they have in common is America. ``Na- amount to a hurried mistake. programs and exhibits, literary publications, tional Conversation,'' which is just one of the As a representative of a Congressional Dis- and cultural heritage visitor centers. thousands of the NEH's valuable programs, trict rich in diversity, I have utmost apprecia- In one example, more than 49,000 visitors was formed out of Chairman Hackney's con- tion for the education made possible through have seen Proving Up: The History of South cern that we in this country spend too much the existence of NEH. Few institutions provide Dakota, a long-term exhibition sponsored by time focussing on what divides us rather than the means by which tolerance can be the South Dakota State Heritage Fund, and a what we have in common. achieved. recipient of more than $200,000 in support A major portion of the NEH's funding for the Through NEH, we have also preserved his- funds from the NEH. In just the first 3 months humanities each year is awarded to projects toryÐboth good and bad. Some Members of of the exhibition, attendance at the Cultural that document and illuminate the American ex- Congress oppose the NEH because of this. Heritage Center in Pierre increased by 49 per- perienceÐthis is of course the great experi- Those Members believe that painful history is cent. ment in democracy and freedom that is our best forgotten. I do not agree with this philoso- Additionally, because of money provided by Nation's history and legacy. I urge my col- phy. It has been said time and time again, and the NEH, A Literary History of the American leagues to do a service to the children in their I hesitate to repeat itÐbut history does repeat West, considered the standard reference work districts by saving this irreplaceable cultural in- itself and societies can learn from their mis- in the field since its publication in 1987, will be stitution. Vote no on this devastating amend- takes. updated through a $71,000 grant to ment. Many also believe that the discussion of the Augustana College in Sioux Falls. The supple- Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, here we go humanities is one that only effects the elite of ment will include such authors as Tony again. You'd think that the opponents of the this country. Again, I disagree. In fact, the Hillerman, Willa Cather, and John Steinbeck. arts and humanities would be satisfied with a NEH is what ensures us that all Americans These and countless other worthy public edu- 40-percent cut next year and a 2-year phase- can have access to the vast knowledge found cation programs will disappear in my rural out of the National Endowment for the ArtsÐ in the humanities. By eliminating NEH imme- state, and the creativity behind this type of but it is very clear that their vendetta against diately, Congress would risk depriving citizens education programming will be thwarted if the these programs knows no bounds. of exemplary education programs and literary Chabot amendment becomes law. All over America, artists, musicians, orches- works of art, where we have already provided In the face of severe cuts to the Institute for tras, dance companies, theaters, and public for a reasonable transition. Museum Services, the only other Federal schools rely on the National Endowment for Since our Founding Fathers, the United funding mechanism specifically chartered to the Arts for essential support. Their work has States Government has been involved in pro- work with States in recording, preserving and enriched our communities and our quality of moting the knowledge of all that is included in educating our children on the American expe- life. But this amendment will pull the rug out the Humanities. I must believe that Thomas rience, we cannot stand by and allow the com- from under many of these organizations and Jefferson, if he could speak to us today, would plete elimination of the programs vital to public damage our cultural heritage. defend that the pursuit of happiness lies not education that are funded through the National The argument that the programs supported only in the marketplace, but more importantly Endowment for Humanities. by the NEA would surviveÐor even flourishÐ in educationÐnamely the arts, philosophy, lit- Mrs. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Chairman, today I in the marketplace is dubious. According to erature and history. rise in strong opposition to the Chabot amend- the president of the J. Paul Getty Trust, foun- I truly believe that our purpose here in the ment to eliminate the National Endowment for dations would have to raise an $8 billion en- House of Representatives is one of careful de- the Humanities. Mr. CHABOT's amendment is dowment in order to generate a reliable H 7060 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE July 17, 1995 stream of money to replace Federal funding 2200 Mr. FOX of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chair- for the NEA, NEH, and the Institute of Mu- Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, will the man, I will withdraw my amendment in seum Services. And, given the massive cuts in gentleman yield? order to prepare a written amendment education and social services my colleagues Mr. DICKS. I yield to the gentleman in conformance with the change which on the other side of the aisle are pushing, from Ohio. was effectuated because of the Skaggs foundation giving will be under even greater Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, it is my amendment. stress than usual. understanding that certain funds will The CHAIRMAN. The modification The total budget for the NEA costs each of be available in this bill for emergency has to be in writing at the desk. Has us about the same price of a candy bar. In land acquisitions, and I have to empha- the gentleman withdrawn his amend- fact, the total cost of the National Endowment size ‘‘emergency.’’ These acquisitions ment? for the Arts, the National Endowment for the could possibly include the area men- Mr. FOX of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chair- Humanities, and the Corporation for Public tioned in the gentleman’s opening man, I have an amendment at the desk Broadcasting is still less than the cost of one statement that involves Big Sur. The which is subject to the rule, because B±1 bomber. determination would have to be made the gentleman from Colorado [Mr. Eliminating the NEA is a classic case of by the Forest Service as to whether SKAGGS], had a $3.5 million increase in being penny-wise and pound-foolish. For this truly constituted an emergency. weatherization. We are trying to have every $1 the NEA spends, it generates more The Forest Service then would have to a $50 million increase. Now I am trying than 11 times that in private donations and submit a request to the committee, the to make an amendment which would be economic activity. This has a huge economic Subcommittee on Interior of the Com- $50 million from EIA, but would go to and cultural impact on our society. mittee on Appropriations in both the the State energy conservation pro- We did not abolish the Department of De- Senate and the House for approval as gram. fense because of $400 toilet seats, we did not provided in the emergency land acqui- POINT OF ORDER abolish the U.S. Navy because of the Tailhook sition legislation in the bill. Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I have a scandal, and we certainly should not abolish Mr. FARR. In response to the ques- point of order against the amendment. the NEA because a small fraction of projects tion, then, Mr. Chairman, it may be el- However, Mr. Chairman, if the gen- a few years ago were controversial. It's simply igible for those funds? tleman will withdraw his amendment, I absurd. Mr. REGULA. Certainly if it is a high will withdraw the point of order. Defeat this amendment. priority, as I understand it, in the For- The CHAIRMAN. At this point the The CHAIRMAN. The question is on gentleman’s amendment is at the desk, the amendment offered by the gen- est Service, then it is very possible that they would feel that the cir- but the modification has to be in writ- tleman from Ohio [Mr. CHABOT]. ing. That is why the Chair asks if the The question was taken; and the cumstances surrounding this purchase gentleman wishes to withdraw it. Chairman announced that the noes ap- qualified as an emergency, and it is Mr. FOX of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chair- peared to have it. possible they could bring that to the Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Chairman, I de- appropriate subcommittees for ap- man, I withdraw my amendment, and I mand a recorded vote. proval. However, as I said earlier, the will file a corrected amendment in The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the budget has a moratorium on land ac- writing. rule, further proceedings on this mo- quisition. We did not provide any ear- The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, tion will be postponed. marks on land acquisition, recognizing the amendment is withdrawn. Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I ask that these are not imperative, but we There was no objection. unanimous consent to strike the last also recognize there will be emergency AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. TIAHRT word. opportunities that should be exercised Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Chairman, I offer The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection in land acquisition for a variety of rea- an amendment. to the request of the gentleman from sons. I think each project will have to The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will des- Washington? stand on its own merits as to whether ignate the amendment. There was no objection. it qualifies under the emergency condi- The text of the amendment is as fol- Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I yield to tions. lows: the gentleman from California [Mr. Mr. FARR. I thank the gentleman. I Amendment offered by Mr. TIAHRT: Page FARR]. understand that continuing for emer- 56, line 3, strike ‘‘$552,871,000’’ and insert ‘‘$364,066,000’’. Mr. FARR. Mr. Chairman, I have a gency and hardship use that these question for the chairman of the Sub- lands may qualify. POINT OF ORDER committee on Interior, the gentleman Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I have a AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. FOX OF from Ohio [Mr. REGULA]. PENNSYLVANIA point of order against the amendment. I understand that the committee’s al- The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will Mr. FOX of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chair- location made it impossible to provide state his point of order. man, I offer an amendment. full funding for the Land and Water Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I make a The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will des- Conservation Fund acquisition request point of order because the amendment ignate the amendment. received by the committee. I also un- seeks to amend a paragraph previously The text of the amendment is as fol- derstand the committee has rec- amended. In the procedures of the U.S. lows: ommended $14.6 million for the Forest House of Representatives, chapter 27, Service budget to be allocated by the Amendment offered by Mr. FOX of Penn- section 27.1, it states the following: sylvania: Page 56, line 3, strike ‘‘$552,871,600’’ Forest Service for emergency and hard- and insert ‘‘$602,871,000’’. It is fundamental that it is not in order to ship acquisitions. Page 56, line 10, strike ‘‘$133,946,000’’ and amend an amendment previously agreed to As you know, the Los Padres Na- insert ‘‘$183,946,000’’. * * *. Thus the text of a bill perfected by tional Forest has worked extensively Page 56, line 17, strike ‘‘$107,466,000’’ and amendment cannot thereafter be amended. with private land owners and others to insert ‘‘$157,446,000’’. Mr. Chairman, this amendment seeks protect the land along the world-re- Page 58, line 12, strike ‘‘$79,766,000’’ and in- to amend text previously amended, and nowned Big Sur coast through Federal sert ‘‘$29,766,000’’. therefore is not in order. acquisitions from willing sellers. This Mr. FOX of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chair- The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman has been an ongoing effort and has man, I ask unanimous consent that the from Kansas [Mr. TIAHRT] wish to be saved thousands of acres of the Big Sur amendment be modified. heard on this point of order? landscape from development. The CHAIRMAN. Has the gentleman Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Chairman, I ask Mr. Chairman, would the commit- submitted a modification? unanimous consent to modify my tee’s instructions to the Forest Service Mr. FOX of Pennsylvania. Only oral- amendment. regarding its emergency and hardship ly at this time, Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection use of the Land and Water Conserva- The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman to the request of the gentleman from tion Fund appropriations in FY 1995 must have it in writing. Would the gen- Kansas? allow the continuation of the Big Sur tleman care to withdraw his amend- Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I have to project? ment at this time so he can prepare it? object to that. July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H 7061 The CHAIRMAN. Objection is heard. member of the committee, this is ex- extremely unlikely to be drilled, to ex- Does the gentleman from Kansas [Mr. actly the type of situation or provision pire over the next couple of years, I TIAHRT] wish to comment on the point that we put in which the subcommittee would ask the gentleman? of order? bill is intended to address. The Forest Mr. REGULA. Yes, Mr. Chairman, Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Chairman, I was Service could, if they chose, designate the gentleman is correct. merely trying to present an oppor- Mt. Evans as one of the sites for collec- Mr. JONES. Unless this provision is tunity for us to discuss an issue regard- tion of fees, and could contract with repealed, these leases will remain ing the Committee on Science’s level of the State of Colorado, or any other pri- under suspension indefinitely, and at authorization in the area of energy vate or public entity, for the provision some point could be open for explo- conservation. of visitor services. I would hope that ration and drilling? The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is pre- this will happen many places. That is Mr. REGULA. If the gentleman will pared to rule on the point of order. the goal of this provision in the bill, is continue to yield, he is correct. For the reasons stated by the gen- to allow flexibility in the services to Mr. JONES. Mr. Chairman, therefore tleman from Washington [Mr. DICKS] contract, privatize, to provide in the it is clearly in the interests of the the adoption of the Skaggs amendment most efficient way services to the visi- coasts of eastern North Carolina to precludes the offering of this amend- tors. allow these leases to be removed from ment printed in the RECORD under the Mr. SKAGGS. Mr. Chairman, I thank suspension so they can be allowed to Chair’s rulings of March 15 and March the gentleman for his comments, and run their course? 16 of this year and earlier rulings thank him also for including this pro- Mr. REGULA. I believe that to be the today. The point of order is sustained. vision in the bill, which I think will case, Mr. Chairman. Are there further amendments to make a great deal of difference as we Mr. JONES. Mr. Chairman, I would title II? especially deal with some of these dif- ask the gentleman, can he assure me Mr. SKAGGS. Mr. Chairman, I ask ficult budget constraints. that a vote for this bill will in no way unanimous consent to strike the last Mr. JONES. Mr. Chairman, I ask undermine the position of those who word to proceed to a colloquy with the unanimous consent to strike the last are opposed to the exploration of the chairman of the Committee on Science. word to enter into a colloquy with the so-called Manteo Unit? The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, gentleman from Ohio. Mr. REGULA. If the gentleman will the gentleman is recognized for 5 min- The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, yield further, Mr. Chairman, let me utes. the gentleman is recognized for 5 min- emphasize that this bill in no way af- There was no objection. utes. fects the disposition of the Manteo Mr. SKAGGS. Mr. Chairman, I would There was no objection. Unit. like to ask the chairman of the sub- Mr. JONES. Mr. Chairman, I appre- Mr. JONES. I thank the gentleman, committee a question about section 315 ciate the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Mr. Chairman. of the bill, which provides for a pilot REGULA] agreeing to take a few ques- AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. FOX OF user fee program to demonstrate the tions regarding the fate of the coast of PENNSYLVANIA feasibility of user fees to recover some eastern North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, Mr. FOX of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chair- of the costs of proper management of it is my understanding that there are man, I offer an amendment, amend- public lands. I support this, especially really two separate groups of leases off ment No. 5. in connection with the Mt. Evans area the coast of North Carolina. One is The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will des- in Colorado. There the State has been called the Manteo Unit, the large natu- ignate the amendment. working with the forest Service to try ral gas prospect covering 21 leases in a The text of the amendment is as fol- to reach an agreement for sharing contiguous area, while the remaining lows: some of the management responsibil- leases are a series of 32 individual Amendment offered by Mr. FOX of Penn- ities there, including fee collection. leases which are widely scattered. Is The Forest Service has identified this sylvania: that correct? Page 56, line 3, strike ‘‘$552,871,000’’ and in- area as one where a fee would be appro- Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, will the sert ‘‘$602,871,000’’. priate, but they were uncertain wheth- gentleman yield? Page 56, line 10, strike ‘‘$133,946,000’’ and er they could move forward with the Mr. JONES. I yield to the gentleman insert ‘‘$183,946,000’’. State for a couple of reasons; first be- from Ohio. Page 56, line 17, strike ‘‘$107,466,000’’ and cause the facilities there have been Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, the insert ‘‘$157,446,000’’. constructed with HUTF money; and gentleman is correct. Page 58, line 12, strike ‘‘$79,766,000’’ and in- second, because the Forest Service was Mr. JONES. Mr. Chairman, the sert ‘‘$29,766,000. no sure that it had the authority. Manteo Unit is the only prospect in POINT OF ORDER As I read section 315 of this bill, both which industry has expressed any in- Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I make of these points would be re- terest, is that the gentleman’s under- a point of order against the gentle- solved,because that section provides standing? man’s amendment, because it seeks to that the forest Service in fact could Mr. REGULA. That is correct, that is amend a paragraph previously amend- implement such a pilot program on my understanding. ed. lands under their jurisdiction, and Mr. JONES. Mr. Chairman, does the The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman could contract with any public or pri- repeal of the Outer Banks Protection from Pennsylvania [Mr. FOX] wish to vate entity to provide visitor services, Act have any effect on the status of the be heard on the point of order? such as the State of Colorado. Manteo Unit? Mr. FOX of Pennsylvania. I do, Mr. Mr. Chairman, would the chairman of Mr. REGULA. No, the Manteo Unit is Chairman. the committee agree with me that en- no longer protected under that provi- Mr. Chairman, this amendment, as actment of section 315 should resolve sion of law. amended, in fact does add $50 million these matters so the Forest Service Mr. JONES. Therefore, the repeal of under technical and financial assist- could designate an area such as the Mt. the Outer Banks Protection Act does ance to the State energy conservation Evans area in Colorado as one of the nothing to change the status of the programs which are so vital to each of sites for one of these fee demonstration area most likely to be drilled? our States, and it takes the $50 million projects, and could contract with the Mr. REGULA. The gentleman is abso- from the Energy Information Adminis- State for the provision of visitor serv- lutely correct. This is merely a house- tration. Previously, Mr. Chairman, we ices? keeping provision which corrects a may recall there was an amendment of- Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, will the technicality which inadvertently has fered by the gentleman from Colorado gentleman yield? kept these other leases under suspen- [Mr. SKAGGS] which added $3.5 million Mr. SKAGGS. I yield to the gen- sion. to the weatherization program, but tleman from Ohio. Mr. JONES. Mr. Chairman, the repeal this is not the weatherization program. Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I would of the Outer Banks Protection Act will Therefore, I believe it is in order, Mr. say to the gentleman from Colorado, a allow the remaining leases, which are Chairman. H 7062 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE July 17, 1995 Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, reserv- of the Skaggs amendment precludes SEC. 302. No part of any appropriation ing my point of order, I renew it, be- the offering of this amendment as under this Act shall be available to the Sec- cause in the procedures of the United printed in the RECORD under the retary of the Interior or the Secretary of Ag- States House of Representatives, chap- Chair’s rulings of March 15, and 16 of riculture for the leasing of oil and natural gas by noncompetitive bidding on publicly ter 27, section 27.1, it states the follow- this year and the previous rulings of owned lands within the boundaries of the ing: ‘‘It is fundamental that it is not in today. The point of order is sustained. Shawnee National Forest, Illinois: Provided, order to amend an amendment pre- PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY That nothing herein is intended to inhibit or viously agreed to. Thus, the text of a Mr. FOX of Pennsylvania. Parliamen- otherwise affect the sale, lease, or right to bill perfected by amendment cannot tary inquiry, Mr. Chairman. access to minerals owned by private individ- thereafter be amended.’’ The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will uals. SEC. 303. No part of any appropriation con- Mr. Chairman, this amendment seeks state his parliamentary inquiry. to amend text previously amended, and tained in this Act shall be available for any Mr. FOX of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chair- activity or the publication or distribution of is therefore not in order. man, inasmuch as the amendment literature that in any way tends to promote The CHAIRMAN. Does any Member which I had asked for through unani- public support or opposition to any legisla- wish to be heard on the point of order? mous consent, did not alter, as we tive proposal on which congressional action Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Chairman, I op- know, originally I was trying to add $50 is not complete. SEC. 304. No part of any appropriation con- pose the point of order offered by the million to weatherization, which, be- gentleman from Ohio [Mr. REGULA] for tained in this Act shall remain available for cause the gentleman from Colorado obligation beyond the current fiscal year un- the following reason. Originally what [Mr. SKAGGS] was successful in having the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. less expressly so provided herein. a prior amendment, which I could not SEC. 305. None of the funds provided in this FOX] had intended to do was to put the have known would be adopted, I could Act to any department or agency shall be ob- money into the weatherization pro- not have it preprinted, not knowing ligated or expended to provide a personal gram. That is what we all wanted to the flow of events in the House this cook, chauffeur, or other personal servants do. However, in fact, because the gen- evening. to any officer or employee of such depart- ment or agency except as otherwise provided tleman from Colorado [Mr. SKAGGS] Therefore, I did all which was reason- placed $3.5 million more into that pro- by law. ably calculated to a reasonable man, SEC. 306. No assessments may be levied gram, the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Mr. Chairman, to have made an amend- against any program, budget activity, sub- REGULA] made a point of order that ment on the floor, along with the gen- activity, or project funded by this Act unless any more money going into that pro- tleman from Vermont [Mr. SANDERS]. notice of such assessments and the basis gram would be out of order. Mr. Chairman, I was hoping maybe therefor are presented to the Committees on What the gentleman from Pennsylva- Appropriations and are approved by such the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. REGULA], nia [Mr. FOX] is doing is attempting to Committees. the esteemed chairman, would in a SEC. 307. (a) COMPLIANCE WITH BUY AMER- put $50 million into a fund for the bright moment think how wonderful it State Energy Conservation Program, ICAN ACT.—None of the funds made available would be to at least hear this amend- in this Act may be expended by an entity un- which has not been amended. So I ment and not have an objection in less the entity agrees that in expending the would argue very strongly that the order. funds the entity will comply with sections 2 gentleman from Ohio [Mr. REGULA] is Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I am through 4 of the Act of March 3, 1933 (41 incorrect that this is a fund that has very aware of what the amendment was U.S.C. 10a–10c; popularly known as the ‘‘Buy American Act’’). not been amended, and that the amend- going to do, without hearing any fur- ment offered by the gentleman from (b) SENSE OF CONGRESS; REQUIREMENT RE- ther conversation. I might add that GARDING NOTICE.— Pennsylvania [Mr. FOX] is in fact in even with the modification, which I ob- (1) PURCHASE OF AMERICAN-MADE EQUIPMENT order. jected to, but even with it, it would AND PRODUCTS.—In the case of any equipment PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY still have been subject to a point of or product that may be authorized to be pur- Mr. DICKS. Parliamentary inquiry, order. chased with financial assistance provided Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair has using funds made available in this Act, it is The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will ruled. the sense of the Congress that entities re- state it. ceiving the assistance should, in expending Are there other amendments to title the assistance, purchase only American- Mr. DICKS. Is it not true that under II? the rule, Mr. Chairman, the gentleman made equipment and products. f (2) NOTICE TO RECIPIENTS OF ASSISTANCE.— would have to ask unanimous consent In providing financial assistance using funds in order to change the amendment that PERSONAL EXPLANATION made available in this Act, the head of each he had printed in the RECORD? Mr. VOLKMER. Mr. Chairman, on Federal agency shall provide to each recipi- The CHAIRMAN. Once the printed ent of the assistance a notice describing the amendment is pending, the gentleman Thursday, July 13, 1995, I missed roll- statement made in paragraph (1) by the Con- is correct. call votes during consideration of H.R. gress. Mr. DICKS. Therefore, in order to do 1977, Interior appropriations for fiscal (c) PROHIBITION OF CONTRACTS WITH PER- this, he would have to ask for unani- year 1996. SONS FALSELY LABELING PRODUCTS AS MADE On rollcall votes Nos. 503 and 504, if IN AMERICA.—If it has been finally deter- mous consent? mined by a court or Federal agency that any The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is present I would have voted no. On roll- call votes Nos. 508, 509, and 510, if person intentionally affixed a label bearing a correct. ‘‘Made in America’’ inscription, or any in- Mr. DICKS. I do not think he has yet present I would have voted aye. scription with the same meaning, to any asked for unanimous consent. I request that this explanation be in- product sold in or shipped to the United The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is cluded in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. States that is not made in the United States, the person shall be ineligible to receive any correct. b 2215 Mr. FOX of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chair- contract or subcontract made with funds man, I ask unanimous consent that the The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will des- made available in this Act, pursuant to the debarment, suspension, and ineligibility pro- modification be accepted. ignate title III. The text of title III is as follows: cedures described in sections 9.400 through Mr. REGULA. I object, Mr. Chair- 9.409 of title 48, Code of Federal Regulations. man. TITLE III—GENERAL PROVISIONS SEC. 308. None of the funds in this Act may The CHAIRMAN. Objection is heard. SEC. 301. The expenditure of any appropria- be used to plan, prepare, or offer for sale tim- Under the rule, the gentleman from tion under this Act for any consulting serv- ber from trees classified as giant sequoia Pennsylvania [Mr. FOX] may only offer ice through procurement contract, pursuant (sequoiadendron giganteum) which are lo- an amendment as printed in the to 5 U.S.C. 3109, shall be limited to those cated on National Forest System or Bureau contracts where such expenditures are a of Land Management lands in a manner dif- RECORD. Once it is pending, but only matter of public record and available for ferent than such sales were conducted in fis- then, he may ask unanimous consent public inspection, except where otherwise cal year 1995. to modify the printed amendment. For provided under existing law, or under exist- SEC. 309. None of the funds made available the reason stated by the gentleman ing Executive order issued pursuant to exist- by this Act may be obligated or expended by from Ohio [Mr. REGULA], the adoption ing law. the National Park Service to enter into or July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H 7063 implement a concession contract which per- (7) Carrying out the responsibilities of the historic preservation at the Pennsylvania mits or requires the removal of the under- Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corpora- Avenue National Historic Site. ground lunchroom at the Carlsbad Caverns tion under the Federal Triangle Develop- (4) The National Park Service may enter National Park. ment Act (40 U.S.C. 1101–1109), including re- into contracts, cooperative agreements, or SEC. 310. Where the actual costs of con- sponsibilities for managing assets and liabil- other transactions with any agency or in- struction projects under self-determination ities of the Corporation under such Act. strumentality of the United States, the sev- contracts, compacts, or grants, pursuant to (c) In carrying out the responsibilities of eral States, or the District of Columbia or Public Laws 93–638, 100–413, or 100–297, are the Pennsylvania Avenue Development Cor- with any person, firm, association, or cor- less than the estimated costs thereof, use of poration transferred under this section, the poration as may be deemed necessary or ap- the resulting excess funds shall be deter- Administrator of the General Services Ad- propriate for the conduct of special events, mined by the appropriate Secretary after ministration shall have the following pow- festivals, concerts, or other art and cultural consultation with the tribes. ers: programs at the Pennsylvania Avenue Na- SEC. 311. Notwithstanding Public Law 103– (1) To acquire lands, improvements, and tional Historic Site or may establish a non- 413, quarterly payments of funds to tribes properties by purchase, lease or exchange, profit foundation to solicit funds for such ac- and tribal organizations under annual fund- and to sell, lease, or otherwise dispose of real tivities. (e) Notwithstanding any other provision of ing agreements pursuant to section 108 of or personal property as necessary to com- law, the responsibility for ensuring that de- Public Law 93–638, as amended, may be made plete the development plan developed under velopment or redevelopment in the Penn- on the first business day following the first section 5 of the Pennsylvania Avenue Devel- sylvania Avenue area is carried out in ac- day of a fiscal quarter. opment Corporation Act of 1972 (40 U.S.C. 874) if a notice of intention to carry out such cordance with the Pennsylvania Avenue De- SEC. 312. None of funds in this Act may be acquisition or disposal is first transmitted to velopment Corporation Plan—1974, as amend- used for the Americorps program. the Committee on Transportation and Infra- ed, is transferred to the National Capital SEC. 313. (a) On or before April 1, 1996, the structure and the Committee on Appropria- Planning Commission or its successor com- Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corpora- tions of the House of Representatives and mencing April 1, 1996. tion shall— the Committee on Environment and Public (f) SAVINGS PROVISIONS.— (1) transfer and assign in accordance with Works and the Committee on Appropriations (1) REGULATIONS.—Any regulations pre- this section all of its rights, title, and inter- of the Senate and at least 60 days elapse scribed by the Corporation in connection est in and to all of the leases, covenants, after the date of such transmission. with the Pennsylvania Avenue Development agreements, and easements it has executed (2) To modify from time to time the plan Corporation Act of 1972 (40 U.S.C. 871–885) or will execute by March 31, 1996, in carrying referred to in paragraph (1) if such modifica- and the Federal Triangle Development Act out its powers and duties under the Penn- tion is first transmitted to the Committee (40 U.S.C. 1101–1109) shall continue in effect sylvania Avenue Development Corporation on Transportation and Infrastructure and until suspended by regulations prescribed by Act (40 U.S.C. 871–885) and the Federal Tri- the Committee on Appropriations of the the Administrator of the General Services angle Development Act (40 U.S.C. 1101–1109) House of Representatives and the Committee Administration. to the General Services Administration, Na- on Environment and Public Works and the (2) EXISTING RIGHTS, DUTIES, AND OBLIGA- tional Capital Planning Commission, or the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate TIONS NOT AFFECTED.—Subsection (a) shall National Park Service; and and at least 60 days elapse after the date of not be construed as affecting the validity of (2) except as provided by subsection (d), such transmission. any right, duty, or obligation of the United transfer all rights, title, and interest in and (3) To maintain any existing Pennsylvania States or any other person arising under or to all property, both real and personal, held Avenue Development Corporation insurance pursuant to any contract, loan, or other in- in the name of the Pennsylvania Avenue De- programs. strument or agreement which was in effect velopment Corporation to the General Serv- (4) To enter into and perform such leases, on the day before the date of the transfers ices Administration. under subsection (a). contracts, or other transactions with any (3) CONTINUATION OF SUITS.—No action or (b) The responsibilities of the Pennsylva- agency or instrumentality of the United other proceeding commenced by or against nia Avenue Development Corporation trans- States, the several States, or the District of the Corporation in connection with adminis- ferred to the General Services Administra- Columbia or with any person, firm, associa- tration of the Pennsylvania Avenue Develop- tion under subsection (a) include, but are not tion, or corporation as may be necessary to ment Corporation Act of 1972 (40 U.S.C. 871– limited to, the following: carry out the responsibilities of the Penn- 885) and the Federal Triangle Development (1) Collection of revenue owed the Federal sylvania Avenue Development Corporation Act (40 U.S.C. 1101–1109) shall abate by reason Government as a result of real estate sales under the Federal Triangle Development Act of enactment and implementation of this or lease agreements entered into by the (40 U.S.C. 1101–1109). Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corpora- Act, except that the General Services Ad- (5) To request the Council of the District of ministration shall be substituted for the Cor- tion and private parties, including, at a min- Columbia to close any alleys necessary for imum, with respect to the following projects: poration as a party to any such action or the completion of development in Square 457. proceeding. (A) The Willard Hotel property on Square (6) To use all of the funds transferred from 225. (g) Section 3(b) of the Pennsylvania Ave- the Pennsylvania Avenue Development Cor- nue Development Corporation Act of 1972 (40 (B) The Gallery Row project on Square 457. poration or income earned on Pennsylvania (C) The Lansburgh’s project on Square 431. U.S.C. 872(b)) is amended as follows: Avenue Development Corporation property ‘‘(b) The Corporation shall be dissolved on (D) The Market Square North project on to complete any pending development Square 407. April 1, 1996. Upon dissolution, assets, obliga- projects. tions, and indebtedness of the Corporation (2) Collection of sale or lease revenue owed (d)(1)(A) On or before April 1, 1996, the shall be transferred in accordance with the the Federal Government (if any) in the event Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corpora- Department of the Interior and Related two undeveloped sites owned by the Penn- tion shall transfer all its right, title, and in- Agencies Appropriations Act, 1996.’’. sylvania Avenue Development Corporation terest in and to the property described in SEC. 314. (a) Except as provided in sub- on Squares 457 and 406 are sold or leased subparagraph (B) to the National Park Serv- section (b), no part of any appropriation con- prior to April 1, 1996. ice, Department of the Interior. tained in this Act or any other Act shall be (3) Application of collected revenue to (B) The property referred to in subpara- obligated or expended for the operation or repay United States Treasury debt incurred graph (A) is the property located within the implementation of the Interior Columbia by the Pennsylvania Avenue Development Pennsylvania Avenue National Historic Site River Basin Ecoregion Assessment Project Corporation in the course of acquiring real depicted on a map entitled ‘‘Pennsylvania (hereinafter ‘‘Project’’). estate. Avenue National Historic Park’’, dated June (b) From the funds appropriated to the (4) Performing financial audits for projects 1, 1995, and numbered 840–82441, which shall Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Man- in which the Pennsylvania Avenue Develop- be on file and available for public inspection agement, $600,000 is made available to pub- ment Corporation has actual or potential in the offices of the National Park Service, lish by January 1, 1996, for peer review and revenue expectation, as identified in para- Department of the Interior. The Pennsylva- public comment, the scientific information graphs (1) and (2), in accordance with proce- nia Avenue National Historic Site includes collected, and analysis undertaken, by the dures describe in applicable sale or lease the parks, plazas, sidewalks, special lighting, Project prior to the date of enactment of agreements. trees, sculpture, and memorials. this Act concerning forest health conditions (5) Disposition of real estate properties (2) Jurisdiction of Pennsylvania Avenue and forest management needs related to which are or become available for sale and and all other roadways from curb to curb those conditions. lease or other uses. shall remain with the District of Columbia (c)(1) From the funds appropriated to the (6) Payment of benefits in accordance with but vendors shall not be permitted to occupy Forest Service, the Secretary of Agriculture the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real street space except during temporary special (hereinafter ‘‘Secretary’’) shall— Property Acquisitions Policies Act of 1970 to events. (A) review the land and resource manage- which persons in the project area squares are (3) The National Park Service shall be re- ment plan (hereinafter ‘‘plan’’) for each na- entitled as a result of the Pennsylvania Ave- sponsible for management, administration, tional forest within the area encompassed by nue Development Corporation’s acquisition maintenance, law enforcement, visitor serv- the Project and any policy which is applica- of real estate. ices, resource protection, interpretation, and ble to such plan (whether or not such policy H 7064 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE July 17, 1995 is final or draft, or has been added to such ity customer services and resource enhance- any applicable Federal law relating to risk plan by amendment), which is or is intended ment, and provide appropriate recognition to assessment, the protection of private prop- to be of limited duration, and which the such partners or investors. erty rights, or unfunded mandates. Project was tasked to address; and (c)(1) Amounts collected at each fee dem- Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I move onstration site in excess of 104 percent of (B) determine whether such policy modi- that the Committee do now rise. fied to meet the specific conditions of such that site’s total collections during the pre- national forest, or another policy which vious fiscal year shall be distributed as fol- The motion was agreed to. serves the purpose of such policy, should be lows: Accordingly, the Committee rose; adopted for such national forest. (i) Eighty percent of the amounts collected and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. (2) If the Secretary makes a decision that at the demonstration site shall be deposited GUTKNECHT) having assumed the chair, such a modified or alternative policy should in a special account in the Treasury estab- Mr. BURTON, Chairman of the Commit- be adopted for such national forest, the Sec- lished for the administrative unit in which tee of the Whole House on the State of retary shall prepare and adopt for the plan the project is located and shall remain avail- the Union, reported that that Commit- for such national forest an amendment able for expenditure in accordance with which contains such policy, which is directed paragraph (3) for further activities of the site tee, having had under consideration solely to and affects only such plan, and or project. the bill (H.R. 1977) making appropria- which addresses the specific conditions of (ii) Twenty percent of the amounts col- tions for the Department of the Inte- the national forest and the relationship of lected at the demonstration site shall be de- rior and related agencies for the fiscal such policy to such conditions. posited in a special account in the Treasury year ending September 30, 1996, and for (3) To the maximum extent practicable, for each agency and shall remain available other purposes, had come to no resolu- any amendment prepared pursuant to para- for expenditure in accordance with para- tion thereon. graph (2) shall establish procedures to de- graph (3) for use on an agencywide basis. velop site-specific standards in lieu of impos- (2) For purposes of this subsection, ‘‘total f ing general standards applicable to multiple collections’’ for each site shall be defined as sites. Any amendment which would result in gross collections before any reduction for REPORT ON RESOLUTION PROVID- any change in land allocations within the amounts attributable to collection costs. ING FOR CONSIDERATION OF plan or reduce the likelihood of achievement (3) Expenditures from the special funds H.R. 2020, TREASURY, POSTAL of the goals and objectives of the plan (prior shall be accounted for separately. SERVICE, EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF to any previous amendment incorporating in (4) In order to increase the quality of the THE PRESIDENT, AND CERTAIN the plan any policy referred to in paragraph visitor experience at public recreational INDEPENDENT AGENCIES APPRO- areas and enhance the protection of re- (1)(A)) shall be deemed a significant plan PRIATIONS ACT, 1996 amendment pursuant to section 6(f)(4) of the sources, amounts available for expenditure Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources under paragraph (1) may only be used for the Mr. SOLOMON, from the Committee Planning Act of 1974 (16 U.S.C. 1604(f)(4)). site or project concerned, for backlogged re- on Rules, submitted a privileged report (4) Any amendment prepared pursuant to pair and maintenance projects (including (Rept. No. 104–190) on the resolution (H. paragraph (2) which adopts a modified or al- projects relating to health and safety) and Res. 190) providing for the consider- ternative policy to substitute for a policy re- for interpretation, signage, habitat or facil- ferred to in paragraph (1)(A) which has un- ity enhancement, resource preservation, an- ation of the bill (H.R. 2020) making ap- dergone consultation pursuant to section 7 of nual operation, maintenance, and law en- propriations for the Treasury Depart- the Endangered Species Act of 1973 shall not forcement relating to public use. The agen- ment, the U.S. Postal Service, the Ex- again be subject to the consultation provi- cywide accounts may be used for the same ecutive Office of the President, and sions of such section 7. No further consulta- purposes set forth in the preceding sentence, certain Independent Agencies for the tion shall be undertaken on any policy re- but for sites or projects selected at the dis- fiscal year ending September 30, 1996, ferred to in paragraph (1)(A). cretion of the respective agency head. and for other purposes, which was re- (5) Any amendment prepared pursuant to (d)(1) Amounts collected under this section paragraph (2) shall be adopted on or before shall not be taken into account for the pur- ferred to the House Calendar and or- March 31, 1996: Provided, That any amend- poses of the Act of May 23, 1908 and the Act dered to be printed. ment deemed a significant amendment pur- of March 1, 1911 (16 U.S.C. 500), the Act of f suant to paragraph (3) shall be adopted on or March 4, 1913 (16 U.S.C. 501), the Act of July before June 30, 1996. 22, 1937 (7 U.S.C. 1012), the Act of August 8, COMMUNICATION FROM THE (6) No policy referred to in paragraph (1)(A) 1937 and the Act of May 24, 1939 (43 U.S.C. CLERK OF THE HOUSE shall be effective on or after April 1, 1996. 1181f et seq.), the Act of June 14, 1926 (43 SEC. 315. (a) The Secretary of the Interior U.S.C. 869–4), chapter 69 of title 31, United The SPEAKER pro tempore laid be- (acting through the Bureau of Land Manage- States Code, section 401 of the Act of June fore the House the following commu- ment, the National Park Service and the 15, 1935 (16 U.S.C. 715s), the Land and Water nication from the Clerk of the House of United States Fish and Wildlife Service) and Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (16 U.S.C. Representatives: the Secretary of Agriculture (acting through 460l), and any other provision of law relating OFFICE OF THE CLERK, the Forest Service) shall each implement a to revenue allocation. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, fee program to demonstrate the feasibility of (2) Fees charged pursuant to this section Washington, DC, July 14, 1995. user-generated cost recovery for the oper- shall be in lieu of fees charged under any Hon. NEWT GINGRICH, ation and maintenance of recreation sites other provision of law. The Speaker, House of Representatives, and habitat enhancement projects on Fed- (e) The Secretary of the Interior and the Washington, DC. eral lands. Secretary of Agriculture shall carry out this DEAR MR. SPEAKER: Pursuant to the per- (b) In carrying out the pilot program es- section without promulgating regulations. mission granted in Clause 5 of Rule III of the tablished pursuant to this section, the appro- (f) The authority to collect fees under this Rules of the U.S. House of Representatives, priate Secretary shall select from areas section shall commence on October 1, 1995, the Clerk received the following message under the jurisdiction of each of the four and end on September 30, 1996. Funds in ac- from the Secretary of the Senate on Friday, agencies referred to in subsection (a) no counts established shall remain available July 14, 1995 at 2:00 p.m.: that the Senate fewer than 10, but as many as 30, sites or through September 30, 1997. passed without amendment H. Con. Res. 82. projects for fee demonstration. For each SEC. 316. The Forest Service and Bureau of Sincerely yours, such demonstration, the Secretary, notwith- Land Management may offer for sale sal- ROBIN H. CARLE, standing any other provision of law— vageable timber in the Pacific Northwest in Clerk, House of Representatives. (1) shall charge and collect fees for admis- fiscal year 1996: Provided, That for public sion to the area or for the use of outdoor lands known to contain the Northern spotted f recreation sites, facilities, visitor centers, owl, such salvage sales may be offered as equipment, and services by individuals and long as the offering of such sale will not SPECIAL ORDERS groups, or any combination thereof; render the area unsuitable as habitat for the The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under (2) shall establish fees under this section Northern spotted owl: Provided further, That the Speaker’s announced policy of May timber salvage activity in spotted owl habi- based upon a variety of cost recovery and 12, 1995, and under a previous order of fair market valuation methods to provide a tat is to be done in full compliance with all broad basis for feasibility testing; existing environmental and forest manage- the House, the following Members will (3) may contract with any public or private ment laws. be recognized for 5 minutes each. entity to provide visitor services, including SEC. 317. None of the funds made available f in this Act may be used for any program, reservations and information, and may ac- The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a cept services of volunteers to collect fees project, or activity when it is made known charged pursuant to paragraph (1); and to the Federal entity or official to which the previous order of the House, the gen- (4) may encourage private investment and funds are made available that the program, tleman from Colorado [Mr. SKAGGS] is partnerships to enhance the delivery of qual- project, or activity is not in compliance with recognized for 5 minutes. July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H 7065 [Mr. SKAGGS addressed the House. bills of thousands of families every tered by the States is one that is finan- His remarks will appear hereafter in year. For instance, Mr. Speaker, in the cially secure and one where the funds the Extensions of Remarks.] cold climate region, a 1989 study found are checked to make sure that those f that the first year net saving for natu- who need the assistance get the assist- The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a ral gas consumption represented a 25- ance and we reduce the amount of bu- previous order of the House, the gen- percent reduction in gas used for space reaucracy involved but expand the tleman from Florida [Mr. GOSS] is rec- heating and an 18-percent reduction in services to those who are in need has ognized for 5 minutes. total gas usage. This program can be been an excellent program under the difference in whether or not an el- CADCOM’s assistance in Montgomery [Mr. GOSS addressed the House. His derly couple maintains their independ- County and all the poverty agencies in remarks will appear hereafter in the ence and are able to stay in their own Pennsylvania administered through Extensions of Remarks.] home. each county. f I would like to stress that the I thank the Speaker for this time to The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a amendment we were offering which was speak out for weatherization and to previous order of the House, the gentle- scored by CBO as being budget neutral make the changes that we figure are woman from Ohio [Ms. KAPTUR] is rec- and, in fact, reduced outlays by $15 intelligent with energy assistance to ognized for 5 minutes. million, the offset would come out of make sure we do less on bureaucracy [Ms. KAPTUR addressed the House. the Energy Information Administra- and more on direct services for the peo- Her remarks will appear hereafter in tion. We believe that the EIA data ple. I thank my colleagues for their the Extensions of Remarks.] which is valuable and currently pro- thoughtful attention and support. f vided free of charge could best be pro- f vided on a fee-for-service basis. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a WEATHERIZATION ASSISTANCE When I am given the choice between previous order of the House, the gen- PROGRAM documents and statistics for helping tleman from New York [Mr. OWENS] is people who are cold or trapped in The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a recognized for 5 minutes. previous order of the House, the gen- unhealthy, dilapidated homes, I think [Mr. OWENS addressed the House. tleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. FOX] is most colleagues on both sides of the recognized for 5 minutes. aisle in both Chambers, the House and His remarks will appear hereafter in Mr. FOX of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speak- the Senate, would agree that this is an the Extensions of Remarks.] er, I rise today to work with my col- intelligent use of funds as opposed to f leagues to try to make those adjust- giving statistics and not the taking NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR ARTS ments to our budget which are reason- care of services. AND HUMANITIES CAPTURES able and fair to all citizens. I thank those Members on both sides SPIRIT OF AMERICA In my own county and across Penn- of the aisle who have helped me on sylvania and for that matter the this. I yield to my friend and colleague, The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a United States, we need to make those the gentleman from Florida [Mr. previous order of the House, the gentle- kinds of adjustments to our energy STEARNS], who has been very active in woman from Texas [Ms. JACKSON-LEE] budget which, in fact, would give as- this movement. is recognized for 5 minutes. sistance to the weatherization assist- Mr. STEARNS. I thank my colleague. Ms. JACKSON-LEE. Mr. Speaker, it ance program. I also am sorry that you were not has been said to many of us that if you I salute the gentleman from Colorado able to offer the amendment because I are not able to remember the past, [Mr. SKAGGS] for his assistance in mak- think it is an important amendment. sometimes you may be doomed to re- ing an initial change of $3.5 million ad- People in rural counties like Lake peat some of the negatives that occur. ditional for this program. I would have Country in Florida which is part of my That does not mean that history is all preferred having the program that was congressional district often use this as- negative. But it means that it gives us supported by many Members on both sistance to make the necessary im- a sense of direction and future. It helps sides of the aisle, working with the provements that keep homes livable us understand where we should be gentleman from Vermont [Mr. SAND- while reducing the portion of their going. ERS] and others for the figure of $50 budget which they must also spend on Mr. Speaker, I rise to talk about the million, and correspondingly we would utilities. Without such assistance, the value of the National Endowment for have made a reduction in the Energy homes can become too expensive to Humanities and the National Endow- Information Administration. Frankly I maintain and often become uninhabit- ment for the Arts. Because for many think the need for the assistance, able. I want to congratulate my col- when we begin to talk about budget whether they be poor or elderly, to leagues. I hope my colleagues on both cutting and assuring that we are fis- have the weatherization programs to sides of the aisle will realize this is an cally responsible in this Congress on help them get through the winters that important amendment and that we can behalf of the American people, I think can be so severe in many parts of the have an opportunity to debate on it we must also ask the question and an- country, that this tradeoff of technical and vote on it up or down in the near swer it about focus, about where we assistance to companies frankly that future. would like to go in the 21st century. could in fact through user fees take Mr. FOX of Pennsylvania. I thank Allow me to tell a simple story about that particular information and receive the gentleman from Florida [Mr. a man named John Biggers, a gen- it rather than taking funds away from STEARNS] for his support on this pro- tleman who has created a mosaic of art weatherization. gram. It has been very helpful. I thank and history over 50 years of his life. I thank those Members of the body, the gentlewoman from New York [Ms. Coming from North Carolina and now a both Republican and Democrat, who MOLINARI] who has been very helpful resident of Texas, this gentleman has have worked with us on this weather- and many others who have given their painted the mosaics of life. He has ization program. The intent of our assistance and their support. I frankly painted the canvases of life and he has amendment tonight would be to pro- say the group involved in my commu- been able to share with young people tect a program which is important to nity, the CADCOM, the community ac- and old people and middle-aged people many families across the United tion group, has been working day and a continuing history of America. His States. The weatherization program is night to help those who are in need. art has been touted internationally and a cost-conscious energy conservation Weatherization is a major program nationally. He has traveled to Africa program which makes renovations to that CADCOM has been involved with. and he has brought back the dreams low-income homes to increase energy Keith Sampson, their executive direc- and aspirations of those who live there efficiency and make health and safety tor, knows full well that the needs and he has shared them with those of improvements. keep growing. While the Federal Gov- us who live here in America. These improvements make a signifi- ernment cannot answer all those needs, More importantly, he has opened the cant difference in the home heating the weatherization program adminis- eyes of children, inner city children H 7066 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE July 17, 1995 who would wonder whether or not they Should we deny the American public tend their remarks and include extra- too could paint a brush and make a pic- the same opportunity to preserve both neous material:) ture. He has been very instrumental in its history and its culture? I think not. Mr. SKAGGS, for 5 minutes, today. a program in Houston, TX, called the Let us be instructed wisely. Shake- Ms. KAPTUR, for 5 minutes, today. artists in residence program. speare said the first thing we should do Mr. OWENS, for 5 minutes, today. What does that mean? It takes mid- is kill all the lawyers. Some would say, (The following Members (at the re- dle-school children and introduces as a trained lawyer, I would want to quest of Mr. FOX of Pennsylvania) to them to famous artists and allows burn that and not want to hear the revise and extend their remarks and in- them to have the same creativity and play that offered those words. clude extraneous material:) spark of interest and thrill and excite- But I think in the spirit of art, cer- Mr. CANADY of Florida, for 5 minutes, ment about being creative. This project tainly, there are limitations, but it is on July 18. is sponsored by the Museum of Fine important to have that kind of diver- Mr. GOSS, for 5 minutes each day, on Arts and, yes, it receives dollars from sity, that kind of contradiction and July 17, 18, 19, 20, and 21. the National Endowment for the Arts. conflict, but as well, the opportunity Mr. FOX of Pennsylvania, for 5 min- Pornography? No. Sinfulness? No. op- for artists to express themselves. utes, today. portunity? Yes, I salute both John The National Endowment for the f Biggers and these many artists who Arts helps us do that. The National En- EXTENSION OF REMARKS have contributed to this program but dowment for the Humanities helps us more importantly I think it reinforces preserve our culture. And with the By unanimous consent, permission to the value of the National Endowment great culture of the American Indian revise and extend remarks was granted for the Arts and likewise the history- and all that is rested in this Nation, we to: telling of the National Endowment for would not want to lose that. (The following members (at the re- the Humanities. So my instruction, Mr. Speaker, is quest of Mr. FOX of Pennsylvania) and We wonder about art and whether or that we as Americans should draw to- to include extraneous matter:) not it is part of culture. I would say if gether, yes, and be fiscally responsible. Mr. BAKER of California. Mr. HANSEN. you asked the Houston Grand Opera or We have many, many challenges and Mr. BACHUS. the Museum of Fine Arts or the Ensem- many, many tasks. Many, many re- Mr. LAUGHLIN. sponsibilities for this Government. But ble Theater or Mecca or the Asian Mr. MARTINI. Dance Company in Houston or the I would say to you that to the child Mr. CALLAHAN. Acres Home Dance Theater, they could who stands in the classroom learning Mr. WALKER. be able to tell the story of the eyes it about his or her culture, or expressing (The following members (at the re- has opened of children, children who himself or herself creatively through quest of Mr. LUTHER) and to include ex- thought for a moment that they had no art or in the inner city or down in the traneous matter:) creativity, that they could not be a stages in downtown Houston or New Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota in two danger, a speaker, an orator or an art- York or Chicago or Los Angeles, it is instances. ist, or maybe someone who might have valuable to have entities that help us Mr. SERRANO. never had the opportunity to see some preserve who we are. Mr. SKELTON. of our history unfold, not so much in a I support the National Endowment Mr. GORDON. story book but on the theater stage as for the Arts and National Endowment Mrs. MALONEY. produced by the Human Grand Opera or for the Humanities and I think the Mr. BONIOR. any opera in this Bation. amendments cutting these particular Mr. MENENDEZ in two instances. I always believe that we must do entities do us a disservice in this Na- Ms. WOOLSEY. things constructively and positively. I tion. Let us preserve who we are. Mr. WARD. also believe we should do it with reason f f and a focus on the future. I do not ADJOURNMENT think this country directs itself well if LEAVE OF ABSENCE we take away the value of our culture, By unanimous consent, leave of ab- Ms. JACKSON-LEE. Mr. Speaker, I if we do not preserve it, if we do not sence was granted to: move that the House do now adjourn. teach it, if we do not understand it. Mr. CLINGER (at the request of Mr. The motion was agreed to; accord- The National Endowment for the ARMEY) for today, on account of weath- ingly (at 10 o’clock and 32 minutes Arts and National Endowment for the er/mechanical travel-related difficul- p.m.), under its previous order, the Humanities captures the spirit of what ties. House adjourned until tomorrow, Tues- America is. It reflects on its diversity Ms. HARMAN (at the request of Mr. day, July 18, 1995, at 9 a.m. but more importantly it helps to uplift GEPHARDT) for today, on account of of- f those who want to share our story. ficial business. It is important to have your story Mr. UNDERWOOD (at the request of EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS, shared, whether it is in music, whether Mr. GEPHARDT) for today and the bal- ETC. it is in the story teller or the history ance of the week, on account of official Under clause 2 of rule XXIV, execu- professor, whether it is in the opera business. tive communications were taken from singer, whether it is in the actor or on Mr. TUCKER (at the request of Mr. the Speaker’s table and referred as fol- the stage, it is important to have the GEPHARDT) for today, on account of of- lows: story of a nation told so that all people ficial business. 1203. A communication from the President can understand the story. Miss COLLINS of Michigan (at the re- of the United States, transmitting a report quest of Mr. GEPHARDT) for today and on revised estimates of the budget receipts, b 2230 the balance of the week, on account of outlays, and budget authority for fiscal Mr. Speaker, let me share with you medical reasons. years 1995–2000, pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 1106(a) (H. Doc. No. 104–98); to the Committee on Ap- that the American public is willing to Mr. RUSH (at the request of Mr. GEP- propriations and ordered to be printed. spend $15 of its tax money, per family, HARDT) for today, on account of travel 1204. A communication from the President to have the National Endowment for problems. of the United States, transmitting amend- the Arts. Does that sound like a nation f ments to the fiscal year 1996 appropriations that wants to cut from underneath its requests for the Department of Defense, the very soul the opportunity to spread its SPECIAL ORDERS GRANTED Department of Health and Human Services, culture? How proud we are when we By unanimous consent, permission to and the Social Security Administration, pur- share European history and African address the House, following the legis- suant to 31 U.S.C. 1106(b) (H. Doc. No. 104–99); to the Committee on Appropriations and or- history and history from Latin Amer- lative program and any special orders dered to be printed. ica and history from Canada and his- heretofore, entered, was granted to: 1205. A communication from the President tory from the Pacific Rim. All of that (The following Members (at the re- of the United States, transmitting amend- is valuable. quest of Mr. LUTHER) to revise and ex- ments to the fiscal year 1996 appropriations July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H 7067 requests for the Departments of Commerce, sonal financial disclosure statements and the tax treatment for direct foreign invest- Energy, Health and Human Services, Justice, amendments thereto filed with the Clerk of ment and investment through a foreign mu- State, Transportation, and the Treasury; the the House of Representatives, pursuant to 2 tual fund; to the Committee on Ways and General Services Administration; and the U.S.C. 703(d)(1) and Rule XLIV, clause 1, of Means. Federal Emergency Management Agency, the House Rules (H. Doc. 104–97); to the Com- By Mr. REED: pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 1106(b) (H. Doc. No. 104– mittee on Standards of Official Conduct and H.R. 2046. A bill to amend the Coastal Zone 100); to the Committee on Appropriations ordered to be printed. Management Act of 1972 to authorize grants and ordered to be printed. 1218. A letter from the Chairman, Federal to coastal States for development of State 1206. A letter from the Secretary of the Trade Commission, transmitting the Com- coastal zone management program changes Treasury, transmitting a copy of a report en- mission’s 78th annual report covering its ac- to support adoption of procedures and poli- titled: ‘‘Study of Specialized Government Se- complishments during the fiscal year ended cies to evaluate and facilitate siting of cer- curities Brokers and Dealers,’’ pursuant to 15 September 30, 1992, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. tain aquaculture facilities in the coastal U.S.C. 78o–5 note; to the Committee on Com- 46(f); jointly, to the Committees on Com- zone, and to establish in the National Oce- merce. merce and the Judiciary. anic and Atmospheric Administration a ma- 1207. A letter from the Assistant Secretary f rine aquaculture development program to be for Legislative Affairs, Department of State, known as the Nantucket Program; to the transmitting a Memorandum of Justification REPORTS OF COMMITTEES ON Committee on Resources. for Presidential Determination on drawdown By Mr. SMITH of New Jersey (for him- of Department of Treasury Commodities and PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS self, Mr. LIPINSKI, Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN, Services to Support Serbia-Montenegro Under clause 2 of rule XIII, reports of Mr. WOLF, Mr. KING, and Mr. SALM- Sanctions Program Enforcement Efforts, committees were delivered to the Clerk ON): pursuant to 22 U.S.C. 2348a; to the Commit- for printing and reference to the proper H.R. 2047. A bill concerning the Fourth tee on International Relations. World Conference on Women in Beijing; to 1208. A letter from the Secretary for Legis- calendar, as follows: the Committee on International Relations. lative Affairs, Department of State, trans- Mr. ARCHER: Committee on Ways and By Mr. BREWSTER: mitting notification of a proposed license for Means. House Joint Resolution 96. Resolu- H. Res. 191. Resolution amending the Rules the export of major defense articles and serv- tion disapproving the extension of non- of the House of Representatives to require ices sold commercially to French Guiana discriminatory treatment—most-favored-na- (Transmittal No. DTC–38–95), pursuant to 22 tion treatment—to the products of the Peo- the reduction of section 602(b)(1) U.S.C. 2776(c); to the Committee on Inter- ple’s Republic of China; adversely (Rept. 104– suballocations to reflect floor amendments national Relations. 188). Referred to the Committee of the Whole to general appropriation bills, and for other 1209. A letter from the Director, Office of House on the State of the Union. purposes; to the Committee on Rules. Management and Budget, transmitting Mr. YOUNG of Alaska: Committee on Re- f OMB’s estimate of the amount of change in sources. S. 268. An act to authorize the col- outlays or receipts, as the case may be, in lection of fees for expenses for triploid grass PRIVATE BILLS AND each fiscal year through fiscal year 2000 re- carp certification inspections, and for other RESOLUTIONS sulting from passage of H.R. 483, pursuant to purposes (Rept. 104–189). Referred to the Public Law 101–508, section 13101(a) (104 Stat. Committee of the Whole House on the State Under clause 1 of rule XXII, 1388–582); to the Committee on Government of the Union. Mr. GEKAS introduced a bill (H.R. 2048) to Reform and Oversight. Mr. DIAZ-BALART: Committee on Rules. authorize the Secretary of Transportation to 1210. A letter from the Chairman, Council House Resolution 190. Resolution providing issue a certificate of documentation with ap- of the District of Columbia, transmitting a for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2020) mak- propriate endorsement for employment in copy of D.C. Act 11–93, ‘‘District of Columbia ing appropriations for the Treasury Depart- the coastwise trade for the vessel Babs; Campaign Finance Reform and Conflict of ment, the U.S. Postal Service, the Executive which was referred to the Committee on Interest Temporary Amendment Act of Office of the President, and certain Inde- Transportation and Infrastructure. 1995,’’ pursuant to D.C. Code, section 1– pendent Agencies, for the fiscal year ending f 233(c)(1); to the Committee on Government September 30, 1996, and for other purposes Reform and Oversight. (Rept. 104–190). Referred to the House Cal- ADDITIONAL SPONSORS 1211. A letter from the Chairman, Council endar. of the District of Columbia, transmitting a Under clause 4 of rule XXII, sponsors copy of D.C. Act 11–92, ‘‘Prohibition on the f were added to public bills and resolu- Transfer of Firearms Act of 1995,’’ pursuant PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS tions as follows: to D.C. Code, section 1–233(c)(1); to the Com- H.R. 32: Mr. LAFALCE. mittee on Government Reform and Over- Under clause 5 of rule X and clause 4 H.R. 72: Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. sight. of rule XXII, public bills and resolu- H.R. 104: Mr. ENGEL and Mr. STUPAK. 1212. A letter from the Auditor, District of tions were introduced and severally re- H.R. 127: Mr. QUINN. Columbia, transmitting a copy of a report ferred as follows: H.R. 218: Mr. STUPAK. entitled, ‘‘Fiscal Year 1993 Annual Report on H.R. 325: Mr. TOWNS and Mr. GENE GREEN Advisory Neighborhood Commissions,’’ pur- By Mr. WALKER (for himself, and Mr. of Texas. suant to D.C. Code, section 47–117(d); to the SENSENBRENNER): H.R. 427: Mr. HALL of Texas, Mr. ENSIGN, Committee on Government Reform and H.R. 2043. A bill to authorize appropria- Mr. STEARNS, Mr. BEREUTER, and Mr. Oversight. tions to the National Aeronautics and Space 1213. A letter from the Auditor, District of Administration for human space flight, MCINNIS. Columbia, transmitting a copy of a report science, aeronautics, and technology, mis- H.R. 552: Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts, Mr. entitled, ‘‘Review of the Agency Fund of the sion support, and inspector general, and for PARKER, Mr. BRYANT of Tennessee, Ms. RIV- Office of the People’s Counsel for Fiscal Year other purposes; to the Committee on ERS, Ms. KAPTUR, Mr. MCKEON, Mr. 1994,’’ pursuant to D.C. Code, section 47– Science. ROHRABACHER, and Mr. WELDON of Florida. 117(d); to the Committee on Government Re- By Mr. ACKERMAN (for himself, Mr. H.R. 628: Mr. SAXTON. form and Oversight. KING, Mr. LAZIO of New York, Mr. H.R. 743: Mr. WAMP and Mr. SALMON. 1214. A letter from the Archivist, National FRISA, and Mr. FORBES): H.R. 789: Mr. KINGSTON. Archives and Records Administration, trans- H.R. 2044. A bill to remove police officers H.R. 852: Ms. LOFGREN and Mr. MEEHAN. mitting the Administration’s report on dis- employed by the Long Island Rail Road Com- H.R. 863: Mr. BENTSEN, Mr. ACKERMAN, Mr. posal of Federal records for fiscal year 1994, pany from coverage under the Employer’s Li- CLYBURN, Mrs. THURMAN, Mr. KILDEE, Mr. pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 303a(f); to the Commit- ability Act, the Railway Labor Act, the Rail- ROMERO-BARCELO, Mr. LUTHER, and Mr. tee on Government Reform and Oversight. road Retirement Act, and the Railroad Un- STUPAK. 1215. A letter from the Secretary of Com- employment Insurance Act, and for other H.R. 883: Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. merce, transmitting a report entitled, ‘‘Ant- purposes; to the Committee on Transpor- H.R. 899: Mr. CALLAHAN, Mr. TOWNS, Mr. arctic Marine Living Resources Convention tation and Infrastructure, and in addition to SALMON, Mrs. KELLY, Mr. MOORHEAD, Mr. Act of 1984: Program Development Plan,’’ the Committee on Ways and Means, for a pe- SHADEGG, and Mr. STEARNS. pursuant to 16 U.S.C. 2431 et seq.; to the riod to be subsequently determined by the H.R. 910: Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Committee on Resources. Speaker, in each case for consideration of H.R. 949: Mr. HEFLEY. 1216. A letter from the Deputy Associate such provisions as fall within the jurisdic- H.R. 1006: Ms. VELAZQUEZ and Mr. WYDEN. Director for Compliance, Department of the tion of the committee concerned. H.R. 1021: Mr. KLUG. Interior, transmitting notification of pro- By Mr. CRANE (for himself, Mr. GIB- H.R. 1100: Mr. BROWN of California. posed refunds of excess royalty payments in BONS, and Ms. DUNN of Washington): H.R. 1169: Mr. NEY. OCS areas, pursuant to 43 U.S.C. 1339(b); to H.R. 2045. A bill to amend the Internal Rev- H.R. 1202: Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas, Mr. the Committee on Resources. enue Code of 1986 to provide tax treatment HASTINGS of Florida, Mr. MENENDEZ, Mr. 1217. A letter from the Clerk of the House, for foreign investment through a U.S. regu- BECERRA, Mr. MATSUI, Mr. MARTINEZ, Ms. transmitting the annual compilation of per- lated investment company comparable to JACKSON-LEE, and Mr. TEJEDA. H 7068 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE July 17, 1995

H.R. 1254: Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Page 3, line 15, strike ‘‘$5,899,000’’ and in- Page 25, line 20, strike ‘‘$805,888,000’’ and H.R. 1278: Mr. WYNN. sert ‘‘$5.309,100’’. insert ‘‘$805,396,000’’. H.R. 1329: Mr. JOHNSTON of Florida. Page 3, line 21, strike ‘‘$4,133,000’’ and in- H.R. 1976 H.R. 1352: Mr. COOLEY, Ms. FURSE, Mr. DIN- sert ‘‘$3,719,700’’. OFFERED BY: MR. CONDIT GELL, and Mr. TIAHRT. Page 4, line 19, strike ‘‘$596,000’’ and insert AMENDMENT NO. 37: Page 3, line 3, strike H.R. 1362: Mr. FUNDERBURK, Mr. BURTON of ‘‘$536,400’’. ‘‘$3,748,000’’ and insert ‘‘$4,240,000’’. Indiana, Mr. TIAHRT, Mr. EMERSON, and Mr. Page 5, line 23, strike ‘‘$800,000’’ and insert Page 31, line 19, strike ‘‘$629,986,000’’ and GOODLATTE. ‘‘$720,000’’. insert ‘‘$629,494,000’’. H.R. 1527: Mr. CRAPO. Page 7, line 19, strike ‘‘$3,797,000’’ and in- H.R. 1976 H.R. 1535: Mr. STUPAK. sert ‘‘$3,607,150’’. H.R. 1594: Mr. FAWELL and Mr. GOODLING. Page 8, line 3, strike ‘‘$8,198,000’’ and insert OFFERED BY: MR. CONDIT H.R. 1610: Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. ‘‘$7,378,200’’. AMENDMENT NO. 38: Page 3, line 3, strike H.R. 1637: Mr. CAMP. Page 9, line 3, strike ‘‘$27,860,000’’ and in- ‘‘$3,748,000’’ and insert ‘‘$4,240,000’’. H.R. 1692: Mr. SCHIFF. sert ‘‘$26,467,000’’. Page 44, line 4, strike ‘‘$1,000,000’’ and in- H.R. 1693: Mr. POSHARD, Mr. SCHIFF, and Page 9, line 12, strike ‘‘$520,000’’ and insert sert ‘‘$508,000’’. Mr. LUTHER. ‘‘$468,000’’. H.R. 1976 H.R. 1694: Mr. POSHARD and Mr. SCHIFF. Page 9, line 17, strike ‘‘$53,131,000’’ and in- OFFERED BY: MR. CONDIT sert ‘‘$50,474,450’’. H.R. 1695: Mr. POSHARD and Mr. SCHIFF. AMENDMENT NO. 39: Page 3, line 3, strike H.R. 1701: Mr. STUPAK. Page 10, line 3, strike ‘‘$81,107,000’’ and in- ‘‘$3,748,000’’ and insert ‘‘$4,240,000’’. H.R. 1707: Ms. SLAUGHTER, Mr. REYNOLDS, sert ‘‘$77,051,650’’. Page 3, line 21, strike ‘‘$4,133,000’’ and in- and Mr. SERRANO. H.R. 1976 sert ‘‘$3,641,000’’. H.R. 1715: Mr. CONDIT, Mr. CUNNINGHAM, OFFERED BY: MR. BEREUTER H.R. 1976 Mr. FOLEY, Mr. HEFNER, Mr. MATSUI, Mrs. AMENDMENT NO. 31: Page 40, after line 25, OFFERED BY: MR. MCINTOSH MEYERS of Kansas, Mr. MONTGOMERY, Mr. insert the following: AMENDMENT NO. 40: At page 71 of the bill, PETERSON of Florida, Mr. SISISKY, and Mr. In addition, for the cost (as defined in sec- after line 2, insert after the last section the SPRATT. tion 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of following new section: H.R. 1735: Mr. GOODLATTE and Mr. FARR. 1974) of guaranteed loans under a demonstra- SEC. 726. None of the funds made available H.R. 1744: Mr. KIM, Mr. CHRISTENSEN, and tion program of loan guarantees for multi- in this Act may be used to prevent the dis- Mr. BARRETT of Wisconsin. family rental housing in rural areas, semination of reprints of articles when it is H.R. 1749: Mr. HOKE, Mr. COYNE, Ms. RIV- $1,000,000, to be derived from the amount made known to the Federal official having ERS, Mr. SALMON, Mr. STOCKMAN, Ms. made available under this heading for the authority to obligate or expend such funds VELAZQUEZ, Mr. DELLUMS, and Mrs. SCHROE- cost of low-income section 515 loans and to that the articles have been published in peer- DER. become available for obligation only upon reviewed scientific publications or other gen- H.R. 1801: Mr. MCCOLLUM. the enactment of authorizing legislation. erally recognized scientific materials, in- H.R. 1856: Mr. HOYER, Mr. BERMAN, Mr. cluding articles discussing cost-effectiveness HASTINGS of Florida, Mr. CHRISTENSEN, and H.R. 1976 claims. Mr. LIGHTFOOT. OFFERED BY: MR. CARDIN H.R. 1976 H.R. 1876: Ms. MCKINNEY, Ms. LOFGREN, and AMENDMENT NO. 32: Page 71, after line 2, in- Mr. OBERSTAR. sert the following new section: OFFERED BY: MR. MCINTOSH H.R. 1892: Mr. BAKER of Louisiana. ‘‘SEC. 726. None of the funds made available AMENDMENT NO. 41: At page 71 of the bill, H.R. 1903: Mr. OWENS. in this Act may be used by the Food and after line 2, insert after the last section the H.R. 1912: Mr. OBERSTAR, Mr. DELLUMS, Mr. Drug Administration to carry out the con- following new section: TORRES, Mr. SERRANO, Mr. CARDIN, Mr. solidation of its field laboratories, other SEC. 726. None of the funds made available HILLIARD, Mr. FATTAH, and Mr. BROWN of than the renovation of the National Center in this Act shall be used to increase, from Ohio. for Toxicological Research.’’. the fiscal year 1995 level, the level of Full time Equivalency Positions (whether H.R. 1915: Mr. SHAW and Mr. PICKETT. H.R. 1976 H.R. 1932: Mr. SMITH of New Jersey, Mr. through new hires or by transferring full FFERED Y RS LAYTON HEFLEY, Mr. UNDERWOOD, Mr. EMERSON, Mr. O B : M . C time equivalents from other offices) in any RAHALL, Mr. INGLIS of South Carolina, Mr. AMENDMENT NO. 33: Page 40, line 10, insert of the following Food & Drug Administration HASTINGS of Washington, Mr. POSHARD, Mr. ‘‘(less $50,000,000)’’ before ‘‘for loans’’. offices: Office of the Commissioner, Office of BURTON of Indiana, Mr. KNOLLENBERG, Mr. Page 40, line 11, insert ‘‘(less $50,000,000)’’ Policy, Office of External Affairs (Immediate BUNN of Oregon, and Mr. DELAY. before ‘‘shall’’. Office, as well as Office of Health Affairs, Of- H.R. 2008: Mr. SERRANO, Mrs. JOHNSON of Page 40, line 20, insert ‘‘(less $85,000)’’ be- fice of Legislative Affairs, Office of Connecticut, Mr. FOX, and Mr. ANDREWS. fore ‘‘, of which’’. Consumer Affairs, and Office of Public Af- H.R. 2011: Ms. MCKINNEY, Mr. WAXMAN, Mr. Page 40, line 20, insert ‘‘(less $85,000)’’ be- fairs), and the Office of Management & Sys- FROST, Mr. POMEROY, and Mr. HALL of Texas. fore ‘‘shall be for’’. tems (Immediate Office, as well as Office of H.R. 2017: Mr. WYNN. Page 45, line 10, strike ‘‘$6,437,000’’ and in- Planning and Evaluation and Office of Man- H.J. Res. 70: Mr. KILDEE and Mr. ENGEL. sert ‘‘$7,080,700’’. agement). H.J. Res. 97: Mr. HILLIARD, Mr. LIPINSKI, Page 45, line 19, strike ‘‘$500,000,000’’ and H.R. 1976 Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi, and Mr. LUTHER. insert ‘‘$550,000,000’’. OFFERED BY: MR. MILLER OF CALIFORNIA H. Con. Res. 31: Ms. HARMAN. H.R. 1976 AMENDMENT NO. 42: Page 13, line 24, strike H. Con. Res. 42: Ms. HARMAN, Ms. MCKIN- OFFERED BY: MRS. CLAYTON ‘‘$31,485,000’’ and insert in lieu thereof NEY, Ms. MOLINARI, Mr. GALLEGLY, Mr. AMENDMENT NO. 34: Page 40, line 10, insert ‘‘$15,050,000’’. DEFAZIO, and Mr. OBEY. Page 14, line 20, strike ‘‘$389,372,000’’ and ‘‘(less $70,000,000)’’ before ‘‘for loans’’. H. Con. Res. 47: Mr. ACKERMAN, Mrs. KEN- Page 40, line 11, insert ‘‘(less $70,000,000)’’ insert ‘‘$372,937,000’’. NELLY, Mr. DURBIN, and Mr. FAZIO of Page 53, line 17, strike ‘‘3,729,807,000’’ and before ‘‘shall’’. California. insert in lieu thereof ‘‘$3,746,242,000’’. Page 40, line 14, strike ‘‘$150,000,000’’ and H. Con. Res. 79: Mr. MARKEY, Mr. KILDEE, insert ‘‘$220,000,000’’. H.R. 1976 and Mr. LUTHER. Page 40, line 20, insert ‘‘(less $119,000)’’ be- OFFERED BY: MR. SANFORD H. Res. 30: Mr. SPRATT, Mr. YOUNG of Alas- fore ‘‘, of which’’. AMENDMENT NO. 43: Page 5, line 17, strike ka, Mr. LONGLEY, Mr. BEREUTER, Ms. RIVERS, Page 40, line 20, insert ‘‘(less $119,000)’’ be- ‘‘$25,587,000’’ and insert ‘‘$9,000,000’’. MS. LOFGREN, and Mr. CLINGER. fore ‘‘shall be for’’. H.R. 1976 H. Res. 37: Mr. CRAMER. Page 40, line 23, strike ‘‘$82,035,000)’’ and in- OFFERED BY: MR. SANFORD f sert ‘‘$92,973,000’’. AMENDMENT NO. 44: Page 5, line 18, after H.R. 1976 AMENDMENTS the semi-colon, insert the following new lan- OFFERED BY: MRS. CLAYTON guage: ‘‘provided that no funds may be ex- Under clause 6 of rule XXIII, pro- AMENDMENT NO. 35: Page 40, line 11, insert pended for the Department’s Strategic Space posed amendments were submitted as ‘‘(less $300,000,000) before ‘‘shall’’. Plan;’’. follows: Page 40, line 20, insert ‘‘(plus $62,460,000)’’ H.R. 1976 H.R. 1976 before ‘‘, of which’’. OFFERED BY: MR. SANFORD Page 40, line 20, insert ‘‘(less $510,000)’’ be- OFFERED BY: MR. ALLARD AMENDMENT NO. 45: Page 26, strike lines 7 fore ‘‘shall be for’’. through 10. AMENDMENT NO. 30: Page 2, line 11, strike H.R. 1976 ‘‘$10,227,000, of which $7,500,000’’ and insert H.R. 1976 ‘‘$9,204,300, of which $6,750,000’’. OFFERED BY: MR. CONDIT OFFERED BY: MR. WATT OF NORTH CAROLINA Page 3, line 3, strike ‘‘$3,748,000’’ and insert AMENDMENT NO. 36: Page 3, line 3, strike AMENDMENT NO. 46: Page 40, line 16, before ‘‘$3,373,200’’. ‘‘$3,748,000’’ and insert ‘‘$4,240,000’’. the period insert the following: July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H 7069

‘‘: Provided, That, notwithstanding section actment of all general appropriations bills (b) DEFINITION.—As used in this section, 520 of the Housing Act of 1949, the Secretary for the same fiscal year, an amount not to the term ‘‘appropriation bill’’ means any of Agriculture may make loans under section exceed the amount by which the section general or special appropriation bill, and any 502 of such Act for properties in the Pine 602(a) allocation of new budget authority ex- bill or joint resolution making supple- View West Subdivision, located in ceeds the sum of all new budget authority mental, deficiency, or continuing appropria- Gibsonville, North Carolina, in the same provided by appropriations bills enacted for tions. manger as provided under such section for that fiscal year plus that supplemental ap- (c) RESCISSION.—Funds in the Deficit Re- properties in rural areas’’. propriation bill (as reported by that commit- duction Lockbox shall be rescinded upon re- H.R. 1977 tee). ductions in discretionary limits pursuant to ‘‘(c) It shall not be in order for the Com- subsection (a). OFFERED BY: MR. SANDERS mittee on Rules of the House of Representa- AMENDMENT NO. 73: Page 55, line 5, strike tives to report a resolution that restricts the SEC. 703. (a) SECTION 302(e) AMENDMENT.— ‘‘$384,504,000’’ and insert ‘‘$334,504,000’’. offering of amendments to any appropriation Section 302(e) of the Congressional Budget Page 56, line 3, strike ‘‘$552,871,000’’ and in- bill adjusting the level of budget authority Act of 1974 is amended to read as follows: sert ‘‘602,871,000’’. contained in a Deficit Reduction Account. ‘‘(e) CHANGES IN SUBALLOCATIONS.—(1) Page 56, line 10, strike ‘‘$133,946,000’’ and ‘‘(d) Whenever a Member of either House of After a committee reports suballocations insert ‘‘$183,946,000’’. Congress offers an amendment (whether in under subsection (b), that committee may Page 56, line 17, strike ‘‘$107,446,000’’ and subcommittee, committee, or on the floor) report a resolution to its House changing its insert ‘‘$157,446,000’’. to an appropriation bill to reduce spending, suballocations, which resolution shall not H.R. 2002 that reduction shall be placed in the deficit take effect unless adopted by that House. OFFERED BY: MR. DELAY reduction lock-box unless that Member indi- ‘‘(2) A resolution reported to the House of cates that it is to be utilized for another pro- AMENDMENT NO. 1: Page 15, line 8, strike Representatives under paragraph (1) shall be $1,600,000,000’’ and insert ‘‘$1,700,000,000’’. gram, project, or activity covered by that placed on the Union Calendar and be privi- Page 26, line 4, insert before the final pe- bill. If the amendment is agreed to and the leged for consideration in the Committee of riod the following: reduction was placed in the deficit reduction the Whole after the report on the resolution lock-box, then the line item entitled ‘Deficit : That each dollar amount has been available to Members for at least Provided further, Reduction Lock-box’ shall be increased by three calendar days (excluding Saturdays, otherwise specified under this heading is the amount of that reduction. Any amend- Sundays and legal holidays). After general hereby reduced by $100,000,000, and such re- ment pursuant to this subsection shall be in debate which shall not exceed one hour to be ductions shall be made by the Secretary of order even if amendment portions of the bill equally divided and controlled by the chair- Transportation solely from the amounts ap- are not read for amendment with respect to man and ranking minority member of the portioned to urbanized areas with popu- the Deficit Reduction Lock-box. lations of more than 1,000,000 ‘‘(e) It shall not be in order in the House of committee reporting the resolution, the res- H.R. 2002 Representatives or the Senate to consider a olution shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. No amendment OFFERED BY: MR. RICHARDSON conference report or amendment of the Sen- ate that modifies any Deficit Reduction shall be in order in the House or in the Com- AMENDMENT NO. 2. Page 12, line 7, strike mittee of the Whole except amendments in ‘‘$4,600,000,000’’ and insert ‘‘$4,591,250,000’’. Lock-box provisions that is beyond the scope of that provision as so committed to the con- the nature of a substitute containing H.R. 2020 ference committee. changes in suballocations under subsection OFFERED BY: MR. CRAPO ‘‘(f) It shall not be in order to offer an (b) which do not breach any allocation made AMENDMENT NO. 1. At the end add the fol- amendment increasing the Deficit Reduction under subsection (a). Priority in recognition lowing new title: Lock-box Account unless the amendment in- for offering the first such amendment shall be accorded to the chairman of the Commit- TITLE VI—DEFICIT REDUCTION LOCK- creases rescissions or reduces appropriations tee on the Budget or a designee. No amend- BOX by an equivalent or larger amount, except that it shall be in order to offer an amend- ments to such amendments shall be in order DEFICIT REDUCTION TRUST FUND ment increasing the amount in the Deficit except substitute amendments. Following DEFICIT REDUCTION LOCK-BOX PROVISIONS OF Reduction Lock-box by the amount that the the consideration of the resolution for APPROPRIATION MEASURES appropriate 602(b) allocation of new budget amendment, the Committee shall rise and SEC. 701. (a) DEFICIT REDUCTION LOCK-BOX authority exceeds the amount of new budget report the resolution to the House together PROVISIONS.—Title III of the Congressional authority provided by that bill. with any amendment that may have been Budget Act of 1974 is amended by adding at ‘‘(g) It shall not be in order for the Com- adopted. The previous question shall be con- the end the following new section: mittee on Rules of the House of Representa- sidered as ordered on the resolution to final ‘‘DEFICIT REDUCTION LOCK-BOX PROVISIONS OF tives to report a resolution which waives adoption without intervening motion. It APPROPRIATION BILLS subsection (c).’’. shall not be in order to consider a motion to (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—The table of reconsider the vote by which the resolution ‘‘SEC. 314. (a) Any appropriation bill that is contents set forth in section 1(b) of the Con- is agreed to or disagreed to.’’. being marked up by the Committee on appro- gressional Budget and Impoundment Control (b) SECTION 602(b)(1) AMENDMENT.—The last priations (or a subcommittee thereof) of ei- Act of 1974 is amended by inserting after the ther House shall contain a line item entitled sentence of section 602(b)(1) of the Congres- item relating to section 313 the following sional Budget Act of 1974 is amended by ‘Deficit Reduction Lock-box’. new item: ‘‘(b) Whenever the Committee on Appro- striking ‘‘or revised’’. ‘‘Sec. 314. Deficit reduction lock-box provi- priations of either House reports an appro- sions of appropriation meas- CBO TRACKING priation bill, that bill shall contain a line ures.’’. item entitled ‘Deficit Reduction Account’ SEC. 704. Section 202 of the Congressional comprised of the following: CHANGES IN SUBALLOCATIONS Budget Act of 1974 is amended by adding at ‘‘(1) Only in the case of any general appro- SEC. 702. (a) DOWNWARD ADJUSTMENTS.— the end the following new subsection: priations for Treasury and Postal Service (or The discretionary spending limit for new ‘‘(i) SCOREKEEPING.—To facilitate compli- resolution making continuing appropriations budget authority for any fiscal year set forth ance by the Committee on Appropriations (if applicable)), an amount equal to the in section 601(a)(2) of the Congressional with section 314, the Office shall score all amounts by which the discretionary sending Budget Act of 1974, as adjusted in strict con- general appropriation measures (including limit for new budget authority and outlays formance with section 251 of the Balanced conference reports) as passed by the House of set forth in the most recent OMB sequestra- Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act Representatives, as passed the Senate and as tion preview report pursuant to section of 1985, shall be reduced by the amount of enacted into law. The scorecard shall include 601(a)(2) exceed the section 602(a) allocation budget authority transferred to the Deficit amounts contained in the Deficit Reduction for the fiscal year covered by that bill. Reduction Lock-box for that fiscal year Lock-Box. The chairman of the Committee ‘‘(2) Only in the case of any general appro- under section 314 of the Budget Control and on Appropriations of the House of Represent- priation bill (or resolution making continu- Impoundment Act of 1974. The adjusted dis- atives or the Senate, as the case may be, ing appropriations (if applicable)), an cretionary spending limit for outlays for shall have such scorecard published in the amount not to exceed the amount by which that fiscal year and each outyear as set forth Congressional Record.’’. the appropriate section 602(b) allocation of in such section 601(a)(2) shall be reduced as a H.R. 2020 new budget authority exceeds the amount of result of the reduction of such budget au- new budget authority provided by that bill thority, as calculated by the Director of the OFFERED BY: MR. DUNCAN (as reported by that committee), but not less Office of Management and Budget based upon AMENDMENT NO. 2: Page 31, strike lines 7 than the sum of reductions in budget author- such programmatic and other assumptions through 10. ity resulting from adoption of amendments set forth in the joint explanatory statement in the committee which were designated for of managers accompanying the conference Page 30, line 13, insert ‘‘(less $65,764,000)’’ deficit reduction. report on that bill. All such reductions shall after each of the two dollar amounts. ‘‘(3) Only in the case of any bill making occur within ten days of enactment of any Page 39, line 17, insert ‘‘(less $65,764,000)’’ supplemental appropriations following en- appropriations bill. after the dollar amount. H 7070 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE July 17, 1995

H.R. 2020 (A) the agency’s requirements for such pro- EMERGENCY EXCEPTIONS; EXCLUSIONS OFFERED BY: MR. HOYER curement are unique and cannot be satisfied SEC. 05. (a) EMERGENCY EXCEPTION.—Sec- by property and service procured by the Ad- AMENDMENT NO. 3: On page 22, line 2 (Under tion 03(a) or 04(a), or both, shall not apply ministrator of General Services as part of The White House Office), delete $39,459,000 to a regulatory rulemaking action if— the procurement known as ‘‘FTS2000’’; and and insert $40,193,000. (1) the head of a Federal agency otherwise On page 14, line 10 (Under IRS Information (B) the agency procurement, pursuant to authorized to take the action submits a writ- Systems), delete $1,575,216,000 and insert such delegation, would be cost-effective and ten request to the Administrator of the Of- $1,574,482,000. would not adversely affect the cost-effective- fice of Information and Regulatory Affairs ness of the FTS2000 procurement. within the Office of Management and Budget H.R. 2020 (b) After July 31, 1995, subsection (a) shall and submits a copy thereof to the appro- OFFERED BY: MR. HOYER apply only if the Administrator of General priate committees of each House of the Con- AMENDMENT NO. 4: On page 23 following Services has reported that the FTS2000 pro- gress; line 10 insert the following: curement is producing prices that allow the (2) the Administrator of the Office of Infor- mation and Regulatory Affairs within the ‘‘COUNCIL OF ECONOMIC ADVISORS Government to satisfy its requirements for such procurement in the most cost-effective Office of Management and Budget finds in SALARIES AND EXPENSES manner. writing that a waiver for the action is (A) For necessary expenses of the Council in necessary because of an imminent threat to H.R. 2020 carrying out its functions under the Employ- health or safety or other emergency, or (B) ment Act of 1946 (15 U.S.C. 1021), $3,439,000. OFFERED BY: MR. MCINTOSH necessary for the enforcement of criminal On page 13, line 3 (Under IRS Processing, AMENDMENT NO. 9: At the end of the bill laws; and Assistance and Management), delete add the following new title: (3) the Federal agency head publishes the finding and waiver in the Federal Register. $1,682,742,000 and insert $1,681,060,000. TITLE —REGULATORY TRANSITION On page 14, line 10 (Under IRS Information (b) EXCLUSIONS.—The head of an agency Systems), delete $1,575,216,000 and insert SHORT TITLE shall publish in the Federal Register any ac- $1,573,459,000 and amend the report accord- SEC. 01. This title may be cited as the tion excluded because of a certification ingly. ‘‘Regulatory Transition Act of 1995’’. under section 06(3)(B). (c) CIVIL RIGHTS EXCEPTION.—Section H.R. 2020 FINDING 03(a) or 04(a), or both, shall not apply to a OFFERED BY: MR. HOYER SEC. 02. The Congress finds that effective regulatory rulemaking action to establish or AMENDMENT NO. 5: On page 28 line 5 delete steps for improving the efficiency and proper enforce any statutory rights against dis- $26,521,000 and insert $27,721,000. management of Government operations, in- crimination on the basis of age, race, reli- On page 14, line 10 (IRS Information Sys- cluding enactment of a new law or laws to gion, gender, national origin, or handicapped tems), delete $1,575,216,000 and insert require (1) that the Federal rulemaking proc- or disability status except such rulemaking $1,574,016,000. ess include cost/benefit analysis, including actions that establish, lead to, or otherwise H.R. 2020 analysis of costs resulting from the loss of rely on the use of a quota or preference based property rights, and (2) for those Federal on age, race, religion, gender, national ori- OFFERED BY: MR. HOYER regulations that are subject to risk analysis gin, or handicapped or disability status’’. MENDMENT O A N . 6: Strike everything from and risk assessment that those regulations DEFINITIONS ‘‘Sec. 524’’ on page 63 line 22 through ‘‘term.’’ undergo standardized risk analysis and risk SEC. 06. For purposes of this title: on line 5 page 64. assessment using the best scientific and eco- (1) FEDERAL AGENCY.—The term ‘‘Federal H.R. 2020 nomic procedures, will be promoted if a mor- agency’’ means any agency as that term is OFFERED BY: MR. HOYER atorium on new rulemaking actions is im- defined in section 551(1) of title 5, United posed and an inventory of such action is con- AMENDMENT NO. 7: On page 84, following States Code (relating to administrative pro- ducted. ‘‘above.’’ on line 17, insert: cedure). Provided further, That the Commission MORATORIUM ON REGULATIONS (2) MORATORIUM PERIOD.—The term ‘‘mora- torium period’’ means the period of time— shall be under the operation of the Advisory SEC. 03. (a) MORATORIUM.—Until the end (A) beginning November 20, 1994; and Commission on Intergovernmental Rela- of the moratorium period, a Federal agency (B) ending on the earlier of— tions: Provided further, For necessary ex- may not take any regulatory rulemaking ac- (i) the first date on which there have been penses for the Advisory Commission on tion, unless an exception is provided under enacted one or more laws that— Intergovernmental Relations, $1,000,000, and section 05. Beginning 30 days after the date (I) require that the Federal rulemaking additional amounts collected from the sale of the enactment of this Act, the effective- process include cost/benefit analysis, includ- of publications shall be credited to and used ness of any regulatory rulemaking action ing analysis of costs resulting from the loss for the purposes of this appropriation. taken or made effective during the morato- of property rights; and On page 12, line 10 delete $180,065,000 and rium period but before the date of the enact- (II) for those Federal regulations that are insert $178,975,000 and ment shall be suspended until the end of the subject to risk analysis and risk assessment, On page 12, line 17 delete $170,000,000 and moratorium period, unless an exception is require that those regulations undergo insert $168,910,000. provided under section 05. standardized risk analysis and risk assess- For expenses necessary to carry out the (b) INVENTORY OF RULEMAKINGS.—Not later ment using the best scientific and economic provisions of the Advisory Commission on than 30 days after the date of the enactment procedures; or Intergovernmental Relations Act of 1959, as of this Act, the President shall conduct an (ii) December 31, 1995. amended (42 U.S.C. 4271–79); $1,000,000, and inventory and publish in the Federal Reg- except that in the case of a regulatory rule- additional amounts collected from the sale ister a list of all regulatory rulemaking ac- making action with respect to determining of publications shall be credited to and used tions covered by subsection (a) taken or that a species is an endangered species or a for the purposes of this appropriation. made effective during the moratorium period threatened species under section 4(a)(1) of On page 12, line 9 delete $180,065,000 and in- but before the date of the enactment. the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. sert $178,975,000 and SPECIAL RULE ON STATUTORY, REGULATORY, 1533(a)(1)) or designating critical habitat On page 12, line 16 delete $170,000,000 and AND JUDICIAL DEADLINES under section 4(a)(3) of that Act (16 U.S.C. insert $168,910,000. 1533(a)(3)), the term means the period of time SEC. 04. (a) IN GENERAL.—Any deadline beginning on the date described in subpara- H.R. 2020 for, relating to, or involving any action de- graph (A) and ending on the earlier of the OFFERED BY: MR. HOYER pendent upon, any regulatory rulemaking first date on which there has been enacted actions authorized or required to be taken AMENDMENT NO. 8: On page 84, following after the date of the enactment of this Act a before the end of the moratorium period is line 17, insert: law authorizing appropriations to carry out extended for 5 months or until the end of the SEC. 628. (a) None of the funds appropriated the Endangered Species Act of 1973, or De- moratorium period, whichever is later. by this or any other Act may be expended by cember 31, 1996. any Federal agency to procure any product (b) DEADLINE DEFINED.—The term ‘‘dead- (3) REGULATORY RULEMAKING ACTION.— or service that is subject to the provisions of line’’ means any date certain for fulfilling (A) IN GENERAL.—The term ‘‘regulatory Public Law 89–306 and that will be available any obligation or exercising any authority rulemaking action’’ means any rulemaking under the procurement by the Administrator established by or under any Federal statute on any rule normally published in the Fed- of General Services known as ‘‘FTS2000’’ un- or regulation, or by or under any court order eral Register, including— less— implementing any Federal statute or regula- (i) the issuance of any substantive rule, in- (1) such product or service is procured by tion. terpretative rule, statement of agency pol- the Administrator of General Services as (c) IDENTIFICATION OF POSTPONED DEAD- icy, notice of inquiry, advance notice of pro- part of the procurement known as LINES.—Not later than 30 days after the date posed rulemaking, or notice of proposed rule- ‘‘FTS2000’’; or of the enactment of this Act, the President making, and (2) that agency establishes to the satisfac- shall identify and publish in the Federal (ii) any other action taken in the course of tion of the Administrator of General Serv- Register a list of deadlines covered by sub- the process of rulemaking (except a cost ben- ices that— section (a). efit analysis or risk assessment, or both). July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H 7071

(B) EXCLUSIONS.—The term ‘‘regulatory reational or subsistence activity in the ab- (4) ACTIONS WITH RESPECT TO CHINA REGARD- rulemaking action’’ does not include— sence of the agency action) or taking any ac- ING INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY PROTECTION AND (i) any agency action that the head of the tion necessary to permit new or improved MARKET ACCESS.—A regulatory rulemaking agency and the Administrator of the Office applications of technology or allow the man- action providing notice of a determination of Information and Regulatory Affairs with- ufacture, distribution, sale, or use of a sub- that the People’s Republic of China’s failure in the Office of Management and Budget cer- stance or product. to enforce intellectual property rights and to tify in writing is limited to repealing, nar- (5) RULEMAKING.—The term ‘‘rulemaking’’ provide market access is unreasonable and rowing, or streamlining a rule, regulation, or means agency process for formulating, constitutes a burden or restriction on United administrative process or otherwise reducing amending, or repealing a rule. States commerce, and a determination that regulatory burdens; (6) LICENSE.—The term ‘‘license’’ means trade action is appropriate and that sanc- (ii) any agency action that the head of the the whole or part of an agency permit, cer- tions are appropriate, taken under section agency and the Administrator of the Office tificate, approval, registration, charter, 304(a)(1)(A)(ii), section 304(a)(1)(B), and sec- of Information and Regulatory Affairs with- membership, statutory exemption, or other tion 301(b) of the Trade Act of 1974 and with in the Office of Management and Budget cer- form of permission. respect to which a notice of determination (7) IMMINENT THREAT TO HEALTH OR SAFE- tify in writing is limited to matters relating was published on February 7, 1995 (60 Fed. TY.—The term ‘‘imminent threat to health to military or foreign affairs functions, stat- Reg. 7230). or safety’’ means the existence of any condi- utes implementing international trade (5) TRANSFER OF SPECTRUM.—A regulatory agreements, including all agency actions re- tion, circumstance, or practice reasonably expected to cause death, serious illness, or rulemaking action by the Federal Commu- quired by the Uruguay Round Agreements nications Commission to transfer 50 mega- Act, or agency management, personnel, or severe injury to humans, or substantial endangerment to private property during the hertz of spectrum below 5 GHz from govern- public property, loans, grants, benefits, or ment use to private use, taken under the contracts; moratorium period. LIMITATION ON CIVIL ACTIONS Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 (iii) any agency action that the head of the and with respect to which notice of proposed SEC. 07. No private right of action may be agency and the Administrator of the Office rulemaking was published at 59 Federal Reg- brought against any Federal agency for a of Information and Regulatory Affairs with- ister 59393. in the Office of Management and Budget cer- violation of this title. This prohibition shall tify in writing is limited to a routine admin- not affect any private right of action or rem- (6) PERSONAL COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES LI- istrative function of the agency; edy otherwise available under any other law. CENSES.—A regulatory rulemaking action by the Federal Communications Commission to (iv) any agency action that— RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER LAW; SEVERABILITY establish criteria and procedures for issuing (I) is taken by an agency that supervises SEC. 08. (a) APPLICABILITY.—This title licenses utilizing competitive bidding proce- and regulates insured depository institu- shall apply notwithstanding any other provi- dures to provide personal communications tions, affiliates of such institutions, credit sion of law. services— unions, or government sponsored housing en- (b) SEVERABILITY.—If any provision of this terprises; and title, or the application of any provision of (A) taken under section 309(j) of the Com- (II) the head of the agency certifies would this title to any person or circumstance, is munications Act and with respect to which a meet the standards for an exception or exclu- held invalid, the application of such provi- final rule was published on December 7, 1994 sion described in this title; or sion to other persons or circumstances, and (59 Fed. Reg. 63210); or (v) any agency action that the head of the the remainder of this title, shall not be af- (B) taken under sections 3(n) and 332 of the agency certifies is limited to interpreting, fected thereby. Communications Act and with respect to implementing, or administering the internal REGULATIONS TO AID BUSINESS which a final rule was published on Decem- revenue laws of the United States. COMPETITIVENESS ber 2, 1994 (59 Fed. Reg. 61828). (4) RULE.—The term ‘‘rule’’ means the SEC. 09. Section 03(a) or 04(a), or both, (7) WIDE-AREA SPECIALIZED MOBILE RADIO LI- whole or a part of an agency statement of shall not apply to any of the following regu- CENSES.—A regulatory rulemaking action by general or particular applicability and fu- latory rulemaking actions (or any such ac- the Federal Communications Commission to ture effect designed to implement, interpret, tion relating thereto): provide for competitive bidding for wide-area or prescribe law or policy. Such term does (1) CONDITIONAL RELEASE OF TEXTILE IM- specialized mobile radio licenses, taken not include the approval or prescription, on PORTS.—A final rule published on December under section 309(j) of the Communications a case-by-case or consolidated case basis, for 2, 1994 (59 Fed. Reg. 61798), to provide for the Act and with respect to which a proposed the future of rates, wages, corporation, or fi- conditional release by the Customs Service rule was published on February 14, 1995 (60 nancial structures or reorganizations there- of textile imports suspected of being im- Fed. Reg. 8341). of, prices, facilities, appliances, services or ported in violation of United States quotas. MPROVED TRADING OPPORTUNITIES FOR allowances therefor, or of valuations, costs, (2) TEXTILE IMPORTS.—Any action which (8) I or accounting, or practices bearing on any of the head of the relevant agency and the Ad- REGIONAL EXCHANGES.—A regulatory rule- the foregoing, nor does it include any action ministrator of the Office of Information and making action by the Securities and Ex- taken in connection with the safety of avia- Regulatory Affairs certify in writing is a change Commission to provide for increased tion or any action taken in connection with substantive rule, interpretive rule, state- competition among the stock exchanges, the implementation of monetary policy or to ment of agency policy, or notice of proposed taken under the Unlisted Trading Privileges ensure the safety and soundness of federally rulemaking to interpret, implement, or ad- Act of 1994 and with respect to which pro- insured depository institutions, any affiliate minister laws pertaining to the import of posed rulemaking was published on February of such an institution, credit unions, or gov- textiles and apparel including section 334 of 9, 1995 (60 Fed. Reg. 7718). ernment sponsored housing enterprises or to the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (P.L. DELAYING EFFECTIVE DATE OF RULES WITH protect the Federal deposit insurance funds. 103–465), relating to textile rules of origin. RESPECT TO SMALL BUSINESSES Such term also does not include the granting (3) CUSTOMS MODERNIZATION.—Any action an application for a license, registration, or which the head of the relevant agency and SEC. 10. (a) DELAY EFFECTIVENESS.—For similar authority, granting or recognizing an the Administrator of the Office of Informa- any rule resulting from a regulatory rule- exemption, granting a variance or petition tion and Regulatory Affairs certify in writ- making action that is suspended or prohib- for relief from a regulatory requirement, or ing is a substantive rule, interpretive rule, ited by this title, the effective date of the other action relieving a restriction (includ- statement of agency policy, or notice of pro- rule with respect to small businesses may ing any agency which establishes, modifies, posed rulemaking to interpret, implement, not occur before six months after the end of or conducts a regulatory program for a rec- or administer laws pertaining to the customs the moratorium period. reational or subsistence activity, including modernization provisions contained in title (b) SMALL BUSINESS DEFINED.—In this sec- but not limited to hunting, fishing, and VI of the North American Free Trade Agree- tion, the term ‘‘small business’’ means any camping, if a Federal law prohibits the rec- ment Implementation Act (P.L. 103–182). business with 100 or fewer employees. E PL UR UM IB N U U S Congressional Record United States th of America PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 104 CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION

Vol. 141 WASHINGTON, MONDAY, JULY 17, 1995 No. 115 Senate (Legislative day of Monday, July 10, 1995)

The Senate met at 9:30 a.m., on the RECOGNITION OF THE ACTING GUARDING AGAINST expiration of the recess, and was called MAJORITY LEADER BUREAUCRACY to order by the President pro tempore The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Mr. GRAMS. Mr. President, any suc- [Mr. THURMOND]. able acting majority leader is recog- cessful entrepreneur who starts out nized. small and gradually builds their busi- PRAYER SCHEDULE ness up knows about bureaucracy. Mr. GRAMS. Mr. President, leader As his or her company grows, so do The Chaplain, Dr. Lloyd John time has been reserved for today. There the piles of paperwork, and the number Ogilvie, offered the following prayer: will be a period for morning business of employees handling it, and pretty soon projects that used to take a day Commit your way to the Lord, trust also until 10 a.m. At 10 a.m., the Senate will are taking weeks, or even longer. Lines in Him and He shall bring to resume consideration of S. 343, that is of communication that used to be clear pass***rest in the Lord, wait patiently the regulatory reform bill, with the and open become tangled and confused. for Him***.—Psalm 37:5,7. Glenn substitute amendment pending. The first votes today will begin at 6 What began as a lean machine too Lord, as we begin a new week we p.m. The first one will be a 15-minute often turns into a convoluted, Rube take these four vital verbs of the vote on the motion to invoke cloture Goldberg contraption. ‘‘In every small business lies the psalmist as our strategy for living in on the Dole-Johnston substitute seeds of a bureaucracy.’’ the pressure of the busy days ahead. amendment to S. 343. That will be fol- I read that line in a recent column in Before the problems pile up and the de- lowed by any votes ordered on or in re- the Minneapolis Star-Tribune—a piece mands of the day hit us, we delib- lation to amendments considered by Mark Stevens entitled ‘‘Action erately stop to commit our way to throughout the session today. Needed to Guard Against Bureauc- You, to trust in You, to rest in You, Further votes are also expected be- racy.’’ and wait patiently for You. Nothing is yond those ordered for 6 p.m., and a more important than being in an hon- ‘‘Rules begin to sprout,’’ wrote Mr. late night session is possible in order Stevens, ‘‘and procedures start to take est, open, receptive relationship with to make progress on the regulatory re- You. Everything we need to be com- hold that do more to complicate life form bill. than to achieve objectives. Left un- petent leaders comes in fellowship with Also today, Senators are reminded You. We are stunned by the fact that checked, these enemies of efficiency under the rule XXII, second-degree tend to multiply until they choke the You know and care about us. We are amendments to the Dole-Johnston sub- business.’’ amazed and humbled that You have stitute must be filed by 5 p.m. today in How many entrepreneurs, do you sup- chosen to bless this Nation through our order to qualify postcloture. pose, have choked on their own en- leadership. In response, we want to be Also, a second cloture motion on the emies of efficiency? How many have spiritually fit for the rigorous respon- Dole-Johnston amendment was filed on been done in by a self-generated bu- sibilities. So, we turn over to Your con- Friday, which will ripen tomorrow, if reaucracy that simply ate up re- trol our personal lives, our relation- necessary. In connection with that clo- sources, devoured precious time, and ships, and all the duties You have en- ture motion, any further first-degree clouded the original goals outlined in trusted to us. We trust You to guide us. amendments must be filed by 1 p.m. the business’ master plan? We seek the source of our security and today. Judging by the rate that small busi- strength in You. We will not run ahead f nesses come and go in this country, I of You or lag behind, but will walk guess that it is a significant number. MORNING BUSINESS with You in Your timing and pacing to- Bureaucracy is a lot like hail on a ward Your goals. You always are on The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. cornfield—a little is not going to hurt, time and in time for our needs. May INHOFE). Mr. President, under the pre- but too much of it can be disastrous. the serenity and peace we feel in this vious order, there will now be a period And nobody knows more about bu- time of prayer sustain us throughout for the transaction of morning busi- reaucracy than the folks who work this day. We thank You in advance for ness, not to extend beyond the hour of here on Capitol Hill. a great day filled with incredible sur- 10 a.m., with Senators permitted to Mr. Stevens was writing about small prises of sheer joy. In Your all-powerful speak for up to 5 minutes each. business in his article, but he could name. Amen. The Senator from Minnesota. just as easily have been describing the

∑ This ‘‘bullet’’ symbol identifies statements or insertions which are not spoken by a Member of the Senate on the floor.

S10079

.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10080 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 Federal Government—the biggest bu- More Government jobs are not the year. Far too often, Government pro- reaucracy this world has ever known. answer. grams get their annual funding simply I have said it often: small business That is why the efforts in this Con- because they are there. Unmonitored and Government actually have a great gress toward regulatory reform, and and unevaluated, they are often auto- deal in common. But the bureaucratic the legislation we are considering on matically renewed for decades. And problems that can plague a small busi- the floor, are so critical. nothing breeds more bureaucracy than ness are magnified a million times in Cutting back the forest of Federal an entity which never needs to justify Washington. regulations will make Government its existence. Imagine having so many new regula- more efficient. Loosening the bureauc- If Washington is serious about guard- tions that it took 65,000 pages to print racy will free Government to meet its ing against bureaucracy, it will build them last year alone. objectives. accountability into the budget process Imagine having so many employees STEP NO. 2: by sunsetting Federal spending. Con- that you are not only far and away the Take a fresh look at payroll, asking if you gress needs the opportunity to reexam- largest employer in the Nation, but really need all of the people who work at ine what works and what does not. Just your annual receipts put you at the your company. Investigate whether some because a program has been around for very top of the Fortune 500 list as well. people have been added to back up others— a while does not mean it is a good in- Imagine having your finger in so who have little to do themselves—or to en- vestment. force the wasteful rules and procedures al- many pies that diversified is just too STEP NO. 4: ready in place. small a word to describe your oper- Grant responsible employees the authority ation. Small business owners often work 80- to make certain decisions—for which they Your employees are overseeing thou- hour weeks just to barely break even. now need approval—unilaterally. Elaborate sands of individual little bureauc- When they see how the Government approvals do little more than slow the com- racies, thousands of programs, wastes their tax dollars, they get furi- pany’s response time and make it more dif- ficult to serve customers. projects, and agencies that have taken ous. They could not run their business on lives of their own, and have little the way Congress runs the Govern- For the Federal Government, that accountability to the home office or ment, with reckless overspending and means moving the concentration of the folks who ultimately pay the billion dollar deficits. The Government power from Washington back to the bills—the taxpayers. would toss them in jail. States, where it belongs. There is more That is the Federal Government. Many businesses, large and small, re- than just a physical distance between But just as small business owners alized during the past decade that big- Washington and the rest of the coun- need to take steps to clear out the cob- ger does not necessarily mean better. try. There are different priorities out- webs of bureaucracy and get back to To help boost their profit margin and side here as well, and nobody on the basics to survive, so should Wash- cut back on the waste, they began other side of the Beltway really be- ington. downsizing. It is a move that has saved lieves that Congress can spend the tax- In fact, the line that originally many businesses from extinction and payers’ dollars better than local offi- caught my eye in Mr. Steven s article returned them to profitability, and it cials can. Our responsibility is to leave the de- could easily be turned around to read: is a move being duplicated here in cision making where it can do the most ‘‘In every bureaucracy lies the seeds of Washington. We call it ‘‘reinventing good and speed up the response time to a small business.’’ Government.’’ With fewer rules and best serve the taxpayers—who are not Re-exposing those seeds to the light regulations clogging the pipeline, fewer only the customers of this Govern- of day and refocusing on the basics is Federal employees are needed to en- ment, but its owners as well. the key to what we are now trying to force them, and fewer taxpayer dollars are wasted. ‘‘Keep in mind that no one sets out to create in Congress—a Federal Govern- create a bureaucracy,’’ wrote Mark ment that runs with the same effi- But re-inventing does not just apply to the number of people on the payroll, Stevens. ‘‘But unless you are diligent ciency as an effective small business. in protecting it, the bureaucracy will In his column, Mr. Stevens outlined because bureaucracy is more than just employees—it is also the programs form on its own.’’ four steps that managers can use to Of course, that is exactly what hap- gauge whether a business is drowning that the employees create, enlarge, and regulate. In the balanced budget reso- pened in Washington. But if we follow in bureaucracy, and suggestions on the same advice that scores of small how to turn things around if it is. His lution we have crafted, this Congress has taken a close look at each and businesses have used to pull themselves ideas work equally well when applied out of the bureaucratic quagmire— to the Federal Government. every place we are spending the tax- payers’ dollars. If a program or an eliminating senseless rules and regula- STEP NO. 1: agency does not meet the test of rel- tions, downsizing to promote effi- Review company rules and procedures, ciency, evaluating spending decisions, questioning why they were established and, evancy, if it is not meeting an impor- tant national need during tight eco- and putting faith, and the dollars to go equally important, if they still make sense. along with it, in the hands of the [Eliminate] anything that detracts from nomic times, then perhaps this nation States, not Washington—we will shrink your company’s ability to achieve its busi- can do without it. ness objectives rapidly and productively. Small business makes these tough the bureaucracy. And while we are doing that, Mr. President, we will ex- Of course, the National agenda decisions every day—it is about time pand the people’s faith in their Govern- changes with time and circumstances, Congress makes some tough decisions, too. Writes Mr. Stevens: ment. but we are in a period now where our Mr. President, I suggest the absence objectives, as mandated by the voters, Unless you rid your company of this dead of a quorum. seem better focused than ever. wood, you will be building a bloated com- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Provide for the Nation’s needs, pro- pany that is likely to sink under its own weight. clerk will call the roll. tect the unprotected, and unshackle The assistant legislative clerk pro- our job providers, so that they are able STEP NO. 3: ceeded to call the roll. to put more Americans to work in new, Make certain that accountability is built Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I ask higher paying jobs. into every job. Every personal function and unanimous consent that the order for Mountains of Federal rules and pro- responsibility should be monitored and eval- the quorum call be rescinded. cedures litter the track and keep the uated. Be sure that seniority is not the cri- The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. objectives out of reach. terion for promotion. GRAMS). Without objection, it is so or- Sure, they may create Federal jobs— There is a strong correlation to this dered. after all, there are some 128,000 regu- in Washington. When it comes to Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I ask lators on the Federal payroll—but in spending decisions on the Federal unanimous consent that I be allowed to reality they are job-killers for the pri- level, the effectiveness of a Govern- speak for whatever time I shall con- vate sector, with a cost to the economy ment program does not always deter- sume during morning business between as high as $1.65 trillion each year. mine whether it gets funded year after now and 10 o’clock.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10081 The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without ago I moved from the basement in my ery they had hospital beds that were in objection, it is so ordered. home three blocks down the street to a circle. And then they did their sur- f another location because the business gical procedures in the center. About was kind of good and I needed a little all they did was amputations at that REGULATORY REFORM bit more room. Apparently they say time because most of the young people Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, on Sat- that I did not advise the EPA that I who were in there, the freedom fighters urday President Clinton gave his Sat- made my move.’’ I said, ‘‘My gosh. You from Nicaragua, were in there because urday speech wherein he justified de- have been operating for 2 years in an they had stepped on land mines or feating the regulatory reform bill. area where they did not know where something like that, so most of them I really believe that so many people you were?’’ He said, ‘‘Oh, no. I told the were amputations. The average age of who are opposed to this regulatory re- regional office in Texas. But appar- the freedom fighter was 18 at that form bill did not get the message that ently they did not tell the office in time, because the older ones had either came from the American people on the Washington.’’ They called up and put died or lost their arms or legs. 8th of November because, loudly and him out of business. I remember, I went all the way clearly, they wanted to redefine the It took me about a week to get him around—I speak Spanish—and I talked role of Government in our lives. back in business. He called up a week to each one of those individuals. I tried The President talked about how you later, and he said, ‘‘I have another to get in my own mind: What is it that are going to be poisoned by your ham- problem, Congressman.’’ He said, is driving these people? What is it that burgers. He talked about how people ‘‘They let me back in business but I they risk their lives for that so many are dying in the streets because they cannot use the number that I had be- of them are dying? And so I asked the are not adequately protected from ex- fore because they said during that 1 question to each of them. The last one posure to the physical elements, and week I was out of business, they as- was a young girl 19 years old. Her name from food, as if Government has a role signed it to somebody else. I had $25,000 was Maria Lynn Gonzalez. I will always of taking care of everyone and people’s worth of inventory.’’ remember her because she was an itty- responsibility for themselves is non- So we finally got it corrected. But for bitty girl. It was her third visit to the existent. And the theme of all of this each one who calls a Congressman or hospital tent; she kept coming back. was that Government really does someone to intervene in behalf of de- But she would not go back to fight things better than people do. That is cency and honesty and good sense, again because that morning they am- not what this country is all about. there are hundreds of them who do not putated her left leg and blood was ooz- The other day we were talking about do that. If he had not called, then ing through the bandages. some reforms that were necessary inso- Keith Carter would have been out of As she lay there, with her large eyes far as the EPA is concerned. The EPA business and his employees would be looking up after having gone through is a good example of a regulator that unemployed today, most likely. That is all that terror, I asked her that ques- has gone far beyond the intent of what the kind of abuse that takes place by tion. She responded to me, and she we have always felt a regulator should regulators in our society. said: do. I suggest, Mr. President, the theme Es porque han tomado nuestras casas, I remember in my city of Tulsa, OK, of this thing is far greater than we campos, todo lo que tenemos. Pero, de veras, there is a lumber company called Mill ustedes en los Estados Unidos entienden. have been talking about. We are talk- Porque ustedes tuvieron que´ luchar por su Creek Lumber Co. owned by the Dunn ing about freedom. That is what this libertad lo mismo que estamos luchando family. It is a third generation lumber whole thing is about; freedom, indi- ahora. company owned by the family. It is a vidual freedom. That is what this coun- What the little girl was saying was competitive business. It is a tough try is supposed to be all about. well, of course, we are fighting; we are business. I remember a few years ago when we fighting because they have taken our I got a call from Jimmy Dunn, the had the problems down in Nicaragua. farms and our houses and everything owner and CEO of Mill Creek Lumber And I know, Mr. President, you were we own. But surely you in the United Co., that family lumber company on serving over in the House at that time States do not have to ask that question 15th Street in Tulsa, OK. He said, ‘‘The and remember it also. At that time, it because you had to fight for your free- EPA just put me out of business after was, fortunately, driven home to me dom from an abusive government the three generations of family running how we are perceived around the world, same as we are fighting for our freedom this business.’’ I said, ‘‘What did you do that we are the bastion of freedom, today. wrong?’’ He said, ‘‘I do not think I did that we are the beacon of freedom. If It occurred to me at that time this anything wrong.’’ He said, ‘‘About 10 you lose it here, you do not have it little girl, Maria Lynn Gonzalez, who years ago I sold used crankcase oil to a anywhere else. That is what this regu- could not read or write, she was not licensed contractor, and the licensed lation is about, the theme that Govern- well educated; she had never gone to contractor apparently disposed of it in ment knows better how to take care of school; she was brilliant in her knowl- the wrong place.’’ It was called the our lives than we do. edge and appreciation of freedom, and Double Eagle site. This is what was happening in Nica- she was willing to die for it. She looked So this guy 10 years later, after dis- ragua at that time, if you will remem- at our revolution in this country, that posing of crankcase oil, long before the ber the big controversy we had here in revolution which we could not have law was even in effect, ended up with a both Houses of the U.S. Congress with won any other way than our reliance letter from the EPA Administrator people saying, ‘‘Well, the freedom upon God and the principles that made saying that you are going to be fined fighters are really a bunch of rebels. this country so great, and she did not $25,000 a day, and you are going to We should not get involved in this know whether we won that revolution 5 maybe even have criminal sanctions. thing.’’ Yet, we knew that the Com- years ago or 200 years ago; she did not Then a year ago Christmas, about 4 munists at that time were supplying have any concept of when all this was or 5 days before Christmas, I got a them with the best of armaments, with happening, but to her it was a fight for phone call from a guy named Keith the best of tanks, and with the best of freedom against all odds, and we were Carter. Keith Carter was a man of very helicopters. And so you had the free- that beacon of freedom that led them modest means. He had developed a dom fighters risking their lives. to their success down there. business in Skiatook, OK, which was in I can remember going down to Hon- It has been that way for 200 years. my congressional district at that time. duras. I think we were only about 7 The whole world looks at us. And while He called up one day 4 days before miles from the Nicaraguan border. And the world looks at us as the example Christmas and he said, ‘‘Congressman I went through a hospital tent down that people are bigger than govern- INHOFE, I have a serious problem. The there where they were bringing the ment, and that totalitarian govern- EPA just put me out of business, and freedom fighters in and nursing them ment, centralized government that is right before Christmas, I have to fire back to health. The tent was about the in charge of people’s lives does not per- my six employees.’’ I said, ‘‘What hap- size of these Chambers. It was a very form as people do when they are un- pened?’’ He said, ‘‘Well, about 2 years large tent. And all around the periph- leashed and can do as they wish and

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10082 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 have the product of their labors, then payer Bill of Rights’’ which guaran- world.’’ This shocking irradiation in- that means so much more. teed—for the first time in 40 years—the cited Mrs. Baca’s grandmother to shove So while we are the beacon of that rights of individual citizens in their her, as well as her cousin, under the freedom, the administration is trying dealings with the IRS. bed. From underneath the bed, the two to hold on to the old, abusive govern- Senator PRYOR is known as an advo- children saw the walls and ceiling re- mental waste of the past with white cate for senior citizens. His advocacy is flect a red color. They were 35 miles knuckles. based on an extensive acquaintance from the Trinity sight, where the ex- And so I say to you, Mr. President— with their situation, a compassionate plosion occurred. not this Mr. President but Mr. Presi- understanding of their needs and a Dolly Oscuro’s ranch used to include dent Clinton—that you are not going thorough knowledge of the existing the land that became the Trinity sight. to win this battle because there was an support systems for the elderly. As a Where the cattle grazed, Mrs. Oscuro election. When that election took place Member of the House of Representa- remembers looking out her window and in November 1994, there were a lot of tives, he at one point worked incognito seeing a rising mushroom cloud. loud messages. They wanted to rebuild to gain first-hand experience of condi- Helen and William Wrye, also ranch- a strong national defense at the same tions in the nursing home industry. He ers, were returning home from a long time they wanted to balance the budg- served for 6 years as chairman of the and exhausting trip. They live in the et. We are going to do both. Senate Special Committee on Aging, same house that is 20 miles from the They wanted to change the role of and, as ranking member, is continuing Trinity sight. They slept through the Government so it no longer has abusive the fight to save Social Security and explosion. The radiation, according to control and power over the citizenry, bring down prescription drug prices. Mr. Wrye, caused his beard to quit and that is exactly what is going to Senators, and I was one of them, growing for a while. Of course, we are happen. heard his announcement that he did not sure that was the case, but at least So this is a very important debate not plan to run again in 1996 with both that is what he perceives. that we are in the middle of right now, relief and great regret. Relief, because Mr. friend, Larry Calloway, who Mr. President, the debate on the role of he works too hard. If by leaving the writes for the Albuquerque Journal, Government, how abusive is Govern- Senate he can stop working too hard, wrote what is in my opinion an articu- ment, and for all those people around then that is the right thing to do, for late, well-documented, and human per- the world who look to us as that bea- his health and for his wonderful wife spective of the first successfully tested con of freedom we are going to keep and family. But I do feel sincere regret, atomic bomb. The article, ‘‘The Nu- that beacon very bright and shiny for for the Senate and for the Nation, that clear Age’s Blinding Dawn,’’ describes them. in 1996 we will lose his legislative skills in detail the events of the night and Mr. President, I suggest the absence and his compassion for the individual. morning leading up to this first display of a quorum. And speaking for myself, I feel genuine of atomic power. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The regret that our working relationship Mr. Calloway’s article portrays the clerk will call the roll. will be ending. It has been a warm, col- human side of this historic day: about The assistant legislative clerk pro- legial, productive relationship for 17 people such as Joe McKibben who wired ceeded to call the roll. years, most notably on the Aging Com- the instruments that set off the implo- Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I ask mittee. I have appreciated both the as- sion bomb; Berlyn Brizner who served unanimous consent that the order for tuteness of his insights and the pleas- as chief photographer; and Jack Aeby, the quorum call be rescinded. ure of his company, and hope to do so a civilian technician who assisted in The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. for the remainder of our terms. placing the radiation detectors—just to INHOFE). Without objection, it is so or- f name a few. dered. ‘‘The Nuclear Age’s Blinding Dawn’’ THE NUCLEAR AGE’S BLINDING f is worthy reading for all Americans. DAWN Many times, the specific event in his- TRIBUTE TO SENATOR PRYOR Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, 50 tory overshadows the individuals who Mr. JOHNSTON. Mr. President, Sen- years ago yesterday, July 16, 1945, the made the event possible. Mr. Calloway ator DAVID PRYOR is a man of many ac- course of human history was changed tells us about the people in New Mexico complishments. In his distinguished ca- forever. who made this historic achievement reer, he has been a journalist and President Harry Truman, Winston happen. founder of a newspaper, a member of Churchill, and Joseph Stalin were pre- Fifty years later, in hindsight, de- the Arkansas House of Representatives paring for the European peace con- bate continues on the issue of whether and a two-term Governor of his State. ference to end the war with Hitler and development and deployment of the In Arkansas, they still talk about his the Axis. There were major questions atomic bomb was the right thing to do. achievements as Governor during the to be answered. Where would the con- For example, a Smithsonian exhibit 70’s recession. Carefully and caringly, ference by held? The war in the Pacific featuring the Enola Gay, the plane that he cut spending without cutting the was still raging; would Russia enter dropped ‘‘Little Boy’’ on Hiroshima, programs that people depended on. into the war against Japan? becomes controversial. It is probably He is also a lawyer who served three And, then, we learned about the fair to suggest that the debate will terms as the Representative of the events at Los Alamos, NM. We did not rage for another 50 years. However, Fourth Congressional District of Ar- know that we had just succeeded in the many believe that their work associ- kansas. He has served three terms in greatest scientific race of all time, let ated with this effort was right. this body as a U.S. Senator and the last alone the unquestionable magnitude of On this anniversary, let’s turn to time he ran, he was so popular that no- this achievement that would end the other aspects of this event. Our en- body bothered to run against him. As a Second World War. Until this time, the trance into the Nuclear Age is as much member of the Agriculture Committee, activities at Los Alamos were shrouded about people as it is about science. It is he has actively shaped innovative pro- in complete secrecy. the well known people: J. Robert grams and policies which have helped As recounted in several superb arti- Oppenheimer, Enrico Fermi, I.I. Rabi, the farmers of Arkansas while fur- cles in New Mexico newspapers, the ac- Niels Bohr, Hans Bethe, Luis Alvarez, thering the leadership position of the tivities at Los Alamos changed the Emilio Segre, Norman Ramsey, Val United States in the world agricultural lives of New Mexicans as much as they Fitch, Aage Bohr, A.H. Compton, E.O. community. impacted upon the rest of the world. Lawrence, and James Chadwick, and More than anything else, what has During the early morning of July 16, Maj. Gen. Leslie R. Groves, to mention distinguished Senator PRYOR’s legisla- 1945, some of the citizens in New Mex- a few. tive work in the U.S. Congress has been ico witnessed a sudden illumination in It is about the citizens of New Mexico his sensitivity to the needs of private the sky. A friend of mine Rowena Baca, who witnessed the Trinity test. citizens. As a member of the Senate Fi- was quoted as saying that her ‘‘grand- And, it is about the unsung workers nance Committee, he wrote a ‘‘Tax- mother thought it was the end of the and scientists at Los Alamos who were

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10083 important players in this enormous on top. And the desert floor was scattered cameras behind 12-inch-thick leaded glass. discovery. They were not alone. They with instruments. Some of his cameras were so fast they shot were joined by many thousands in the McKibben, of the University of Wisconsin, 100 feet of film in a second. Some were 20 State of Tennessee at Oak Ridge and had spent the night at the tower on guard miles away and ran for 10 minutes. duty with two Harvard physicists, Trinity di- And now he waited on top of the bunker, other scientific locations around Amer- rector Kenneth Bainbridge and Russian ex- gripping the panning mechanism of his ica. Together they performed their du- plosives wizard George Kistiakowsky, a movie camera, which like all the others ties for a cause they believed in. The former Cossack. would be turned on by signals from employees of New Mexico’s national This was the second night of uneasy thun- McKibben’s control panel. laboratories continue this legacy derstorms with close strikes of lightning in SNEAKING A CAMERA IN today. the Jornada. At Base Camp, the old David McDonald In honor of these men and women, let McKibben fell asleep under some tarps on ranch house 10 miles south of the tower, the us acknowledge their countless con- the clean linoleum floor at the tower base box-seat audience included Maj. Gen. Leslie where the final assembly team had done its tributions since that time. Let us give Groves, the hard-driving director of the job carefully, very carefully. whole Manhattan Project, and its presi- appreciation for their dedication and And McKibben had a dream. It was simple, commitment. These are the people who dential overseers—Carnegie Institute presi- peaceful. ‘‘I started dreaming Kistiakowsky dent Vannevar Bush and Harvard president changed the course of human history. had gotten a garden hose and was sprinkling James Bryant Conant. Among the physicists I respectfully ask unanimous consent the bomb. Then I woke up and realized there at Base Camp were I.I. Rabi, a New Yorker that the text of Mr. Calloway’s ‘‘The was rain in my face.’’ who would go on to win a Nobel Prize, and Nuclear Age’s Blinding Dawn,’’ Fritz EVERYTHING IN PLACE the revered Italian Enrico Fermi, who had Thompson’s article ‘‘Locals Had Ring- Soon the rain paused, and Bainbridge re- led the research on the first nuclear chain side Seat to History,’’ and Patrick scheduled the shot for 5:30 a.m. After closing reaction. Among the 250 lab workers and 125 Armijo’s article, ‘‘A-Bomb Scientists the last open circuits, the three physicists soldiers was a young civilian technician Bear No Regrets’’ be printed in the drove south in a jeep as fast as they could on named Jack Aeby who was exempt from the the straight blacktop road. draft because he’d suffered from tuber- RECORD. They were the last men out of the zone of culosis. There being no objection, the mate- lethal heat, blast and radiation. The nearest Now 72 and retired from a Los Alamos ca- rial was ordered to be printed in the humans were in bunkers called North 10,000, reer in health physics, Aeby sits in his solar RECORD, as follows: West 10,000 and South 10,000 because they home near Espan˜ ola and recalls how his job THE NUCLEAR AGE’S BLINDING DAWN were 10,000 meters (6.2 miles) from Ground in the weeks leading to the test was to help ´ (A half-century ago on July 16, the United Zero. the Italian physicist Emilio Segre set radi- States detonated the first atomic bomb. The ‘‘We got to South 10,000 (the control bunk- ation detectors near the tower. Some of the test, code named Trinity, was the conclusion er) at 5:10, and that was the time I needed to instruments were hung on barrage balloons of the Manhattan Project to build the bomb throw the first switch,’’ McKibben recalls. tethered 800 yards from the tower. They’d be in a frantic race with Adolf Hitler’s sci- Allison took up the microphone in the count- vaporized in a millisecond after they trans- entists. The explosion ushered in the nuclear down booth. A quick young Harvard physi- mitted their nuclear data. age, gave rise to New Mexico’s modern econ- cist named Donald Hornig, who would be- Aeby carried his personal 35 millimeter ´ omy, led to Japan’s surrender and set off 50 come President Johnson’s science adviser 18 still camera, which Segre got through secu- years of debate about the morality of using years later, took his place near McKibben at rity, and as the countdown started, he was such awesome force.) an abort switch. Hornig’s job was to stop ev- planning to take a new Anscochrome color erything if the detonation circuit faltered, in transparency picture of the bomb. Aeby had (By Larry Calloway) order to save the first precious production of carried a chair out into the darkness and was For Joe McKibben, the Nuclear Age came the Hanford, Wash., plutonium plant. sitting there with the camera propped on the in the back door without knocking. For Jack Kistiakowsky, who would become Presi- back and pointed north. He put on his gov- Aeby, it slipped blindingly through a crack dent Eisenhower’s science adviser, was in ernment-issue welding goggles, not noticing in his welder’s goggles. For Berlyn Brixner, and out of the crowded room. An 18-year-old in the dark that there was a crack in one it rose in dead silence like an awesome new soldier named Val Fitch was attending Brit- lens. And he listened to the countdown on desert sun. ish scientist Ernest Titterton at a set of vac- the Base Camp loudspeakers. After 50 years, they are among the few who uum tubes that would deliver the detonating PREPARING FOR THE BEST remain to tell about the test of the first voltage 6 miles of cable. Fitch would win the atomic bomb, made in the secret wartime At the VIP viewing area called Compania 1980 Nobel Prize in physics. Also there was Hill, 20 miles northwest of the tower and city of Los Alamos and code named Trinity Navy Cmdr. Norris Bradbury, who would be- by lab director J. Robert Oppenheimer. The about 10 miles southeast of the village of San come director of the Los Alamos lab from Antonio, N.M., two refugee physicists put on survivors are among the dwindling few on 1945–70. Earth who have seen any nuclear explosion. sunscreen in the dark. They were Edward McKibben recalls these men but says, ‘‘I Teller of Hungary and Hans Bethe of Ger- It’s been 32 years since the last U.S. atmos- didn’t see Oppenheimer. I was told that he pheric test. many. Teller would become famous as an ad- came in the door and observed me at the con- vocate of the hydrogen bomb, and Bethe On that Monday, July 16, 1945, at 5:10 a.m., trols and went away. Just to see that I was the senatorial voice of physicist Sam Allison would win the 1967 Nobel Prize in physics. sane.’’ And he laughs. Teller put on gloves to protect his hands began what’s now called a countdown. Hundreds turned their expectant eyes to ‘‘Minus 20 minutes’’ boomed over the loud- and sunglasses under his welder’s goggles, the unforgiving New Mexico desert; it was a for extra protection. ‘‘I expected it to work,’’ speakers and shortwave radios in the dark who’s who of the scientific world. Jornada del Muerto in New Mexico’s dry Teller, now 87 and bent, said in a June inter- At North 10,000, Berlyn Brixner was in the view. Tularosa Basin. open on top of the bunker at the controls of By space-age standards, it was a very short Not far away was German Communist ref- a fast movie camera with a blackened ugee Klaus Fuchs, who would be uncovered countdown, but it was probably the first in viewfinder. ‘‘I was one of the few people the about-to-be-born world of big science. as a Russian spy five years later. given permission to look directly at the Outside the Jornada, of course, New Mex- ‘‘Sam seemed to think it was,’’ McKibben bomb at zero time,’’ says Brixner, an ami- ico had eyes and ears. Teller said that many says. ‘‘He told me, ‘I think I’m the first per- able man of 84 sitting alertly in his Los Alamos employees, including his sec- son to count backward.’’’ minimalist living room in a ponderosa- Just as Allison is remembered for the Trin- retary Mary Argo, clipped away to Sandia shaded Los Alamos neighborhood. ity countdown, McKibben will probably be Crest for a direct 100-mile view of the shot Brixner’s assignment as chief photographer remembered as the guy who pushed the but- that morning. was this: Shoot movies in 16-millimeter And in Potsdam, just outside the rubble of ton. ‘‘That kind of annoys me,’’ says black-and-white, from every angle and dis- bombed-out Berlin, President Truman waited McKibben, 82, folding himself down on a tance and at every speed, of an unknown for coded messages so he could tell Josef couch in his cluttered study in White Rock. event beginning with the brightest flash ever Stalin what the Russians already knew. ‘‘I consider it a minor part of my work.’’ produced on Earth. But the rest of the world didn’t have a EXHAUSTIVE PREPARATION ‘‘The theoretical people had calculated a clue. Not the B–29 pilots who had hit Tokyo, It wasn’t minor at the time, of course. . . . 10-sun brightness. So that was easy,’’ again, with 3,000 conventional bombs that McKibben, a lanky Missouri farm boy- Brixner says. ‘‘All I had to do was go out and Friday. Not the 750,000 American troops that turned-Ph.D physicist, sat at the Trinity point my camera at the sun and take some would be needed in the planned Nov. 1 inva- control panel. For three months, he had been pictures. Ten times that was easy to cal- sion of Japan. wiring instruments across 360 square miles of culate.’’ A countdown. A bellow of ‘‘Zero!’’ Silence. desert around a 100-foot steel tower. The fat The theoretical people also knew a little A flash of light brighter than the rising of implosion bomb, 5 feet round, 5 tons heavy, about radiation, which fogs film, and Brixner the sun. Then the shock wave hit, and the squatted in a harness of cables on a platform consequently shielded two of his near-tower blast’s roar echoed off the mountains.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10084 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 At minus 45 seconds, McKibben cut in an At South 10,000, Frank Oppenheimer re- the B–29 that dropped ‘‘Fat Man,’’ identical automatic timing drum he and Clarence called, his brother probably said, ‘‘It in design to the Trinity bomb, on Nagasaki. Turner had made to generate the final 20 worked!’’ Kistiakowsky is supposed to have Ellen, who would marry Norris Bradbury’s relay signals, including the big one. The said to Robert Oppenheimer, ‘‘You owe me 10 son, recalls the now-lost recording clearly: drum turned once a second, and McKibben dollars’’ because of a bet they had. Bain- ‘‘They said, ‘We’ve got an opening in the says he had attached a chime that struck bridge is supposed to have told Oppie, ‘‘Now clouds. OK. We’re going ahead.’ And then once each revolution. So there were 44 we are all sons of bitches.’’ they counted down to drop it. And they did chimes before Allison bellowed: ‘‘Zero!’’ At Compania Hill, Teller remembers, ‘‘I say, ‘Bombs away!’ But I had just learned to It was 5:29.45 a.m. Mountain War Time, the was impressed.’’ count, and I was most impressed by the fact same as Mountain Daylight Time. Hans Bethe, now 89, remembers his first that they could count backwards.’’ McKibben’s bunker was under dirt on the thought was, ‘‘We’ve done it!’’ and his second north, and there was a small open door on was, ‘‘What a terrible weapon have we fash- LOCALS HAD RINGSIDE SEAT TO HISTORY the south, facing away from the shot. ioned.’’ (By Fritz Thompson) ‘‘Suddenly, I realized there was a hell of a FLEEING THE RADIATION Sparkey Harkey and his son, Richard, were lot more light coming in the back door,’’ At North 10,000, Brixner and the others standing in the gloom before dawn, waiting McKibben says. ‘‘A very brilliant light. It were thinking suddenly only of a kind of haz- for a train at Ancho, N.M., when the bomb outdid the light I had on the control panel ard the world had never known. ‘‘I was look- went off. many times over. I looked out the back door ing up, and I noticed there was a red haze up ‘‘Everything suddenly got brighter than and I could see everything brighter than day- there, and it seemed to be coming down on daylight,’’ Richard Harkey remembers light.’’ us,’’ he says. today. ‘‘My dad thought for sure the steam Aeby had put his Perfex 44 camera on ‘‘Pretty soon the radiation monitors said, locomotive had blown up.’’. ‘‘bulb’’ and in the dark before ‘‘Zero’’ opened ‘The radiation is rising! We’ve got to evac- Ir was 5:29.45 a.m. on July 16, 1945. Harkey up the shutter, figuring that way he’d get a uate!’ I said, ‘That’s fine, but not until I get and his father didn’t know it then, but they good image of the flash. Suddenly, the light all the film from my cameras.’’’ In the midst had just witnessed, in that instant 50 years cut a sharp white line across his vision. ‘‘I of the world’s first fallout, somebody helped ago, an event that came to change the course could see that crack for some time after- Brixner throw his last three cameras in an of history and to thereafter touch the lives ward,’’ he says. It was daylight, and Aeby Army car, and they all got out of there fast. of everyone in the world. flung off the goggles to reset his camera. ‘‘I Film badges later showed they got low It was mankind’s first detonation of an released the shutter, cranked the diaphragm doses—by the standards of the time. atomic bomb—at Ground Zero on the empty, down, changed the shutter speed and fired About 160 men were waiting secretly north foreboding sweep of some of the most deso- three times in succession,’’ he says. ‘‘I quit of the Jornada with enough vehicles to evac- late land in New Mexico; Jornada del at three because I was out of film.’’ uate the small communities in the probable Muerto, it is called, the Journey of Death. Brixner, at North 10,000, was stunned. ‘‘The fallout path. Gen. Groves had phoned Gov. Awesomely thunderous, the explosion whole filter seemed to light up as bright as John Dempsey before the test to warn him transformed the sand in the desert to green the sun. I was temporarily blinded. I looked that he might be asked to declare martial glass, hurled dust and smoke thousands of to the side. The Oscura Mountains were as law in southwest New Mexico. feet into the sky and startled the bejabbers bright as day. I saw this tremendous ball of But the radiation readings from people se- out of early morning risers in central New fire, and it was rising. I was just spellbound! cretly stationed all over New Mexico stayed Mexico. I followed it as it rose. Then it dawned on safe—again by the standards of the time. The place where the bomb exploded is me. I’m the photographer! I’ve gotta get that The test was shrouded in secrecy, but, called Trinity Site, and it was 50 miles and ball of fire.’’ He jerked the camera up. within weeks, the world would know what a mountain range away from the Harkeys, One thing more, he says: ‘‘There was no science had wrought in a lonely stretch of standing as they were on the tracks, mouths sound! It all took place in absolute silence.’’ New Mexico desert. agape, bathed in the glow from man’s most UNIQUE SIGHTS AND SOUNDS When Teller returned to his Los Alamos of- fearsome and terrible weapon. That they By the time the blast hit, 30 seconds after fice, he says, Mary Argo ran to him, break- could see a manmade light brighter than the the flash, most of Brixner’s 55 cameras in the ing all the secrecy rules, ‘‘ ‘Mr. Teller! Mr. sun from their far vantage point attests to desert were finished. Some had done their Teller! Did you ever see such a thing in your the incredible power unleashed that morn- work in a second. There would be 100,000 life?’ I laughed. And she laughed,’’ he says ing. frames to develop in black and white and a with joy in his voice. ‘‘Does that tell you Ancho was not even a whistle-stop then. few in temperamental Kodachrome. something?’’ Sparkey, the stationmaster, was out on the In the silence, McKibben stepped out the At community radio station KRS in Los tracks, ready to wave a red flag to stop the back door of South 10,000 and looked north Alamos, Bob Porton, a GI, was about to re- train so Richard, then 18, could board and over the bunker. ‘‘It was quite a pretty sight. broadcast the noon news, courtesy of KOB. ride to his job in Tucumcari. Colored. Purplish. No doubt from the iron in ‘‘Suddenly, about 30 or 40 scientists all came ‘‘It was a blinding flash and it lasted at the tower and a lot of soil off the ground in and stood around,’’ he says. ‘‘We knew least a full minute,’’ Richard says. ‘‘We that had been vaporized. I was surprised at something was up.’’ didn’t know what it was.’’ the enormity of it and immediately felt it The lead story, Porton says, was this: ‘‘The Was he curious? had gone big.’’ commanding officer of Alamogordo Air Base ‘‘Yeah. But when you see something like McKibben ducked behind the bunker just announced this morning a huge ammunition that you’re so flabbergasted that you just let as the shock wave hit. ‘‘Then an amazing dump had blown up, but there were no inju- it go.’’ thing: It was followed by echoes from the ries.’’ THE SUN WAS COMING UP ‘‘All these scientists jumped up and down mountains. There was one echo after an- Ranchers and other residents on both sides and slapped each other on the back,’’ Porton other. A real symphony of echoes.’’ of the Oscura Mountains had a ringside seat says. ‘‘I was familiar with secrecy. I never As the shock wave hit Base Camp, Aeby to the explosion but didn’t know it. In one of asked any questions. But I knew it was saw Enrico Fermi with a handful of torn the best-kept secrets before or since, civil- something big.’’ paper. ‘‘He was dribbling it in the air. When ians had no warning. It was something big. What they’d heard the shock wave came it moved the confetti.’’ The lone exception was the late Jose´ was the coverup story for the first atomic Fermi had just estimated the yield of the Miera, proprietor of the Owl Bar in San An- bomb blast. first nuclear explosion at the equivalent of tonio, a mere 35 unobstructed miles north- 10,000 tons of TNT. Later measures put the COUNTING BACKWARD AGAIN west from Trinity and a popular hangout for yield nearly twice as much, at 18.6 kilotons. Brixner was on his way to Hollywood to the site’s scientists and soldiers. Rowena And this terrible new energy came from a get his film developed in secrecy at a studio Baca, who runs the family establishment plutonium ball weighing 13.6 pounds. lab. One reel showed his jerk of the camera. these days, says friendly MPs that night Thes test’s success brought elation yet was Aeby developed his color film that night in went to her grandfather’s house, woke him tempered for many by the knowledge that Los Alamos, using the complex system of a up, ‘‘and told him to stand in the street out the world had suddenly taken a hazardous half dozen Ansco chemicals. The first shot of front because he was going to see something turn. the bomb was overexposed off the scale, but he had never seen before.’’ Robert Van Gemert of Albuquerque, now one of the next three became the only good Sure enough. 79, who was at Base Camp after the shot, color picture known of the first atomic ex- Baca remembers that the sky suddenly says, ‘‘I’m just amazed how those scientists plosion. turned red. It illuminated the inside of the whipped out so many bottles of gin or what- Weeks later, Ellen Wilder Bradbury of house she was in, reflecting red off the walls ever they could find. And it was rapidly con- Santa Fe recalls, the Wilder family tuned in and the ceiling. sumed, I can tell you that.’’ the only radio they had, in their car, to hear ‘‘My grandmother shoved me and my cous- Writer Lansing Lamont in 1965 recorded a wire recording broadcast over KRS. Ellen in under a bed,’’ Baca remembers, ‘‘because secondhand some GI exclamations: ‘‘Buddy, was about five and hadn’t understood about she thought it was the end of the world.’’. you just saw the end of the war!’’ ‘‘Now Hiroshima. And now she was hearing a re- At the same moment, a U.S. Navy aviator we’ve got the world by the tail!’’ cording made in the cockpit of Bocks Car, named John R. Lugo, now of Scottsdale,

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10085 Ariz., was flying a naval transport plane at they said they were looking for radioac- He said he believes invading Japan would 10,000 feet some 30 miles east of Albuquerque, tivity. Well, we had no idea what radioac- have resulted in more loss of life than the en route to the West Coast. tivity was back then. I told them we didn’t bombings. ‘‘I saw this tremendous explosion to the even have the radio on. The Japanese reporters’ perspective dif- south of me, roughly 55 miles from my posi- ‘‘For four or five days after that, a white fered. tion,’’ Lugo recalls. ‘‘My first impression substance like flour settled on everything. it ‘‘The director Steven Spielberg asked me was, like, the sun was coming up in the got on the posts of the corral and you why the cities were rebuilt and not kept as south. What a ball of fire! It was so bright it couldn’t see it real well in the daylight, but a memorial to genocide. It was like a geno- lit up the cockpit of the plane.’’ at night it would glow.’’ cide. The two bombs killed 200,000 people in- Lugo radioed Albuquerque. He got no ex- Before long, Wrye’s whiskers stopped grow- stantly,’’ Konishi said. planation for the blast, but was told ‘‘don’t ing. Three or four months later, they came Japan America Television was in Los Ala- fly south.’’ back, but they were white, then later, black. mos working on stories for the 50th anniver- As the sun itself finally rose, rancher Dolly Cattle in the area sprouted white hair sary of the bombings. Onsrud of Oscuro woke up, looked out her along the side that had been exposed to the Konishi said the bombing of Nagasaki, in window and saw a mushroom cloud rising blast. Half the coat on Wrye’s black cat particular, was ‘‘a difficult thing for the Jap- from the other side of the mountains—right turned white. anese people to understand.’’ about where her cattle-grazing land had been END OF INNOCENCE The Japanese still question the thinking before the U.S. Army took it over three Out at the north end of the Oscura range, behind the bombings, Konishi said, but his years earlier. 30 miles from Trinity, rancher Bill Gallacher country for the past several years also has She had been none too happy about giving was 15 years old. He remembers the blast, been coming to grips with its wartime up her 36 sections, and now it looked as if the that it lighted up the sky and the rooms in ‘‘atrocities.’’ government was blowing it up. his house, much brighter than a bolt of light- Itsuki Iwata, Los Angeles bureau chief for Like Onsrud, most ranchers who witnessed ning. His father, evidently man of few words The Yomiuri Shibun, a Japanese newspaper, some aspect of the blast are the same ones who was just getting out of bed, simply said said he has conducted numerous interviews who were moved off what became White ‘‘Damm.’’ with the Manhattan scientists, and virtually Sands Missile Range. They are still bitter— ‘‘It was a sort-of-sudden deal,’’ Gallacher all report they had few moral qualms about bitter that the Army never returned the says, ‘‘especially before you’ve had your using the A-bomb. land, bitter that they weren’t more gener- morning coffee.’’ ‘‘The view of the scientists is very much ously compensated for giving up their Several ranchers say they never believed like the point of view you hear today. I ranches for what they believed was a patri- the Army cover story that an ammunition think this is a very difficult thing for the otic duty. And, these days, they would much dump had blown up. But they didn’t guess scientists to talk about,’’ Iwata said. rather talk about their lost lands than about what it was until the devastation of bombs For King the problems people face today the first atomic bomb. at Hiroshima and Nagasaki weeks later. can’t be superimposed onto 1945. With the passage of half a century, these Even then, they didn’t guess the import of ‘‘We were terribly worried that Hitler had same people also find it remarkable that the what had been wrought in their backyard. it (the bomb). It was the inspiration to work government never warned them about an Evelyn Fite Tune and her friends and very long hours, six days a week,’’ he said. event that some scientists thought might set neighbors visited the site soon after. ‘‘We Balagna, who lost a brother in France off a chain reaction and destroy all human- found the hole, we picked up the glass, we about a month after D-Day, said, ‘‘My only ity. climbed the twisted and melted parts of the regret is that we didn’t finish in time to use The fact was, not many workers at Trinity tower,’’ she says. it on Hitler.’’ knew for sure what they were working on. ‘‘All those people,’’ she says, ‘‘grew up and f got married and had kids. Nobody that I Retired teacher Grace Lucero of San Antonio WAS CONGRESS IRRESPONSIBLE? said soldiers who came to the bar that her know of ever turned up sterile.’’ husband operated told him they were build- Back at the Wrye Ranch, Helen Wrye goes THE VOTERS HAVE SAID YES ing a tower. ‘‘They said they didn’t know to the front door, gazing at the sweep of Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, the in- what it was for,’’ Lucero says. The tower, ev- prairie and desert, the Oscuras looming to credibly enormous Federal debt is like eryone later learned, steadied the bomb be- the south, 20 miles from here to Trinity. She the temperature outside—rising rap- speaks of this dawn of the atomic age, and fore it was detonated. idly. As for the rising Federal debt, ‘‘No one knew what was going on out she sounds wistful. ‘‘People weren’t afraid of there,’’ says Evelyn Fite Tune, who lives on the government then,’’ she says. ‘‘It was a Congress had better get cracking—time a family ranch 24 miles west of Trinity. time of innocence. People were trusting. We is a-wasting and the debt is mush- ‘‘And of course none of us ever heard of Los had never heard of an atomic bomb.’’ rooming and approaching the $5 tril- Alamos or the atomic bomb.’’ She is silhouetted against the sunlight of a lion level. She and her late husband, Dean Fite, were bright spring day. In the past, a lot of politicians talked away in Nevada when the blast went off. ‘‘It was a happy time to live,’’ she says. ‘‘It a good game, when they were back was a happy time to live.’’ They couldn’t tell from the news accounts of home with the voters, about bringing A-BOMB SCIENTISTS BEAR NO REGRETS those days exactly where it happened. Federal deficits and the Federal debt ‘‘Finally, on the way back we went to a (By Patrick Armijo) movie house in Denver and watched the under control. But many of them regu- LOS ALAMOS.—The view from three Man- larly voted in support of bloated spend- newsreel,’’ she says. ‘‘When they showed the hattan Project scientists was unanimous hills around the blast area, my husband said Thursday. ing bills that rolled through the Senate ‘Hell, that’s our ranch!’’’ Questioned by Japanese journalists who like Tennyson’s brook. So look at what Pat Withers lives south of Carrizozo. He is wanted to know what they felt upon hearing has happened: 86 now and has been a rancher all his life. His about Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the three As of Friday, July 14, at the close of house is 300 yards from the black and hard- couldn’t hide the pride they have in the work business, the Federal debt stood—down ened lava flow that’s sometimes called the they did 50 years ago. malpais. to the penny—at exactly The retired scientists said their work on $4,933,039,330,339.52. This debt, remem- ‘‘The explosion was loud enough that I the bomb was vital to ending World War II— jumped out of bed,’’ he says. ‘‘I thought the that bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki was ber, was run up by the Congress of the malpais had blowed up. It wasn’t on fire, so necessary to end prolonged fighting. United States. I went back to bed.’’ ‘‘It looked like very quickly it would be Mr. President, most citizens cannot Few ranchers had an experience to match the end of the war, which otherwise who conceive of a billion of anything, let that of William Wrye, whose house then and knew how long it would drag on?’’ Manhat- alone a trillion. It may provide a bit of now is 20 miles northeast of Trinity. tan Project chemist John Balagna told perspective to bear in mind that a bil- Wrye and his wife, Helen, had been return- Hiromasa Konishi of Japan America Tele- lion seconds ago, the Cuban Missile ing from a tiring trip to Amarillo the night vision. before the explosion. ‘‘We got to Bingham Konishi was at the Bradbury Science Mu- Crisis was in progress. A billion min- (on U.S. 380) and there were eight or 10 vehi- seum with several other reporters from utes ago, the crucifixion of Jesus cles and all kinds of lights shining up on the Japan, Britain and Australia to hear the Christ had occurred not long before. clouds. We were stopped by an MP and a Manhattan Project recollections of Balagna, Which sort of puts it in perspective, flashing red light. After we told them who L.D.P. ‘‘Perc’’ King and Joseph McKibben. does it not, that Congress has run up we were, they let us go on to the ranch. We Balagna said the A-bombing of Hiroshima an incredible Federal debt totaling were so tired we must have slept right and Nagasaki kept someone from using the 4,808 of those billions—of dollars. In through the blast. even more destructive hydrogen bomb in other words, the Federal debt, as I said ‘‘Next morning, we were eating breakfast later years. when we saw a couple of soldiers with a little ‘‘The demonstration was so graphic, it put earlier, stood this morning at opening black box out by the stock tank, I went out the fear of the Lord in everyone,’’ he said. time at four trillion, 933 billion, 39 mil- there and asked what they were doing, and ‘‘That’s what kept the Cold War cold.’’ lion, 330 thousand, 339 dollars and 52

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10086 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 cents. It’ll be even greater at closing firmly and decisively hampered. Now, in the tions. Reorganization opponents have repeat- time today. early days of a post-Cold War era, it is pre- edly attempted to paint efforts to achieve cisely the right time to sweep away the bu- sound policy-making and management as f reaucratic remnants of the past, and the os- isolationist, but their ad hominem rhetoric STATE DEPARTMENT’S REFORM IS sified ‘‘old thinking’’ they have come to em- is off the mark. By attempting to evoke dark HISTORIC OPPORTUNITY body. It is simply wrong to argue that the memories of pre-World War II policies, they proponents of change are attempting to shift demonstrate that they are simply unable to Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, the ma- power between the branches. To the con- appreciate why new international realities jority leader announced today his in- trary, the proposals are intended to enhance require new American structures. tentions to bring S. 908, the State De- presidential authority within his own often- It is precisely to make the United States partment Authorization Bill, to the unruly family. more forceful, more dynamic and more Senate floor before the August recess. Advocates of USIA’s continued independ- adaptable that restructuring is so necessary. As my colleagues are well aware, this ence, for example, argue that its news and Thus, the real internationalists today in for- other functions should remain rigorously bill proposes to reorganize the agencies eign affairs follow the lead of predecessors independent from the tainting touch of for- who were also not afraid of massive change of the executive branch charged with eign policy considerations. AID’s defenders the conduct of America’s foreign pol- in process and structure. Those inter- assert that providing foreign economic as- nationalists who were ‘‘present at the cre- icy, saving needed Federal tax dollars sistance should serve as a poverty program ation’’ of U.S. policy and institutions in the rather than a support for vital U.S. interests. in the process. aftermath of World War II would undoubt- ACDA’s champions believe that only its sep- Before my colleagues rush to judg- edly be cheerleaders for the reorganizations arateness will protect the Holy Grail of arms ment on the efforts to restructure the under discussion. control. In fact, the secret agenda in all State Department, I recommend they How the reorganizations are actually im- three cases is to insulate the sub-Cabinet plemented and in what period of time they read John Bolton’s June 25 op-ed piece agencies from effective control by the sec- must be made operational are subjects for in the Washington Times, ‘‘Quest for a retary of state, for fear that their respective reasonable debate, as is the degree of flexi- Stronger Foreign Policy Hand.’’ missions will be ‘‘politicized.’’ In this con- bility the president and the secretary of Mr. President, John Bolton writes text, ‘‘politicized’’ means becoming con- state should be provided in reordering the with authority on the purpose and past sonant with U.S. national interests, which most Americans would simply take as a combined agencies. Important as these ques- performance of the State Department tions may be, however, they are simply de- because of his having served as Assist- given, not as a problem. Many who wish to preserve AID’s separate- tails in the larger vision of Messrs. Gilman, ant Administrator of the Agency for ness, such as Vice President Al Gore, do so Helms and McConnell. International Development in the because they support increased spending on Moreover, no one should be confused that Reagan administration and as assist- international population control and envi- the proposals to fold USIA, AID and ACDA ant Secretary of State in the Bush ad- ronmental matters rather than fundamental into the Department of State are preferred ministration. Currently, John Bolton economic policy reforms in developing coun- because of any illusion that the State De- partment is the unique repository of superior serves as the president of the National tries. The vice president’s preference for condoms and trees instead of markets not- skill or efficiency. Phase two of the reorga- Policy Forum. nization process should encompass a major I urge Senators to take note of John withstanding, these policies will receive long-term political support in Congress only re-examination of attitudinal, press and Bolton’s counsel. His advice regarding if they are tied to enhancing demonstrable management issues within the department strengthening America’s foreign policy U.S. foreign policy interests. itself. hand is both sound and sorely needed. Changes in bureaucratic structures, how- To step back now from the reform pro- Mr. President, I ask unanimous con- ever, do not require or even imply changes in posals out of timidity or indecision would be sent that the June 25 op-ed piece in the budget levels or program priorities. Any to miss an historic opportunity. Soon, the Washington Times, ‘‘Quest for a such changes in these areas must stand or House of Representatives will complete con- Stronger Foreign Policy Hand’’, be fall on their own merits, independently of sideration of the Gilman version of reorga- which department or agency actually imple- nization, where it deserves overwhelming ap- printed in the RECORD. ments policies and programs. Disagreements proval, followed by immediate action by the There being no objection, the mate- on funding and program matters can be han- Senate. What President Clinton ultimately rial was ordered to be printed in the dled through the legislative amendment does with the legislation when it reaches RECORD, as follows: process, and will change over time in any him will speak volumes about whether his [From the Washington Times, June 25, 1995] event. Anyone who has actually served in ‘‘reinventing government’’ initiative is just QUEST FOR A STRONGER FOREIGN POLICY HAND the federal government knows that one of one more disposable promise. (By John Bolton) the few effective ways to capture the bu- reaucracy’s attention is to threaten massive f The House of Representatives has just changes in its budget. Even so, efforts by op- adopted sweeping organizational changes in ponents of reorganization to confuse struc- formulating American foreign policy. The CONCLUSION OF MORNING ture and policy are simply obscurantist at BUSINESS Clinton administration has argued that the best. restructuring under debate—merging the These are the tired arguments of inside- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Morning Agency for International Development, the the-Beltway turf warriors. They deserve ex- business is closed. U.S. Information Agency and the Arms Con- actly as much weight as the voters gave to trol and Disarmament Agency into the State similar arguments on the domestic front in f Department—are isolationist and unneces- November. In fact, most breathtaking here is sary. Comparable legislation is now pending the opposition to reform agencies created up COMPREHENSIVE REGULATORY in the Senate. to 35 years ago, a pace that would imply Lost in the swirling and sometimes con- roughly three bureaucratic reorganizations REFORM ACT fusing arguments about reorganization is the every century. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under principal point: How to strengthen the hand Nonetheless it is the centrality of enhanc- the previous order, the Senate will now of the president in the conduct of foreign ing the president’s foreign policy authority resume consideration of S. 343, which policy. Constitutionally, only the president that provides the inspiring vision to the re- can and should speak authoritatively for the form proposals crafted by Rep. Benjamin Gil- the clerk will report. United States in international matters. man, New York Republican, and Sens. Jesse The legislative clerk read as follows: The paramountcy of executive branch lead- Helms, North Carolina Republican, and A bill (S. 343) to reform the regulatory ership in these affairs, however, has been re- Mitch McConnell, Kentucky Republican. Ris- process, and for other purposes. peatedly compromised by splitting, again ing above the narrow political temptations The Senate resumed consideration of and again, the president’s authority among a occasioned by the split in control between the bill. multiplicity of agencies. Each agency devel- democrats in the executive and Republicans ops its own ‘‘mission,’’ its own political con- in the legislative branches, they have crafted Pending: stituencies, and its own set of priorities, reorganization plans that transcend today’s Dole amendment No. 1487, in the nature of many or all of which may have little or no particular partisan wrangling. They have a substitute. congruence with the wishes of the sitting gained widespread support—including from Domenici amendment No. 1533 (to amend- president. The result, too often, has been distinguished career Foreign Service officers ment No. 1487), to facilitate small business interagency disagreements that retard if not like former Secretary of State Larry involvement in the regulatory development entirely paralyze effective decision-making Eagleberger. These may be sweeping pro- process. and policy implementation. posals, but they are not extreme. Levin (for Glenn) amendment No. 1581 (to Over the years, therefore, the president’s The reforms’ directions, more-over, are de- amendment No. 1487), in the nature of a sub- has been weakened, and his ability to act cidedly internationalist in their implica- stitute.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10087 Mr. HATCH addressed the Chair. be list No. 7. I might add that all of to the family, nor were they made The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- these are from Utah constituents this aware of the issuance of a wetlands ator from Utah. time, but they apply across the coun- permit for the plan. Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, we are al- try. I think you will find some similar- I have to acknowledge that the ready in the second full week of this ities in each and every one of our Lady’s Ute tress orchid, I am sure, is a bill. It is an important bill and it does States. beautiful flower, but I also think that deserve the type of consideration that Silly regulation No. 10: Requiring a that family farm is important, too. we have been giving to it, but we are, company, if they spill just 1 pint of That just shows how ridiculous some of hopefully, coming to closure on it. antifreeze, to call the Coast Guard in these rules and interpretations of the This is a very, very important bill to Washington, DC, to alert them. That is rules are. our society. I do not think there is silly. Now let us turn to silly regulation anybody in this body that will not Silly regulation No. 9: Purposefully No. 1: Requiring that a company sub- admit that our society is overregu- releasing more water from a dam to mit a list to the fire department of all lated. In fact, some people think we are create a flood-stage flow in order to the ingredients in their fire proof being regulated to death, that it will be help endangered fish, regardless of the bricks, sand, gravel, mortar, and steel. the end of a great society, the end of farmland that was flooded as a con- This semiannual report containing the the greatest country in the world if we sequence. list of the fire department of all of the keep going the way we are, if we have Silly regulation No. 8: Requiring a ingredients of fire proof bricks, gravel, bureaucrats back here, who do not un- person who is on a 6-foot scaffold to be mortar and steel is about six inches derstand the problems out there, tethered to a fall protection device thick. You wonder why people do not issuing ridiculous, silly regulations. which is also 6 feet high. want to go into business today or put This bill is about common sense. It is I cannot help laughing at some of up with this. This is a perfectly good putting common sense into the regu- these. Some are so bad. This is what explanation why. latory process. It does not mean doing our people go through out there. The Well, to make a long story short, it is away with regulations. This bill means problem is, if you think about it, that easy to see why Federal regulators— we are going to have to use common the person with that 6-foot tether even the good ones—are held in disdain sense in coming up with regulations. I would already hit the ground before by our people out there. And there are think most Americans would agree the the device could save him. good regulators, we know that. We Federal Government is out of control, Silly regulation No. 7: Requiring a know there is a need for good regula- certainly in terms of the burdens that company to hire an outside contractor tion. We know there is a need to have it places upon them and their small to check emissions, in spite of the fact Washington operate in a careful fash- businesses in particular. the company does it themselves every 8 ion to protect health and safety and What this bill does is it requires gov- hours. other things. On the other hand, these types of in- ernmental agencies to abide by rules Silly regulation No. 6: Refusing to terpretations of regulations and these and regulations that they issue that approve a plan to divert a portion of a types of regulations, I think, bring con- help rather than hurt our people. It flow of water for stock watering, in demnation upon the people, on every- will require the Federal bureaucracy to spite of the fact that it would drain body, even those who are sincere and live by the same rules that Americans into the same basin. Further, the Bu- who do a good job. live by in their day-to-day lives. reau of Land Management, U.S. Forest Now, Mr. President, finally, I want to Those rules are that the benefits of Service, State engineer and Utah De- once again address the relative merits what you are telling people to do have partment of Water Resources all ap- of S. 343 and the Glenn amendment. to be justified by the costs of those prove of the plan. Last Friday, I stated that the Glenn benefits, the cost imposed because of Silly regulation No. 5: Requiring amendment could be termed ‘‘reg lite,’’ the regulations. buildings built after the asbestos ban because it was a somewhat weaker The notion of common sense and ac- took effect to be inspected for asbestos, version of S. 291, which was itself a countability in rulemaking sounds like despite the fact they contain no asbes- product of compromise and, for that a radical idea inside the beltway, but it tos. That is just typical of what is hap- reason, unanimously voted out of the is really something people want out- pening all the time. These are specific Governmental Affairs Committee side the Washington beltway. cases, but it is typical to require stu- under my good friend, Senator BILL Americans are smothered, inundated. pid, idiotic things just because the peo- ROTH. I noted that Chairman ROTH ex- They are drowning in redtape in all as- ple back here are not willing to do plained that S. 343 is a superior vehicle pects of their lives, and they are get- what is right or use common sense. for achieving meaningful and effective ting tired of it. They have asked us to Silly regulation No. 4: Requiring a regulatory reform that neither S. 291 get rid of the status quo and to get company to use only hand tools if they or the Glenn substitute does. I also some reason into this system. This bill want to replace a concrete ditch with critiqued in some detail the Glenn certainly does not mean the end of an underground pipeline, despite warn- bill’s provisions and concluded that S. health concerns or safety concerns and ings that the ditch may fail. This 343 is a far more effective mechanism it certainly does not mean the end of spring, the ditch did fail and flooded for regulatory reform—that is, if you health and safety regulations. It just the whole surrounding area. really want to do something about reg- means they have to be regulations that Silly regulation No. 3: Requiring a ulatory reform. make sense. They just cannot be im- contractor to pay a person $55 an hour Last Friday, a modified Glenn posed ad infinitum on top of American to walk in front of a back hoe to look amendment was introduced. This is a citizens without some justification for out for the desert tortoise. People in little bit stronger and moves a little the regulations themselves. southern Utah are just beside them- bit closer to the Dole-Johnston bill by We have seen on the floor of the Sen- selves. Can you imagine paying a per- adopting a little more of S. 343’s reform ate a lot of effort to maintain the sta- son $55 an hour to walk in front of a measures. The gap is narrowing. We ap- tus quo. That is at the same time that back hoe to look out for the desert tor- pear to be moving closer together. everybody prefaces their remarks with toise? Well, I admit, desert tortoises Nonetheless, while imitation is the sin- ‘‘the status quo is unacceptable.’’ The are wonderful creatures that ought to cerest form of flattery, my original debate this week is going to determine be preserved, but there is a limit, it conclusion remains the same: S. 343 is whether we stick with the status quo seems to me, to this type of stupid ac- a far superior vehicle for regulatory re- or whether we do some things that will tion. form. really help our country and resolve Silly regulation No. 2: Diverting Let me first say that the Dole-John- some of these difficulties. We simply water to aid the ‘‘Lady’s Ute tress or- ston bill is not a bill that simply re- have to get rid of the silly, ridiculous chid,’’ in spite of the fact that this will quires agencies to perform cost-benefit regulations. reduce the flow to a family farm with analysis or risk assessment. It is a In that regard, let me give you my a decreed right to the water. No prior comprehensive regulatory reform top 10 list of silly regulations. This will notice of the plan diversion was given measure that, for the first time in

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10088 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 about a half century, reforms the Ad- factors facing the agency are not fully with this section—624. That require- ministrative Procedure Act. disclosed? The absence of such require- ment will act as a hammer to assure These reforms, many of which were ments are a fatal weakness of the agency compliance with the standards recommended by the Administrative Glenn substitute. set forth in the decisional criteria sec- Conference of the United States and I also want to point out that these tion 624 of S. 343. the American Bar Association, are requirements are hardly controversial. Some will say this is overkill, that commonsense proposals that make the These rulemaking requirements were agencies will abide by cost-benefit notice and comment requirements of all endorsed by the American Bar Asso- standards without section 624’s ham- the Administrative Procedure Act ciation, and the American Bar Associa- mer. Yet, every President since Presi- more productive. These reforms guar- tion has correctly criticized the Glenn dent Ford, including President Ford, antee effective public participation in bill for not containing these needed re- right up to the current President, the promulgation of rules and assure forms. President Clinton, have issued Execu- that judicial review will be more effec- The fairness provisions of Dole-John- tive orders on regulations. And Presi- tive. They provide fairness to the ad- ston also constitute significant ref- dent Clinton’s Executive order on regu- ministrative process. And most are ormation of the administrative proc- lations contains a hammerless cost- missing in the Glenn substitute. ess. They include section 707, the re- benefit analysis requirement, which is More specifically, Dole-Johnston, form of consent decree provision. why it is routinely ignored by all of his amends section 553 of the Administra- This section assures that consent de- Federal agencies and OMB, the Office tive Procedure Act by requiring, crees are not construed in such a way of Management and Budget. among other things, in the notice of as to limit agency discretion to protect According to an April 1995 study by proposed rulemaking in the rule’s the rights of innocent third parties or the Institute for Regulatory Policy, of statement of basis and purpose: to respond to changing circumstances. the 222 major EPA rules issued from First, a succinct explanation of the All too often, particularly in environ- April to September 1994, only six need for and specific objectives of the mental enforcement actions, sweet- passed cost-benefit analysis muster. rule. heart consent decrees are entered into The rest were promulgated anyway. Second, a succinct explanation of the by agencies and special interest envi- So we see there is a need to assure statutory basis for the rule, including ronmental groups that impinge on the agency compliance, because when they whether the agency’s interpretation is rights of innocent third parties and im- will not listen to their own President, clearly required by the text of the stat- plement the political agenda of those or their own Presidents through the ute and, if not, an explanation that the special interests. The Glenn bill con- years, imagine how they will not listen interpretation selected by the agency tains no equivalent provision. to us if we do not go into a compliance is within the range of permissible in- Section 708 is another one of these process together. terpretations identified by the agency, fairness provisions. This provision pre- Of the 510 regulatory actions pub- and an explanation of why the inter- vents impaling the regulated public on lished during this period, this period of pretation selected by the agency is the the horns of a dilemma. An affirmative April to September of 1994, 465 were not preferred interpretation. defense is provided in any enforcement even reviewed by the Office of Manage- Third, a summary of the cost-benefit action where a regulated party faces ment and Budget; and of the 45 rules analysis required to be prepared pursu- compliance with contradictory or in- that were reviewed, not one—not one, ant to chapter 6 of this bill. consistent regulations. Who can argue not a single one—was returned to the Fourth, a statement in the proposed with this fairness provision? I guess agency for having failed the obligatory stage of the rule that the agency will the sponsors of the Glenn substitute cost-benefit analysis. They call this seek proposals from the public and can because it is, again, absent from regulatory reform? local governments for alternative their substitute, from their bill. Moreover, section 624 not only re- methods of accomplishing the objec- The sponsors of the Glenn bill are quires, like the Glenn substitute, that tives of the rulemaking. also AWOL in not including the final of ‘‘benefits of the rule justify the costs of Fifth, in the statement of basis and these fairness provisions—section 709. the rule,’’ but unlike the Glenn sub- purpose, a discussion and response to This provision was originally in the Ju- stitute, it also requires that the rule any factual and legal issues raised by diciary Committee version of S. 343 and must achieve the ‘‘least cost alter- the comments to the proposed rule, in- was unanimously restored to the bill, native’’ of any of the reasonable alter- cluding a description of all reasonable 80 to 0, by amendment introduced by natives facing the agency, or if the alternatives to the rule raised by the Senator HUTCHISON last Friday. It pre- ‘‘public interest’’ requires it, the low- agency and the commenters, and the vents the imposition of criminal pen- est cost alternative taking into consid- reason why such alternatives were re- alties or civil fines in a situation where eration scientific or economic uncer- jected. parties reasonably relied on a long- tainty or unquantifiable benefits. All of these statements and expla- standing position of an agency, and the Now, this does two things. No. 1, it nations must be part of the rulemaking agency tries to retroactively enforce a assures that the least burdensome rule file and, along with factual and meth- new interpretation of law or policy. will be promulgated; No. 2, that agen- odological material supporting the This administrative ex post facto pro- cies are not straitjacketed, when facing basis of the rule, made available to the vision is a codification of a funda- scientific or economic uncertainties or public for inspection and copy. mental precept of justice dating back benefits that cannot be quantified, into These requirements are absolutely to Magna Carta; yet, it is missing from promulgating a rule based on an option essential for regulatory reform. They the Glenn substitute. that is only the least costly in the assure that the public has the needed Besides Administrative Procedure short-term. In the latter situation, information to cogently comment on— Act reform, the Glenn substitute does agencies may explicitly take these fac- or challenge—the rule. They also as- not contain certain critical elements of tors into account when considering the sured that the courts have the needed regulatory reform. Perhaps the most least cost alternative when promul- information to effectively review the important missing element is Dole- gating a rule. factual and legal underpinnings of the Johnston’s ‘‘decisional criteria’’ sec- What about the effect on existing rule. tion 624. This section is the heart of law? Section 624 of 343 provides that its To be sure, without these require- Dole-Johnston and constitutes a far cost-benefit decisional criteria ments—and the requirements of sec- more sophisticated and efficacious ap- ‘‘supplement″ the decisional criteria tion 622 that all reasonable alter- proach to assuring the compliance with for rulemaking applicable under the natives facing the agency in rule- cost-benefit analysis and risk assess- statute granting the rulemaking au- making be identified—judicial review ment requirements than does the thority. of cost-benefit analysis is effectively Glenn approach. This supplement requirement is ap- impossible. First of all, this decisional criteria plicable except when an underlying How can there be review of whether section mandates that no rule shall be statute mandates that a rule to protect cost justify benefits if all the relevant promulgated unless the rule complies health, safety, or the environment be

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10089 promulgated, and the agency rule can- For instance, in section 623, the re- vehicle for regulatory reform. I ask my not, applying in the standard in the quirement for agency review of exist- colleagues to vote against the Glenn text of the statute, satisfy the cost- ing rules, the petition provision allows ‘‘reg lite’’ bill and support the real benefit criteria of section 624. for either placing the rule on the agen- thing. I yield the floor. In such a case, the agency taking ac- cy schedule for review, or in effect to The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. JEF- tion may promulgate the rule but must accelerate agency review of rules al- FORDS). The Senator from Ohio. choose the regulatory alternative ready on the agency’s schedule for re- Mr. GLENN. Mr. President, last week meeting the requirements of the under- view. The petitioner has a significant I took the floor to reply to some of the lying statute that imposes the lowest burden to justify that the requested re- top 10 silly regulations that the Sen- cost. In this way, agencies are given lief is necessary. I might add that this ator from Utah had brought up last great latitude in promulgating cost-ef- provision was a product of negotiations week. We found, upon investigation, fective rules. Thus, S. 343 strongly sup- between Senators KERRY, LEVIN, BIDEN, that of some of those silly regulations plements existing law but does not em- JOHNSTON, ROTH, NICKLES, MURKOWSKI, last week there were, probably a good body a supermandate. BOND, DOLE, and myself. half of them, I do not know the exact This was made absolutely clear in a One other petition provision that I number, but probably half of them I bipartisan amendment adopted last want to mention is section 629, which gave responses to that showed that the week. In contrast, the Glenn amend- allows for the petitioner to seek an al- so-called silly regulations were not ment only requires agencies to justify ternative means to comply with the re- regulations at all and were, in some costs in those situations where such re- quirements of a rule. This allows for cases, municipal or State regulations quirement is not expressly or implic- needed flexibility that will save indus- that were being somehow tossed over itly ‘‘inconsistent with″ the underlying try untold amounts of money and hav- into the Federal bailiwick of responsi- statute. This allows agencies to select ing to comply with sometimes irra- bility. And I gave real details on that, any costly or burdensome option allow- tional requirements, without weak- and it caused considerable concern on able under the underlying statute. ening the protection of health, safety, the other side of the aisle, I under- What about judicial review? Could it or the environment. stand. not be argued that while Glenn does In this way, agencies are given great I do not know the regulations that not contain a decisional criteria sec- latitude in promulgating cost-effective were cited this morning, how they tion, forcing agencies to abide by cost- rules. In this way, agencies can do a originated or what their backgrounds benefit analysis and risk assessment better job. are, but I hope we have better substan- criteria, its judicial review provision Moreover, the following provisions of tiation for the ones given this morning assures that agencies will comply with S. 343 are much better than their coun- than we did for the ones last week. If that bill’s albeit weak cost-benefit terpart provisions in Senator GLENN’s. we wish to take up our time here going analysis requirement. The answer is, Risk assessment provisions: S. 343 ap- through those, we can do that again unfortunately, no. plies its risk assessment and risk char- like the ones that were put in last While both S. 343 and the Glenn bill acterization principles to all agency week. But we found in many of the basically only allow for administrative major rules. The Glenn amendment, by cases mentioned they were not Federal procedure action ‘‘arbitrary and sharp contrast, limits even the applica- regulations at all. There was no re- capricious″ review of the final, and not bility of the risk assessment and risk quirement in Federal law for some of independent review of a cost-benefit characterization principles to major the things that Federal regulators were analysis and a risk assessment, the rules promulgated by certain listed being credited with doing. Glenn judicial review section contains agencies and it contains no decisional So what we are trying to do is bring a provision that perhaps inadvertently requirements for risk assessments. some common sense to this regulatory could be construed to prohibit a court Emergency provisions: The Dole- process. I have said many times during from considering a faulty cost-benefit Johnston bill contains exemptions for this debate, regulatory reform is prob- analysis or risk assessment in deter- imposition of the notice and comment, ably the most important issue we will mining if a rule passes arbitrary and cost-benefit analysis, and risk assess- take up this year, outside of the actual capricious muster. ment requirements. When an emer- appropriations bills, because it affects That provision expressly states that gency arises where a threat to public every person in this Chamber today, ‘‘if an analysis or assessment has been health and safety arises, these provi- whether on the floor, in the gallery, performed, the court shall not review sions would allow for a rule that ad- every person outside, every man, to determine whether the analysis or dresses these concerns to promptly go woman, child, every business, every or- assessment conform to the particular into effect. There is absolutely no ganization across the whole United requirements of this chapter.’’ delay. The government can protect our States of America. So regulatory re- This means that a poorly or sloppily health and safety in all of these cases, form is one of the most important done cost-benefit analysis or risk as- including the red herring of E. coli. items. sessment could avoid judicial scrutiny The Glenn substitute, on the other The American people want regu- even if material to the outcome of a hand, only contains one exemption, latory reform. I want regulatory re- rule, because the Glenn judicial review and that is for risk assessments. form. I believe the vast majority of section literally states that the bill’s As I pointed out last Friday, this Members of Congress do. I do not know ‘‘requirements″ for analysis and assess- contains an element of irony. The sup- of anybody who does not want regu- ment are not reviewable. porters of the Glenn measure have latory reform. When we go back to our Now, that is serious. That is a crit- complained endlessly how S. 343 would States, the horror stories we hear ical difference on the judicial review prevent the agencies from protecting every time are about some of the rules aspects of these two approaches, S. 343 the public from E. coli bacteria present and regulations that are too heavy- and the Glenn substitute amendment. in bad meat, or cryptosporidium in handed and too intrusive, so we need to Another significant reform contained drinking water, and have screamed correct those things. The question is, in S. 343 but missing in the Glenn bill that rules addressing these problems be how will we correct them? If we are is the petition process. While critics of exempt from S. 343. drowning in red tape, how do we cor- S. 343 contend that the bill’s petition Of course, S. 343’s emergency provi- rect it? processes are too many and overlap- sions adequately deal with the prob- I have made no effort to retain the ping, I believe that the bill’s petition lem. But Glenn does not. There is not status quo, in spite of what was said provisions are workable, not at all bur- even similar language. this morning. Quite the opposite. I do densome, and empower that part of the Where are the equivalent provisions not want to retain the status quo. That American public affected by existing in the Glenn substitute? Does the is the reason why we worked 21⁄2 years burdensome regulations to challenge Glenn substitute exempt these types of on the Governmental Affairs Com- rules that have not been subject to S. rules from cost-benefit analysis? No. It mittee to try to get responsible regu- 343’s cost-benefit analysis and risk as- is apparent, Mr. President, that the latory reform legislation ready. We sessment requirements. Dole-Johnston measure is a superior have

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10090 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 heard a lot of talk about specific in- the debate of last week, because I be- words, there would not be a superman- stances of regulatory excess. And, as I lieve that this past week’s debate date that said: If there is a conflict, have pointed out, many of these stories alone, just standing by itself, makes that the earlier law would be knocked are just factually not true. But even the case for the Glenn-Chafee sub- out. Their provision would have pro- for those that may be true, let us make stitute. vided that, if there was a conflict be- sure that the medicine we prescribe is Proponents of the Dole-Johnston sub- tween the rule that came up and a pre- not worse than the illness we want to stitute have repeatedly stated that vious law passed by the Congress, cure. Individual instances of excess do their bill is a good bill, that their bill signed by the President, and in effect not justify bogging down our Govern- went through a long process of im- all over this country, the underlying ment with equally excessive bureau- provement before coming to the floor, statute could be knocked out by a reg- cratic procedures and litigation, and and that it is ready for enactment. But ulation. that is what I fear the proponents of S. I believe our activities on the Senate Finally, on the floor an amendment 343 are giving us. floor last week proved otherwise. When appears from the proponents to do just Instead of making Government more confronted with the challenge that that, to say that if there is a conflict cumbersome, more bureaucratic, and their bill would threaten important between the cost-benefit test and the more expensive, we should be working health and safety rules—impending statutory requirement, that the under- to make the regulatory process more rules, now, not just something thought lying statute would prevail. Again, I effective, more efficient, and less bur- about for the future, but important have to ask why was the Dole-Johnston densome. Regardless of our debates pending health and safety rules such as bill brought to the floor in the form it about process, about how Federal agen- those for food safety, drinking water, was? The proponents insisted it was in cies should make decisions, we must mammograms—the proponents of Dole- fine shape and provided just the right not forget what the process is all Johnston first denied that their bill amount of reform, but when pressed on about. The regulatory process is about would compromise those regulations. the floor, their arguments went both protecting the public interest. It is Then they tried to add general and ways and the weaknesses of the bill, about implementing the laws that we symbolic exemptions just in case, like their bill, were revealed. in Congress pass. It is about providing the sense-of-the-Senate resolution that When it came time to discuss what for the common good, protecting public was supposed to be a substitute for the their bill covers, again we saw confu- health and safety, preserving the envi- Boxer amendment protecting mammo- sion and inconsistency. Their bill pro- ronment, and making this country a gram rules. But when all the votes vided the proper threshold, they said— land of opportunity for all and, at the were done, we see that they voted a major rule should be a rule with an same time, correcting regulatory ex- against meat and poultry inspection annual effect of $50 million or more. On cesses to make sure that those just do rules, putting the American people at Monday, the first day of debate, that not happen. That is a balance. It is a risk due to the dangers of E. coli and threshold was, however, lowered even balance that we have to seek and it is other foodborne diseases; and that they further with the addition of signifi- a balance that I think we have ad- voted against drinking water safety cant, what are called significant rules, dressed in S. 1001, which was laid down rules. But we see that they voted for under the Regulatory Flexibility Act. last Friday afternoon. mammogram rules and for child poi- This will add between 500 and 800 rules That is why, as we debate how to re- soning protection rules. to the agency cost-benefit process. This form the regulatory process, we must I do not think my colleagues value was an incredible expansion of cov- ask ourselves two essential questions— food and drinking water safety less erage. It could quadruple the number of basically what I stated a moment ago. than women’s or children’s health. rules that agencies have to put through First, does the bill before us provide for What I really think is that the pro- detailed analysis. reasonable and appropriate changes to ponents of the Dole-Johnston bill have The very next day an amendment regulatory procedures to eliminate un- yet to come to terms with the fact that was passed, which I supported, to raise necessary burdens on businesses and their bill fails my test. It may reduce the threshold from the $50 million fig- individuals and organizations and ev- regulatory burdens—it will do that— ure to $100 million. But the problem is eryone all over this country? And, sec- but it will also jeopardize public health that the amendments are inconsistent. ond, does the bill maintain our ability and safety and the environment. In It makes no sense to say that we have to protect the environment and the other words, it does not hit the balance restricted the scope of the bill to a health and the safety of our people? In that I spoke about earlier. more reasonable threshold—$100 mil- other words, does the legislation strike They say their bill will not harm the lion overall economic impact on the an appropriate balance? That is what public but they are not really sure. I country—when the threshold at the we have to find in this debate—is the am sure that the Glenn-Chafee sub- same time had just been lowered to in- balance. stitute will protect the public and re- clude hundreds and hundreds and hun- If we find the proper balance, there duce regulatory burdens, and I say we dreds of more rules. will be broad support for this effort. should support that Glenn-Chafee sub- I simply do not understand how my However, if we produce a bill that re- stitute. colleagues can think that agencies in a lieves regulatory burdens but threatens When it came time last week to dis- time of falling budgets and full-time protections for the American people in cuss the effect of their bill on the im- employees—FTE’s—will be able to ef- health and in safety or the environ- plementation of current laws, again we fectively perform the duties that we ment, the legislation should be op- saw confusion and uncertainty. give them. Yes, you have to remember posed. Throughout the negotiations, prior to that we in Congress passed the laws Today we will focus our debate on coming to the floor, and during the that require agency action. I add that two bills, the Dole-Johnston substitute first hours of debate, the proponents some 80 percent of the regulations and the Glenn-Chafee substitute to again and again denied that their bill written are required in the laws that that substitute. Both will transform contained a supermandate—that is, a we sent over to the agencies to have the regulatory process, but I am con- prevision that would have economic the regulations written. vinced that the Dole-Johnston sub- cost-benefit analyses override other Now those agencies will have to stitute goes too far. I believe that only statutory requirements if there was spend scarce resources on analyzing the Glenn-Chafee substitute will re- any conflict between the two. rules that do not have a significant im- form the regulatory process in a way Those other statutory requirements pact on the Nation as a whole. This is that meets my tests just outlined. The are things like clean air, clean water, simply a mistake. They cannot do Glenn-Chafee bill will relieve burdens and worker safety. Even so, they re- something with nothing. We are cut- and maintain an efficient and effective fused to add language to clearly state ting their budgets with fewer full-time process to protect public health and that assertion, that in a case of a con- employees and at same time loading safety and the environment. flict between the cost-benefit test and them up with new policies that must be Before I discuss the differences be- the statutory requirement, the under- done, new analyses—that I favor but tween the two bills, I want to review lying statute would prevail. In other not the expansion that was done on the

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10091 floor—in the numbers of overall re- fronted with the sunshine provision as The Glenn-Chafee substitute is based views that have to be made. We need to an actual amendment, suddenly it was on the Governmental Affairs Commit- stick with the higher threshold, and fine. Suddenly it was acceptable. tee’s unanimous bipartisan legislation. that is it. That is manageable. I have a lot of respect for the intel- S. 291 which was sponsored by Senator Agencies need to be more sensitive to ligence and good faith and legislative ROTH, the chairman of our committee, the burdens that Government places on abilities of the proponents of the Dole- and fully debated in committee. Noth- small business. I also add that is what Johnston substitute. I must admit I do ing was cut short there. It was fully de- the Regulatory Flexibility Act is all not understand the thinking that goes bated before it was voted out with about. Thinking that businesses some- into developing a legislative proposal eight Republican votes and seven Dem- how are being overregulated is not of such great complexity and far reach- ocrat votes. It was a unanimous com- something new. We passed the Regu- ing impact in a closed room dismissing mittee vote. latory Flexibility Act I believe back in compromise proposals out of hand and An examination of the two com- 1972 or 1973. It was supposed to address insisting that the bill should be passed, mittee reports shows the differences some of this problem. and then on the floor accepting some of between those two bills. The Govern- Let me repeat that agencies need to the very proposals that were earlier re- mental Affairs report had a unanimous be more sensitive to the burdens that jected all the while maintaining that bipartisan discussion of a tough but Government places on small business. no changes are needed. workable approach to regulatory re- That is what the Regulatory Flexi- I have not changed the stand I took, form. The Judiciary report is divided bility Act is all about. But requiring along with Senator ROTH and our other and filled with divergent views, and agencies to go through lengthy anal- colleagues in the Governmental Affairs they have never been reconciled yet. yses for nearly every rule that comes Committee 3 months ago. I believe we I believe that these two reports tell under that act is just too much. We had a tough but workable regulatory us why we are in the posture we are in will end up with a Government that reform bill in S. 291. That bill provides today. Instead of choosing the path of spends more money and more time, and the basis for the Glenn-Chafee sub- bipartisan dialog and cooperation, the has less and less to show for it. stitute that I think should be sup- proponents of S. 343 chose to push If the proponents of Dole-Johnston ported now. So my position has not ahead with what I view as an extreme are trying to make it much harder to changed. Of course, there is always bill. All the effort of Senator JOHNSTON issue regulations, regulations that we room for improvement in any bill. We to moderate that bill—and again he has in Congress often require—require as modified Glenn-Chafee to reflect im- accomplished much—has not altered much as 80 percent of the time—then provements that we have seen over the the fundamental nature of that bill. As this is the way to do it. If they want to last several weeks. But on the basic I have said previously during this de- make it harder to issue rules that pro- provisions of the bill, my position is bate, the result is a bill tailored to spe- tect the health and safety of the Amer- clear. It has been consistent. cial interests, and is a lawyer’s dream. ican people, this is the way to do it. With the proponents of the Dole- It does not, in my view, meet the goals Let me just observe that two major Johnston substitute I think the story of at the same time protecting health supporters of the Dole-Johnston sub- is different. I believe the truth is they and safety or of having a more effec- stitute, Senator JOHNSTON and Senator are finally realizing that their bill is tive and efficient Government. ROTH, did not support the expansion of flawed, weighted with ill-thought- Yes, we want agencies to have more the bill to cover regulatory flexibility through provisions that will frustrate thoughtful and less burdensome rules, rules. So I hope we can still address the very reform that they say they but we also want agencies to be effec- this problem in a reasonable way and want to accomplish. maybe work out something on that be- I believe my colleague from Lou- tive. The American public does not want the Federal Government to be fore we come to a final vote on this leg- isiana, Senator JOHNSTON, has accom- islation. plished significant changes in S. 343 in more inefficient or to have important Finally, let me mention the issue of the month or so that he has been work- public protections delayed or bogged sunshine. On Thursday, my amendment ing with the majority leader and the down in red tape, delay and courtroom argument. That is why Senator to the Dole-Johnston substitute to pro- Senator from Utah, Senator HATCH. I CHAFEE, myself and several others of- vide for sunshine in the OMB regu- also believe Senator JOHNSTON deserves latory review process was accepted. I a great deal of credit for his commit- fered an alternative bill just before the was very happy that amendment was ment to regulatory reform, and for his last recess, and it was laid down here accepted. It was not just passed by a tireless efforts to improve S. 343. He before the Senate last Friday as a sub- vote. It was accepted unanimously. has been involved in regulatory reform stitute. That was very good because it shows for a number of years, and that has had Our substitute bill, S. 1001, is based support for an important component of pieces of legislation passed here on the on that same Governmental Affairs reasonable regulatory reform. This Senate floor before. But if nothing else, Committee bill, S. 291, that was re- sunshine provision came from the bi- his constant presence on the floor over ported out with full bipartisan support. partisan Governmental Affairs Com- the last week, and the detailed per- It provides for tough but fair reform. It mittee bill, the bill sponsored by my sonal knowledge he has of the bill, will require agencies to do cost-benefit good friend from Delaware, Senator shows his commitment and expertise. I analyses and risk assessments, but it ROTH. The provision is also contained certainly commend him for his effort. I will not tie up all their resources un- in the Glenn-Chafee bill. believe the product, though, is still necessarily. It does not provide for spe- The problem is that for the last 2 flawed, too unwieldy, too unworkable cial interest fixes, and it does not cre- months we have repeatedly urged those to provide the reform that we all be- ate a lawyer’s dream. It provides for Senators involved in crafting the Dole- lieve is necessary and needed for the reasonable, fair, and tough reform. Johnston substitute to incorporate regulatory process. I think last week’s Since introducing the bill, we have that sunshine provision. Despite our debate highlighted a number of these incorporated additional changes to re- requests we were turned down at every differences. flect agreed upon improvements ar- turn. The latest rejection came last To bring the debate to the present, I rived at during negotiations and debate Wednesday, July 12, when we finally would like to describe the major dif- on the underlying bill. got a response to our June 28 list of 9 ferences that I see between the Dole- This is a very complex matter. We do major and 23 minor issues with the Johnston bill, as modified this past not necessarily claim we have the very Dole-Johnston bill. We were told then Friday, and the Glenn-Chafee sub- last word on every detail, and we look that we would have an answer. We do stitute. forward to suggestions for improve- not have a full answer yet. But we did The Dole-Johnston substitute is ment. We do think our approach is get a response to our June 28 list of 9 based on the Judiciary Committee’s much more workable than the Dole- major and 23 minor issues with the bill that emerged from a divisive com- Johnston substitute and that our sub- Dole-Johnston bill. But then the next mittee proceeding that was cut short stitute provides the better approach for day, on Thursday, July 13, when con- before the bill could be fully debated. reform.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10092 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 Now, that is a little bit on the back- a process that will delay important de- ably will be bad decisions in the first ground, and that brings us to today. cisions, waste taxpayer dollars, enrich place? After a week of debate and amend- lawyers and lobbyists, undermine pro- The Glenn-Chafee substitute requires ments as well as the negotiations that tections for health, safety, and the en- the analysis of costs and benefits. It re- preceded floor action, the Dole-John- vironment and further erode public quires agencies to certify whether ben- ston substitute has been modified in a confidence in government. efits justify the costs and to explain if number of ways. There are, however, Now, let me talk about each one of those benefits do not justify the costs. major issues that still distinguish the these five major issue areas. The first In other words, Glenn-Chafee uses cost- two bills and recommend support for issue is the question of the use of regu- benefit analysis to improve decisions, the Glenn-Chafee substitute. latory analysis. We believe that agen- but it does not give important deci- In my mind, there are five major cies should perform risk assessment sions over to a mechanical economic areas of difference remaining. First is and cost-benefit analyses for all major analysis. Too much is at stake with the issue of how agencies should use rules. As I have already said, the Government decisions to simply rely regulatory analysis. We believe that threshold for a major rule should be a on a least-cost approach to protecting agencies should be required to perform $100 million economic impact. If it in- the public interest. risk assessments and cost-benefit anal- cludes more rules, as the Dole-John- Let me point out here that the Dole- yses for all major rules. These analyses ston substitute now does, it will fail its Johnston substitute also creates confu- should inform agency decisionmaking own cost-benefit test, and we will just sion with its Regulatory Flexibility —inform agency decisionmaking. They waste Government resources instead of Act decisional criteria. Section 604 is should not unilaterally control those reforming Government. Once under- amended by adding a requirement that decisions and impose least-cost solu- taken, the cost-benefit analyses and agencies not issue a rule unless it mini- tions to every problem. Let us put risk assessments should be used to in- mizes the economic impact ‘‘to the some common sense into this process. form agency decisionmaking. maximum extent possible’’ on small We should not unilaterally control We all agree that regulatory deci- entities; that is, small businesses, those decisions and impose least-cost sions will be improved if Federal agen- State and local governments, and other solutions to every problem. cies routinely use consistent economic small organizations. Second is the question of look back. and scientific analysis to test their The least-cost-alternative test in this We believe that agencies should review proposals. The question is, should that minimal impact test will probably con- existing rules, those that have been in analysis control agency decisions, as flict quite often. Least cost overall effect, some for a long time, but their under the Dole-Johnston approach, by may often involve more than the low- reviews should not be dictated by spe- requiring that the agency choose the est cost possible for small entities. As cial interests or lead to wasteful litiga- least-cost solution to every problem— brought to the floor, the Dole-Johnston tion. the least-cost solution to every prob- substitute simply did not address this Third is a matter of judicial review. lem. inherent contradiction. As now amend- We had examples last week in the The courts should be used to ensure ed, there is something of a fix. Agen- Chamber. If something costs $2 more that final agency rules are based on cies are to explain whenever the tests but saves 200 lives, would it be worth adequate analysis. Regulatory reform are in conflict but can go forward. My that excess cost? Yes, it would. Right should not be a lawyer’s dream with personal opinion is this is still not now, you could not do that, as this is unending ways for special interests to enough. bog down agencies in litigation. worded, as I understand it. You have to To create a standard for government- Fourth is the concern about special have a least-cost solution. interests. Regulatory reform should I simply do not believe we always wide rulemaking that says, ‘‘Choose provide a new, across-the-board process want the agencies to take the cheapest the alternative that is the absolute for Federal agency decisionmaking. It path to implement our laws. What if cheapest for small business and other should not provide program fixes for that alternative that costs $2 extra small entities,’’ is to me to turn away special interests. saves 200 lives? Do we say pick the from common sense, away from tradi- Fifth is the implementation of the cheapest; do not look at the benefits of tional notions of administrative law new reforms. In a nutshell, this is the the alternatives before you? That is and reasoned decisionmaking and to issue of effective date. More broadly, what S. 343 does. create a lengthy analytic process that, however, it involves the question of What if the cheapest alternative im- again, is geared to the cheapest solu- whether we want to implement reforms poses more costs on State and local tion, not the most cost-effective solu- in a way that improves Government de- governments? Or what if it imposes tion. cisions or whether we want to impose more costs on small business, or a spe- The Regulatory Flexibility Act was new requirements in order to frustrate cific region of our country, a certain designed to ensure that agencies con- decisions, create more delay, waste re- section of our Nation? Do we want to sider more flexible and less burden- sources, introduce uncertainty and stop agencies from considering such some alternatives for small entities. open up new avenues for litigation. I distributional effects? The Dole-Johnston substitute would believe that implementation of the I think we have to let agencies use turn that important purpose around Glenn-Chafee substitute will improve common sense. We keep saying that is and let it govern decisionmaking. I am decisionmaking and reduce burdens on what regulatory reform is all about. If all for looking out for the interest of the American public. The Dole-John- so, then agencies should be able to small business and State and local gov- ston substitute, on the other hand, has choose the most cost-effective ap- ernments, but American public interest the potential to create problems, cost proach—the cost-effective approach we is broader than that. Protecting public money, and harm the public interest. use in the Glenn-Chafee bill, looking health and safety and the environment, If we could resolve these five sets of not just at cost but also at the bene- for example, requires a broad view of issues, we could establish for the first fits. Remember, if for some reason we what works best for the Nation as a time a governmentwide comprehensive in Congress do not agree with the agen- whole, not just for some. regulatory reform process. This process cy’s solution, the congressional review That brings us back, once again, to would produce better, less burdensome provisions of both bills, S. 343 and S. the issue of balance that we are look- and fewer regulations. It would also 1001, allow us to rescind that rule by ing for. provide the protections for the public bringing it back to Congress for further The second major issue is the ques- interest that the American people de- action. That is something that has not tion of lookback. We believe that agen- mand of their Government and that been done in the past. We have that cies should review existing rules, but they have a right to expect from their provision in both of these bills. So their reviews should not be dictated by Government. should we not create a process that al- special interests or lead to wasteful S. 343 does not follow these prin- lows for good decisions and a way to litigation. Regulatory reform is not ciples. Instead, it does special favors catch the bad ones rather than to cre- just about improving new rules. It for a special few. In so doing, it creates ate a process that ensures there prob- must also look back and help existing

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10093 rules, existing laws that currently gov- alternative compliance, is judicially turn down a petition—just a petition. ern so many activities in our country. reviewable. What a dream for lawyers. It does not come close to being real So we all agree that agencies should At any step along the way, in other regulatory reform. It is regulatory and use cost-benefit analysis and risk as- words, they can bring a suit for any judicial gridlock. It opens up to those sessment to look back and review ex- one of the list of things I mentioned. who would thwart a particular piece of isting regulations to eliminate out- All of these petitions and reviews add regulation that might be in the public dated, duplicative and unnecessary up to one of the worst parts of this bill. good. They can thwart it and stop it rules and to reform and streamline oth- It is a formula for true gridlock. Agen- dead in its tracks by keeping it in ers. cies will have to spend enormous re- court. So this is a way to keep agencies This process should be fair and open sources responding to each other and from doing their jobs and to keep law- with plenty of opportunity for public every petition. Then they can be yers happy and prosperous. So all this comment, so that those who are inter- dragged to court if they turn down a tort reform becomes a big joke if this ested in particular rules can make petition. type of thing goes into effect. their concerns known to the agency. So I do not feel this comes close to Now, while the Dole-Johnston sub- But this review should not be dictated being real regulatory reform. This is stitute creates a recipe for gridlock, by special interests, and I believe this regulatory and judicial gridlock, and the Glenn-Chafee approach provides a is what would happen should the Dole- this is the way to keep the agencies workable process of review. Every 5 Johnston substitute become law. It from doing their jobs and to keep law- years, agencies will have to produce a would create a number of petition proc- yers happy and, I would add, extremely 10-year schedule of rules to be re- esses. That is an innocuous sounding prosperous. This bill would make all viewed. Opportunities for public com- phrase, ‘‘petition processes.’’ It would the rhetoric about tort reform a big ment will identify rules that the agen- create a number of petition processes joke, except in this case judicial grid- cy may not think is pressing. While that has the potential of gridlocking lock means the health and safety of the there is no petition process or judicial agencies and putting special interests American people would be jeopardized. review, our process allows Congress to and the courts, not the agencies and Mr. President, I think sometimes add rules to the agency schedule. In the executive branch, in charge of the people think that a regulation is put other words, if we think their priority review. out by the agencies with a little bit of review of existing rules and regulations The Dole-Johnston substitute uses a effort and very few people involved. is not what it should be, Congress can petition process to put rules on a They do not understand why the delay add rules to that agency’s schedule. schedule for review, and if the agency and why they are so complex. We gave Now, I must admit that I am not 100 grants the petition, it has to review an example on the floor the other day. percent happy with using the annual Just one regulation pursuant to the the rule in 3 years, which is a very appropriations process, as we are pro- Clean Water Act that dealt with some short timeframe for such matters. If it posing, to amend these schedules. I of the metal fabricating areas, just one fails to review the rule in that time, would be happy to consider alter- regulation covers, now that it is in the rule automatically sunsets, goes natives. But the critical point is that place and it has been finalized, covers out of existence. It just automatically we provide for amendments to the re- 123 feet of shelf space. That is a pile of sunsets. This process, it seems to me, view schedules without bogging down documents from the well, right here in puts the petitioner in the driver’s seat, agencies into the lengthy petition and the Senate, to the ceiling, which is 421⁄2 not the agency or the Congress who judicial proceedings created under feet, we found out from the Capitol Ar- passed the law in the first place. It also Dole-Johnston. creates a process more prone to just chitect. That is three piles of docu- I think that is the key point. We killing regulation than creating a ments from the well to the ceiling. want review. We want a review that is thoughtful, balanced review of regula- Three piles of documents to implement sensitive to the complaints of people tions. one regulation, and under the Clean In addition to the review petitions, Water Act there are hundreds of regu- covered by the rules, but we do not the Dole-Johnston substitute has sev- lations like that. want gridlock. We want Government to eral other petitions for ‘‘any interested So we are not talking about some- keep working so that we can have more party″ to challenge an agency on any thing that is just a little thing—well, effective and more efficient protections rule, not just major rules. This is an- we can just throw that over at the of public health and safety and the en- other example of the lawyer’s-dream agencies and they can handle that OK, vironment. approach taken under this bill. they can grind these out OK. That was The third major issue that distin- People could petition for the one regulation written to a small part guishes the Dole-Johnston substitute issuance, amendment, or repeal of any of what was addressed in the Clean from the Glenn-Chafee substitute in- rule. They could petition for the Water Act. volves judicial review. The courts amendment or repeal of an interpretive So these are not small things. When should be used to ensure that final rule or general statement of policy or we talk about upping the cost for each agency rules are based on adequate guidance, and they could petition for regulation that would have to be writ- analysis. Regulatory reform should not the interpretation of the meaning of a ten by some $500,000 to $800,000, I think be a lawyer’s dream, with unending rule, interpretive rule, general state- is what the estimate was made last ways for special interests to bog down ment of policy or guidance. That is a week on the floor, and we had testi- agencies in litigation. We firmly be- mighty big list of things that could be mony before the committee at one lieve in the courts’ role in determining petitioned under S. 343. time that each regulation averages whether a rule is arbitrary or capri- Just to add to the confusion, the bill out, or can average out, around $700,000 cious. The Glenn-Chafee substitute au- also has a separate section, section 629, per regulation to get it implemented. thorizes judicial review of determina- for petitions for alternative compli- We begin to see that this is no small tions of two things—whether a rule is ance. Any person subject to a major matter. Now, these petitions that we major and therefore subject to the re- rule can petition an agency to modify were addressing here—each agency de- quirements of the legislation. Also, it or waive the specific requirements of a cision on every one of these petitions, allows review of the whole rulemaking major rule and to allow the person to except that petition for alternative record, which would include any cost- demonstrate compliance through alter- compliance I mentioned, is judicially benefit and risk assessment documents. native means not permitted by the reviewable. That is an absolute dream In other words, it allows review of rule. In addition, it adds yet another for the lawyers. All of these petitions the final rules at the final stage before petition process in section 634 so that and reviews add up to one of the worst that can be taken to court to see interested persons may petition an parts of the bill—that is, it is a for- whether all of the requirements of agency to conduct a scientific review mula for true gridlock. Agencies are cost-benefit and risk assessment have of a risk assessment. going to have to spend enormous re- been provided. We should not, however, Each agency decision on every one of sources responding to each petition. provide unnecessary, new avenues for these petitions, except that petition for They can be dragged to court if they technical or procedural challenges that

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10094 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 can be used solely as impediments by tant pending rules as the USDA meat Over the last week, the Senate’s reso- affected parties to stop a rule. Courts inspection rules—the rules that are lution of amendments on several of should not, for example, be asked to re- needed to protect the American people these special fixes shows that they are view the sufficiency of an agency’s pre- from foodborne illnesses, such as E. divisive, unrelated to the basic process liminary cost-benefit analysis, or the coli—should be exempted from Dole- reforms proposed in the legislation, use of particular units of measurement Johnston. Independent of its cost-ben- and simply an attempt to avoid going for costs and benefits. efit analysis, all the supporting evi- through the appropriate legislative While courts have a vital role to dence, procedural steps, rulemaking channels. play, they should not become the arbi- notices, and more will all be open to For example, the section that would ters of the adequacy of highly tech- challenge in the courts under these delay an increased cost for environ- nical cost-benefit analysis or risk as- APA amendments. mental cleanups was stricken on the sessment, independent of the rule Again, this is not reform. This is a grounds that it was a specific program itself. Thus, Glenn-Chafee clearly lawyer’s dream and a potential night- fix unrelated to the larger process re- states that ‘‘if an analysis or assess- mare for the American people. I am forms, and that Superfund reform is ment has been performed, the court sure my colleagues, Senator LEVIN and currently under consideration by the shall not review to determine whether Senator BIDEN, both excellent lawyers, committee of jurisdiction. the analysis or assessment conformed will go into this issue. But it seems to When it came time to consider a to the particular requirements of this me that these unneeded amendments similar amendment to strike a section chapter, section 623(D).’’ to the APA alone are reason enough to that would restrict EPA’s toxic release I believe the way the Dole-Johnston oppose the Dole-Johnston substitute. inventory, the same arguments were substitute is currently drafted that The fourth major difference between rejected. Outside the scope of general lawyers and the courts will get into the the two bills is the concern about spe- regulatory reform—no matter. More details of a risk assessment or cost- cial interest. Regulatory reform should properly considered by the committee benefit analysis. I think that is a mis- provide a new across-the-board process of jurisdiction—no matter. Special in- take. From what I understand, there for Federal agency decisionmaking. It terests want the TRI gutted—you got has been a great deal of discussion should not provide program fixes for it. about this issue, and I believe many of special interests. This is not how we should be reform- us want the same result. The question From the beginning, S. 343 has in- ing the regulatory process. We say we is how to get there from here. Leaving cluded a number of provisions that are are creating a new, fair, and reasonable the language as ambiguous as it is now not about Government-wide regulatory process. What we are really showing is unacceptable. That is just an invita- reform. Quite the contrary, they are the American people is that if they are tion to litigation. about giving specific relief to specific a big enough company, they use With all of the attention to the ques- interests or stalling particular pro- enough high-priced lawyers, you can tion of to what extent might the courts grams. Frankly, I do not think these fill the halls of power and get relief. It is unfortunately clear how a ma- get into the details of cost-benefit provisions have any place in a regu- jority of the body weigh the commu- analysis and risk assessment, we have latory reform bill that should be meant nity’s right to know about the release not discussed enough the amendments to establish a fair process, fair and of toxics into the environment against that the Dole-Johnston substitute equal to all. companies who apparently do not want makes to the Administrative Proce- Unlike S. 343, and unlike its revised companies around the plant to know dure Act. I am not a lawyer, but I know alternative, the Dole-Johnston sub- what they are drinking and breathing. stitute, our bill, the Glenn-Chafee sub- that with every statute we pass, the The irony for me is that the TRI is stitute, like its predecessor, Senator courts slowly, over the years, develop a perhaps the most notable example of a body of case law that interprets each Roth’s S. 291, has no such special fixes. rule that is relatively inexpensive and statute. The APA is no exception. It Let me say that I sympathize with really not that burdensome. It is a so- was enacted in 1946 and, to a great ex- those who would like to fix particular called risk communication rule. Unlike tent, it has been given more meaning problems. I know of examples where a command and control rule that would by the courts in the intervening 50 regulations go too far and where agen- prohibit the use of such toxic mate- years than Congress was able to cies go too far. But as testimony before rials, TRI merely requires industry to squeeze into its relatively brief sec- our committee showed, 80 percent of inform the communities of the release tions in 1946. While judicial interpreta- the rules are required by Congress. It is of such chemicals. tion of administrative procedures con- not up to the agencies. We require Now, do you know who cares about tinues, I am not aware of any major them in the legislation that we send the TRI as much as anyone? It is local criticisms of the APA. Certainly, the over. So it is not just the regulatory fire departments. People probably Administrative Conference has not pro- process that needs fixing. We in Con- would not have thought of that, but posed any major overhaul. But that is gress are also responsible for a lot of they are the men and women who have what will happen should the Dole- these problems. In other words, if we to fight the local chemical plant fires Johnston substitute be enacted into have a problem, we ought to look in and clean up chemical spills, and they law. Its amendments to the APA, in- the mirror a good part of the time. want to know what they will face. nocuous though they may seem to Let us focus on making the regu- They do not want a Bhopal, the trag- some, will usher in a whole new genera- latory process better as a whole and edy that took place in India, to take tion of lawsuits that will use the new not affix for special interest. Let me place in their city or town. legislative language to attack the case give some examples. This is not just But no matter to the proponents of S. law that has developed around the 1946 idle talk. The original S. 343 tried to 343. Powerful business interests and statutory language. rewrite the Delaney clause. Now, I hap- their lawyers have sent the word Adding more petition processes, re- pen to think the Delaney clause needs around they do not want to have to quiring new details in rulemaking no- some modification, but they went too comply with TRI. So it will be re- tices, adding the phrase ‘‘substantial far in rewriting the Delaney clause. worked, it will be revised, it will be re- support in the RECORD’’ to the tradi- They also shut down the EPA toxic re- stricted. I know what that means. I do tional formulation of arbitrary and ca- lease inventory, providing enforcement not think the American public comes pricious, these will invariably be used relief for companies and so on. out on top in that particular consider- by lawyers to go after rules not on sub- Now, while I agree that some of these ation. stantive grounds but on these proce- legitimate problems deserve our atten- These and other fixes are found in dural grounds. This is not reform. This tion, this is not the place. A regulatory the Dole-Johnston substitute. They are will recreate a litigation explosion reform bill should address regulatory not found in the Glenn-Chafee sub- that will give deeper gridlock than we issues. It should not become a Christ- stitute. We stuck with the process of could ever imagine. mas tree for lobbyists to hang solu- how the Government should go about Let me just add that this is one of tions to whatever problems they may regulatory reform. This is reason the reasons that I believe such impor- have. enough to support our bill.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10095 The fifth and final major difference What they will not face are the chal- with things like the Delaney clause or between our two bills involves the im- lenges that rules under Dole-Johnston toxic release inventory or things like plementation of the new reforms. In would face such as the new APA chal- that, that have a special interest to a simple terms, this is a question of the lenges that would be created for rule- special few. statute’s effective date. Last week, sev- making procedures and substantial evi- For all the reasons given this morn- eral questions arose about the effect of dence requirements. ing, Mr. President, I urge support of reform legislation on pending rules, on The basic question is whether we the Glenn-Chafee substitute which was expected rules, and on avenues for in- want government to work better for laid down Friday evening before we creased litigation. I have already the American people or whether we left. I yield the floor. talked at some length about these in want to impose new requirements in Mr. JOHNSTON addressed the Chair. this statement. order to frustrate decisions, create The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- I believe if we are serious about more delay, waste resources, introduce ator from Louisiana is recognized. changing the way Federal agencies uncertainty, and open up new avenues Mr. JOHNSTON. Mr. President, the make regulatory decisions, if we are se- for litigation. lines in this debate are becoming very, rious about improving those decisions, I believe that implementation of the very clear. If you are for risk assess- about reducing burdens and improving Glenn-Chafee substitutes will improve ment, if you are for regulatory reform, commonsense solutions to pressing decisionmaking and will reduce bur- you should be for the Dole-Johnston issues involving public health and safe- dens on the American public. bill which is pending. If you are against ty and the environment, then we must The Dole-Johnston substitute, on the that reform, you should be for the have a sensible approach to implement other hand, will create problems, cost Glenn-Chafee substitute because, Mr. the reforms. money—we do not know how much President, the Glenn-Chafee substitute The Dole-Johnston substitute, as it yet—and harm the public interest. is sham reform. Make no mistake now stands, reaches back and covers In conclusion, I want to state again, about it, it is totally consensual. There health and safety rules whose notice of I want regulatory reform. We have are no requirements to it. If the agency proposed rulemaking occurred as early worked on this in the Governmental head wants to do it, it will be done. as April of this year. While that is sup- Affairs Committee for the last several We are told that this is an outgrowth posed to let some rules off the hook, it years. It is not something that came up of the Roth bill which came out of also means that should that bill be- just recently. committee unanimously, with both come law, rules in the pipeline between I believe that S. 343 does not provide Democrats and Republicans supporting April and the date of enactment could the balanced regulatory reform we it, and so it did. And it had some teeth be challenged in court and would have should have. I believe the Glenn-Chafee in it. All of those teeth have now been to go back to square one to comply S. 1001, the substitute that we are pro- removed, so now it is totally consen- with the many requirements of the new posing today, does that job. sual. law. In the coming hours of debate, we We do not need a bill for consensual Now, I want to improve rulemaking. will focus more closely on these two al- reform. We now have that. That is the But I see no value in wasting resources ternatives. I welcome suggestions for problem. Right now there is a risk as- already expended to promulgate a rule. improvement to our bill. I am sure sessment rulemaking which applies to If the rule is so bad, a court can over- there are details that can be revised. I Federal agencies, but it is consensual turn it under current law. There is no am also sure our bill provides a better and they do not do it—and that is the need to reach back and waste Govern- approach. I urge our colleagues to sup- problem. We have been told there are ment resources. The Dole-Johnston im- port our substitute. all these lists of these rules, the top 10 mediate effective date for all other Mr. President, I reiterate, once list we have been talking about here on rules simply adds to this bad picture. again, these areas: The Glenn-Chafee the floor, and that some of those were Challenges will flood the courts the substitute focuses on truly major rules. not Federal rules, they were State very next day to go after rules devel- Glenn-Chafee substitute requires cost- rules or whatever. But what really is oped under current law—current until benefit analysis for all major rules. It the problem? The problem is that Fed- the day Dole-Johnston S. 343 is en- does not take the least-cost approach eral agencies today are not doing the acted. that the Dole-Johnston bill does. risk assessment, are not doing the During our debate last week, pro- The Glenn-Chafee substitute provides cost-benefit analysis, are not using ponents of the S. 343 substitute argued for review of current rule but with no good science, and their regulations are that because the Glenn-Chafee sub- automatic sunset. If we run out to a a disaster. stitute does not have a broad exemp- time period and the agency has not Who says so? EPA says so. In their tion for health and safety rules, it is taken adequate action in the pre- own studies they have determined that more restrictive than Dole-Johnston in scribed time period, then they must the risks which they have rules against its effect on pending rules. This argu- issue a notice of proposed rulemaking are risks perceived by the public rather ment is based on a misunderstanding of to repeal the rule. In other words, ei- than real risks. So anyone who says our bill. ther approve it or put the forces in mo- there is no problem with rulemaking, We apply our reform legislation to tion to repeal it, but allowing public let them go on like they are doing, let rules that are proposed 6 months after comments on the rule. them be consensual; we can trust these enactment. This delay gives agencies a Also, the Glenn-Chafee substitute is bureaucrats, they have done a great reasonable amount of time to develop not a lawyer’s dream. We allow for ju- job—those who say that are not read- new procedures, bring new regulatory dicial review of the determination of a ing EPA’s own documents. proposals up to the new standards be- major rule and whether the final rule is I say this is a consensual bill. It has fore they are published as proposed arbitrary and capricious in light of the no teeth. What is the basis of saying rules. Again, Dole-Johnston applies all whole rulemaking file. that? If you look at section 625 of the requirements immediately. The Dole-Johnston bill provides pro- Glenn-Chafee substitute, it says that Once promulgated and coming under cedures, petition, multitudinous places the agency head picks the rules to be Glenn-Chafee, rules will face analytic where suits can be filed to stop even reviewed ‘‘in the sole discretion of the requirements that are tough, but they the best of legislation. head of the agency.’’ Let me repeat are also fair and they are not unreason- Also, the Glenn-Chafee substitute that. According to the Glenn-Chafee able. Remember, we do not have the does not create brand-new petitions by substitute, the only rules to be re- least-cost alternative. We do not have private persons that will eat up agency viewed are those which the agency the least-cost alternative test or the resources and let special interests—not head picks at the sole discretion of the minimal impact reg flex test of Dole- the agency or Congress—guide prior- agency head. Johnston. We are not afraid to have ities. If there was any chance of any court important rules go through our proc- Lastly, Glenn-Chafee substitute has reversing that discretion, that also is ess. They will face a tough test. But if no special interest provision. We did totally removed by section 625, which they are needed, the rules will survive. not put a section in here that deals says on judicial review that ‘‘judicial

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10096 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 review of agency action taken pursuant trary and capricious. So a new rule that is misdescribed, mischaracterized, to the requirements of this section comes along and the head of the agency factually misquoted. And let me tell shall be limited to review of compli- says, ‘‘I think this is not expressly in- you what I mean. ance or noncompliance with the re- consistent.’’ There is nothing in this My friend from Ohio, Senator GLENN, quirements of this section.’’ new statute that comes along that says just said that the Dole-Johnston bill What does that mean? It means when you should not do a cost-benefit anal- requires the cheapest solution. He went you judicially review, you look at that ysis. There is nothing here that pro- on to say you could not get an alter- phrase ‘‘sole discretion of the head of hibits it. There is no language on it. native that cost a little more and saves the agency,’’ and it disappears. There But I, agency head, think it is implic- 200 lives. He just said that, Mr. Presi- is no judicial review. There is sole dis- itly inconsistent with the statute. dent. cretion of the agency. There is nothing If there was ever a subjective rule, Mr. President, here is the decisional enforceable. So if Carol Browner, the beauty in the eye of the beholder, un- criterion. It says you adopt the ‘‘least head of the EPA, decides she wants to fettered discretion in an agency head, cost.’’ Or ‘‘if scientific, technical, or review a rule she can do so. And if she it is found in this word ‘‘implicitly’’ in- economic uncertainties are nonquan- does not want to, guess what, Mr. consistent. Implicitly inconsistent— tifiable benefits to health, safety, or President? Nobody can force her to do Mr. President, it is a hole wide enough the environment, identified by the that. She can do that today. She can do to drive three M–1 tanks side by side agency in the rulemaking record make that today. So why do we have all through and never touch the sides. It a more costly alternative that achieves these pages of bills if we are going to does not pass the straight-face test. the objectives of the statute appro- adopt the Glenn-Chafee substitute? Really, ‘‘implicitly inconsistent’’? If priate and in the public interest and What is the point of all that, if it is all that is not enough, they have taken the agency head * * *’’ explains that, going to be consensual? If we think out the rule about the benefits justi- then you may adopt the ‘‘more costly these bureaucrats are doing a great fying the costs. alternative.’’ job? I have told my colleagues, when we What are ‘‘nonquantifiable benefits How about new rules? First of all, let initially came up almost 2 years ago to health, safety, or the environment?’’ me compare that with the Roth bill. with the first risk assessment amend- Mr. President, the value of 200 lives is Under the original Roth bill, which ment—which passed overwhelmingly first of all a benefit defined as a benefit came out unanimously, all rules had to here in the Senate—of the example of in the bill. be reviewed by every agency head, the carbon 14 rule which EPA came up Second, it explicitly states that you every single rule had to be reviewed— with which set these limits at 0.063 of can have a more costly alternative; not every single major rule, $100 million, the amount of carbon 14 contained in only that, but ‘‘scientific, technical, or had to be reviewed. And at the end of 10 the body naturally, and they set that economic uncertainties’’ because the years they were sunsetted, boom, un- limit at that amount. Yet, it was going science is frequently uncertain. less they were continued or modified, to cost $2.3 billion to comply with the Mr. President, it escapes me how peo- which, in turn, would have been a rule. ple can continue to say that we require major Federal action or final agency If there was ever an example of some- the ‘‘least cost alternative’’ when the action subject to judicial review. thing that needed to be done—I mean plain language of the bill states other- So under the original Roth bill, it you needed—they did not know what it wise. I mean, why can people not un- had sharp teeth. In fact, I think its was going to cost, and it was clearly derstand the English language? Why teeth were maybe even a little too not a risk. In other words, this was can they not understand this, Mr. sharp because they had to review all over 6,000 times the risk of dancing President? It is clear. And we have con- the rules. But the fact of the matter is, with your wife than was allowed in this tinually stated what that English lan- all those rules were there to be re- carbon 14 provision. But it was going to guage is. viewed and they were there, there was cost $2.3 billion to comply with it. The fact of the matter is that the judicial review of the agency action. Why should you not have that kind of agency head under this has enormous So if you were an aggrieved party information? Why should not that be discretion. And the agency head ought and there was one of these bad rules, there? Under this new language you do to have enormous discretion. But it re- either it was sunsetted or you had your not have to certify that the benefits quires this rigorous analysis so that if right to come in and have your say. justify the cost. All you have to do is there is uncertain science the agency Under the Glenn-Chafee bill, all of indicate whether the benefits justify head has to make an explanation of those rules out there, which again the costs. those considerations. And if it is non- EPA, in its own documents, says do not In other words, rather than a rig- quantifiable benefits to health, safety, realistically reflect risk—some of them orous test that says the benefits ought or the environment, you have to make imposing hundreds of millions of dol- to justify the cost, all you have to do is an explanation of those things. It is de- lars, hundreds of billions of dollars in sort of give the information whether it signed to focus the logic of the think- some instances, costs on the taxpayers is or whether it is not. It does not mat- ing of the agency process to make and on citizens—you cannot get to ter in the bill. them focus on what it is they are try- them. You have no right to be heard. So, Mr. President, we have consen- ing to achieve because in the past that You have no ability to review those sual legislation that does not make has not been done. We do not know. rules. any requirements on anybody to do With that carbon 14 regulation, we just Oh, you can call it special interest. anything. And it is, as I say, sham re- did not know what the thinking was You can say special interests should form. because they had ignored their own sci- not be able to come in and be heard on Now, if you are against risk assess- entists, did not know what it was going these rules. I can tell you who pays for ment, if you are against cost-benefit to cost, and trotted out the regulation those rules. It is the American tax- analysis, vote for this amendment be- without any idea of what they were payer. It is the American citizen who cause you can feel very confident that doing. pays for those rules. you are not going to change anything Mr. President, let me turn to judicial How about the new rules under the in the Federal Government, that it is review. The judicial review provisions Glenn-Chafee amendment? We have a going to be business as usual, that we of the Roth amendment have changed new provision here that says you do are going to let the bureaucrats con- at least twice since Senator Roth re- not have to do a cost-benefit analysis if tinue to waste the money of American ported that legislation. It was changed a cost-benefit analysis is ‘‘expressly or taxpayers and American citizens as again this morning. implicitly inconsistent with the stat- they have in the past by the hundreds Mr. President, the fact of the matter ute’’—‘‘expressly or implicitly incon- of billions of dollars. is that the Glenn-Chafee substitute has sistent with the statute.’’ Mr. President, there really are two the faults which they accuse the Dole- And do not forget the agency head is bills being debated; two Dole-Johnston Johnston bill of having—which we do able to interpret the statute and that bills. One is the bill that is before the not have and which they do have. May judgment is reversed only if it is arbi- Senate. The other is this fictitious bill I explain?

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10097 First of all, let me say what the prob- Let us take another one: radon. We ministrative Procedure Act, particu- lem is here. What we wanted to achieve have had various radon legislation and larly section 706 of the Administrative all along was to have a review of the some rules up on radon. Radon could be Procedure Act, it provides for review of final agency action; that is, in most very expensive as well. And the sci- all agency action—all final agency ac- cases that will be the major rule. We entific judgments there are very well tion. wanted that to be approved, to be test- known. We know radon causes cancer, So I assume that section 706 is the ed according to the standard of wheth- but at what levels does it cause cancer, guiding rule for appellate review. I tell er or not it is arbitrary and capricious and in what sections of the country is my friend from Ohio that I am going to or an abuse of discretion. Those are the it a risk, and what efforts ought to be ask him some questions about it if he old standards in the Administrative made to deal with radon. is willing to answer when I finish these Procedure Act. We wanted those stand- If you picked scientists who are, say, remarks because I would like to know ards to govern the final agency action. with the home building industry and what in his opinion the standard of We did not want the cost-benefit anal- are not impartial, I can imagine a re- that review is. ysis, or the risk assessment provisions versal on that ground. If you did not When you say, ‘‘judicial review of the to be independently reviewed so as to have a cost-benefit analysis on some- agency action,’’ what is the standard? test them for the procedures, for the thing like radon, which could cost a Now, if it is section 706, section 706 has adequacy of the procedures. huge amount of money, I can imagine a two pertinent provisions. One is the The reason we wanted the risk as- reversal on that ground. same standard we have here, that is, sessment and the cost-benefit analysis Or suppose we have a regulation on to be made part of the record is be- arbitrary and capricious or an abuse of second-hand tobacco smoke, to name discretion. But it also has subsection cause only by making them part of the one of our biggest areas now. Suppose record and considering that can you (d) that says ‘‘without observance of you had a regulation on that, and all procedure required by law.’’ understand whether the final agency the scientists came from the tobacco action is arbitrary and capricious. In Now, if I am correct that it is section companies. You mean to tell me you 706 under which this is reviewed, then effect, it would be a rule of common could not reverse on that ground? Be- sense. under the Glenn-Chafee amendment by cause the science is so critical to that Let me tell my colleagues how it that last phrase you can review both particular issue. On the other hand, if might work on three rules which may the arbitrary and capricious nature of come up in the future. They are not you were going to be setting a hunting the final agency action, the abuse of proposed now. But it will give you a season—I think, by the way, hunting discretion of the final agency action, good indication of what is at stake seasons have been expressly exempted. and you can review with the phrase here. In earlier versions of the act, they were ‘‘without observance of procedure re- One possible rule is electromagnetic not. But I can imagine that you might quired by law.’’ fields, so-called EMF. EMF regulations leave out the cost-benefit analysis al- Now, there is another provision, could cost literally hundreds of billions together in setting a hunting season, though, of the Glenn-Chafee judicial of dollars because it could require the and it would not affect the final agency review provision upon which they rely relocation of electric lines, high power action. So it is a rule of reason, and which says this: under this language: tension lines all over this country. We If an analysis or assessment has been per- have ongoing studies now, scientific Failure to comply with this subchapter— formed, the Court shall not review to deter- studies, as to whether or not EMF This subchapter, of course, deals with mine whether the analysis or assessment causes cancer, and if so, at what levels, risk assessment and cost-benefit anal- conformed to the particular requirements of and to what extent. I might tell my ysis. this chapter. colleagues that we do that under the and subchapter III may be considered by the Now, the operative phrase here, Mr. Energy Committee. We have been fund- Court solely— President, is ‘‘particular.’’ One of the ing those studies. I do not want to pre- s-o-l-e-l-y, which means solely. oldest rules of statutory construction judge all of them. But the preliminary for the purpose of determining whether the is that when two provisions are in pari studies indicate that the level at which final agency action is arbitrary and capri- materia; that is, when they are on the people receive EMF does not cause can- cious or an abuse of discretion. same subject and particularly when cer. But again, that will await bringing Mr. President, we are continually they are in the same section, you read in all of the science. told by the opponents of risk assess- those two together so as to give life to Let us suppose you have an EMF rule ment that ‘‘solely’’ does not mean sole- both of them, so that you do not nul- here, and let us suppose that the sci- ly. ‘‘Solely’’ means something else. lify one at the expense of the other. entists that they pick for peer review Now, I will tell you what this means violates section 627 on conflict of inter- ‘‘Solely’’ means solely part of the time to me. ‘‘Shall not review to determine est. Let us say, for example, that all of and means something else some other whether the analysis or the assessment the scientists, if it is EPA who is doing part of the time. conformed to the particular require- the rule, are from the electric power Mr. President, it is as clear as the ments of this chapter.’’ The word ‘‘par- industry. They come up with a rule noonday Sun on a cloudless day that ticular’’ must have some meaning, and that says no problem; it does not cause ‘‘solely’’ means solely and only for the I believe that meaning is to institute a cancer. purpose of determining whether that Why, Mr. President, in that kind of final agency action is arbitrary and ca- de minimis test; that is to say, you do situation, with the importance of that pricious, which is exactly what we not reverse for procedural errors of rule, the huge amount of expense in- want to achieve. small degree, but you may reduce for volved, the centrality of the question Now, Mr. President, let us look at procedural errors of greater degree. of science, then I believe, if I were in this new iteration of the Glenn-Chafee If that is the not the meaning, then the Court—and that is the record we judicial review language. It says: what is the meaning of the word ‘‘par- had under this language—I would re- When an action for judicial review of an ticular’’? They could have said conform verse it and send it back and say you agency action is instituted— to the requirements of this subchapter have to get this science right, because In other words, when you get to ap- as opposed to the particular require- the science is very important. On the peal. ments of this subchapter. And if, Mr. other hand, if you had a rule where the any analysis or assessment of such agency President, I am wrong on that, then science is fairly well understood and is action shall constitute part of the whole ad- you still have a review under the other not central to the issue, I think you ministrative record of agency action for the provisions of section 706, which leads could leave out a risk assessment alto- purpose of judicial review of the agency ac- you to the same conclusion we have gether, and the final agency action tion. here. might not be arbitrary and capricious. ‘‘For the purpose of judicial review of So either the Glenn-Chafee amend- The point is that the risk assessment the agency action.’’ ment goes beyond what our amend- might or might not, depending on the Now, what is the guiding rule of re- ment goes to by at least implicitly al- circumstances, be grounds for reversal. view of agency action? Under the Ad- lowing a procedural review, or it at

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10098 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 least provides for a review of the final guage, specifically states that it is No. 1: Did the agency sufficiently ex- agency action and to the same extent solely for the purpose of determining plain the need for and objectives of a that ours does. whether the final agency action is arbi- rule? So now, Mr. President, if the distin- trary and capricious. No. 2—— guished Senator from Ohio would yield My question to you is, under your Mr. JOHNSTON. On that first one—— for a few questions, if I may ask him, language which says—you allow risk Mr. GLENN. Is the Senator going to when you say ‘‘purpose of judicial re- assessments—‘‘analysis or assessment let me read these? view of the agency action,’’ by what shall constitute part of the whole ad- Mr. JOHNSTON. Not 144. rule is that? Is that not under section ministrative record for the purpose of Mr. GLENN. I am not the counsel for 706 of the APA and, if not, then under judicial review of the agency action,’’ EPA. I am saying this is their interpre- what standard? is that review not under section 706? tation of exactly what you are refer- Mr. GLENN. I think we are referring Mr. GLENN. The difference here ring to here. to—you are talking about section 706? being, what we provide is that final re- Mr. JOHNSTON. But you said you Mr. JOHNSTON. In your amendment, view, just before the rule or reg would would have a separate review, even this is section 623(e), providing for judi- go into effect, then it would be under what counsel for EPA says, that cial review, the last sentence of which challengeable in the court. There would come only at the final review says, ‘‘When an action for judicial re- would be judicial review at that point. and solely for the purpose of deter- view of an agency action is instituted, They could consider everything that mining whether or not the final agency any analysis or assessment for such has happened up to that point. It would action was arbitrary and capricious; is agency action shall constitute part of not be judicially reviewable at all the that not correct? It is clear. the whole administrative record of multitudinous steps along the way that Mr. GLENN. We stick with the arbi- agency action for the purpose of judi- would still be permitted under Dole- trary-and-capricious rule. We do not cial review of the agency action.’’ Johnston. expand that as Dole-Johnston does. My question is, Is that review not Mr. JOHNSTON. I do not even know Mr. JOHNSTON. There is the stand- under section 706 of the Administrative what you are talking about, multitudi- ard right there. It is plain English. It is Procedure Act, and if that is not the nous. Name one place. as plain as it can be. It is ‘‘arbitrary applicable section, what is the applica- Mr. GLENN. I will get the detail on and capricious or abuse of discretion,’’ ble section? that a little later on today. that is the sole and only basis for re- (Mr. KYL assumed the Chair.) Mr. JOHNSTON. I suggest to my view of the cost-benefit analysis or of Mr. GLENN. I reply to my colleague friend from Ohio that there is only one the risk assessment. That is it. Look, from Louisiana, we maintain the cur- review, explicitly only one review, read the language. rent status under the APA, the stand- under our proposal, and that is final Mr. GLENN. I say to my friend from ard being arbitrary and capricious, agency action. Louisiana, there is a difference of opin- Mr. GLENN. Will the Senator yield which has been the case for a long ion here on what is meant by the lan- so I can read some of the areas—— guage. I know we have had a number of time. Mr. JOHNSTON. I want to clear this Mr. JOHNSTON. That is section 706. discussions back and forth, and with up, because we say specifically that Mr. GLENN. Section 706. It is my un- the Senator from Louisiana and Sen- there is—all right, let me read this, derstanding, under Dole-Johnston, it ator LEVIN on the Senate floor. from section 625 of Dole-Johnston: expands 706 for scope of review. It al- The interpretation counsel at EPA is lows a court to set aside an agency ac- Compliance or noncompliance by an agen- giving on this is the one I was about to cy with the provisions of this subchapter and tion if findings are ‘‘without substan- subchapter III shall be subject to judicial re- read, and there are 144 different ques- tial support.’’ That is a new and higher view only in accordance with this section. tions where they feel litigation can standard of review than APA has ac- (b) except as provided in subsection (e) and come up under this. knowledged in the past. subject to subchapter II each court with ju- Mr. JOHNSTON. Those may be re- Mr. JOHNSTON. That is a different risdiction under a statute to review final quirements of risk assessment or cost- section. For the purpose of compliance agency action to which this title applies has benefit analysis which, to the extent with this subchapter, subchapter II, jurisdiction to review any claims of non- they are relevant, can be used to chal- compliance with this subchapter and sub- and subchapter III, that is risk assess- chapter III. . . . lenge the final agency action. Maybe ment and cost-benefit analysis, that re- so. But those are only arguments you And then next: view shall be solely on the basis of make. The first one there is notice. Do what is arbitrary and capricious or an Except as provided in subsection (e), no you really think you are going to claims of noncompliance with this chapter abuse of discretion. or subchapter III shall be reviewed separate throw out a final agency action as Mr. GLENN. Then we disagree on the or apart from judicial review of the final being arbitrary and capricious because meaning of—— agency action to which they relate. they did not give notice? Mr. JOHNSTON. ‘‘Solely’’? And then we state here that that is a Mr. GLENN. This was not notice. I Mr. GLENN. Arbitrary and capri- review of final agency action. read this. ‘‘Did agencies sufficiently cious. It is as clear as it can be. Now tell me explain the need for and objectives of a Mr. JOHNSTON. That language is ex- where else you were going to be able to rule?’’ cerpted—it is the same standard that review this? It says ‘‘compliance or They feel, under S. 343, this language you have. That is section 706. noncompliance shall be subject to judi- under your proposal could be chal- Mr. GLENN. No, it is my under- cial review only in accordance with lenged in litigation. standing Dole-Johnston goes beyond this section,’’ and there is the section. Mr. JOHNSTON. You can challenge that and establishes ‘‘without substan- It is final agency action. Now is that anything. tial support’’ as a new and higher not clear, I ask my friend? Mr. GLENN. No, not under Glenn- standard of review, where we stick Mr. GLENN. No, I do not think it is. Chafee, you cannot challenge anything. with the Administrative Procedure Act EPA has given a list of things where We have the final rule that can be that has been in effect, acknowledged they feel this could be challenged, challengeable, or whether it is a major under law, a whole body of law devel- where litigation could come out of this. rule or not. We specify that. oped under that, and we stick with that I was asked a moment ago, I believe Mr. JOHNSTON. If you ever got a so there can be no misunderstanding of the gist of it was, what possible litiga- cost-benefit analysis done under Glenn- it. Dole-Johnston goes well beyond tion could come out of this? Chafee, all that is consensual. If you that and establishes a whole new proce- Mr. JOHNSTON. Right. want to do it, if you feel like it, if it dure. Mr. GLENN. We have here—I do not feels good, do it. Otherwise, do not do Mr. JOHNSTON. I say to my friend, know whether it is necessary to read it because you do not have to. It is that is a different question. That is a all of these or not—but there are 144 business as usual. Am I not right that different section. We are talking about items that could be litigated under S. it is all consensual on the lookback the review of cost-benefit analysis and 343 as counsel to EPA interprets this. process under Glenn-Chafee; is that risk assessment which, under our lan- Let me go through some of these. correct?

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10099 Mr. GLENN. No, that is not correct. 11. Does a rule cost more than $50 million? 40. Did agency adequately determine I will tell you the difference. What we 12. Is rule closely related to other rules whether rule adopts the least cost alter- provided in both pieces of legislation is that aggregate into major rule? native of the reasonable alternatives? 13. Did initial cost-benefit analysis contain the right for Congress to get in the act 41. Did agency correctly identify and suffi- a sufficient description of the benefits of a ciently describe scientific, technical, or eco- and review anything that we want to proposed rule? nomic uncertainties or nonquantifiable bene- that could come back to Congress. So if 14. Did initial cost-benefit analysis include fits that make a more costly alternative ap- there is any question about it, it comes a sufficient description of how the benefits propriate and in the public interest? back to Congress. That is provided in would be achieved? 42. Did agency sufficiently describe why both pieces of legislation. 15. Did initial cost-benefit analysis contain such alternatives are appropriate and in the Mr. JOHNSTON. Oh, well, sure. Con- a sufficient description of the persons or public interest? gress can always pass a law. The Con- classes of persons likely to receive such ben- 43. Did agency sufficiently explain why any efits? such alternative is the least cost alternative stitution provides that. This bill does 16. Did initial cost-benefit analysis contain of the reasonable alternatives necessary to not provide that. But save Congress en- a sufficient description of the costs of a pro- take into account uncertainties or nonquan- acting a law, it is consensual, is it not? posed rule? tifiable benefits? Mr. GLENN. I say to my friend that 17. Did initial cost-benefit analysis include 44. Did agency correctly determine that we provide specifically for a procedure a sufficient description of how the costs rule is likely to significantly reduce risks for any rule to come back to Congress would result from the rule? addressed? for further consideration. And in both 18. Did initial cost-benefit analysis contain 45. If uncertainties preclude such a finding, bills, we give a time period that is re- a sufficient description of the persons or did agency adequately justify the issuance of classes of persons likely to bear such costs? the rule? quired for Congress to review whatever 19. Did initial cost-benefit analysis ade- 46. Did agency correctly determine that a it is that was brought back. One is 60 quately identify alternatives that require no rule could not satisfy the cost-benefit days, the other is 45 days—not a huge government action? decisional criterion applying the statutory difference. So it seems to me that pro- 20. Did initial cost-benefit analysis ade- requirements upon which the rule is based? tects whatever may be required or quately assess costs/benefits of no-action al- 47. Did agency quantify costs and benefits whatever may come up over there, as ternatives? to extent feasible? far as whether something has had ade- 21. Did initial cost-benefit analysis ade- 48. Did quantification adequately specify quately identify alternatives that accommo- ranges of predictions? quate review or not before it was put date differences among geographic regions? 49. Did quantification adequately explain into a rule. 22. Did initial cost-benefit analysis ade- margins of error? Mr. JOHNSTON. Well, let us say that quately assess costs/benefits of geographic 50. Did quantification adequately address the director of EPA or another agency alternatives? the uncertainties and variabilities in the es- looks back and says, ‘‘We have done a 23. Did initial cost-benefit analysis ade- timates used? heck of a good job, we have great bu- quately identify alternatives that accommo- 51. Did agency adequately describe nature reaucrats in this agency, and we do not date different compliance resources? and extent of nonquantifiable costs and ben- efits? think anything needs to be reviewed.’’ 24. Did initial cost-benefit analysis ade- quately assess costs/benefits of different 52. Did agency clearly articulate relation- So the slate is clean, it is a tabula compliance resource alternatives? ship of benefits to costs? rasa, it is a devoid of any rules to be 25. Did initial cost-benefit analysis ade- 53. Is understanding of industry-by-indus- reviewed. I am an aggrieved party and quately identify performance-based, market- try effects of central importance to a rule- what is my remedy? To come to Con- based alternatives, or other flexible alter- making? gress and ask them to pass an act? natives? 54. If so, were costs and benefits broken That is it, is it not? 26. Did initial cost-benefit analysis ade- down appropriately on industry-by-industry Mr. GLENN. I will reply. The stand- quately assess costs/benefits of performance- basis? 55. Did agency correctly determine that ard of review is arbitrary and capri- based, market-based, or flexible alter- natives? conducting a cost-benefit analysis would cious under Dole-Johnston, but that 27. Did initial cost-benefit analysis ade- have been impracticable due to an emer- issue itself is what can be reviewed. quately assess costs-benefits of all other rea- gency or threat likely to result in significant Now, these 144 items here— sonable alternatives? harm to the public or natural resources? I ask unanimous consent that these 28. Did agency in proposed rule adequately 56. In developing a preliminary schedule 144 items be printed in the RECORD. verify quality, reliability, and relevance of for regulatory review, did the agency appro- There being no objection, the list was science? priately consider whether a rule is unneces- sary and may be repealed? ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as 29. Did final cost-benefit analysis contain a 57. In developing a preliminary schedule follows: sufficient description of the benefits of a pro- posed rule? for regulatory review, did the agency appro- ONE HUNDRED FORTY-FOUR ITEMS TO 30. Did final cost-benefit analysis include a priately consider whether a rule would meet LITIGATE UNDER S. 343 (VERSION 783) sufficient description of how the benefits the decisional criteria of § 624? 1. Did agency sufficiently explain the need would be achieved? 58. In developing a preliminary schedule for and objectives of a rule? 31. Did final cost-benefit analysis contain a for regulatory review, did the agency appro- 2. Did agency identify and sufficiently dis- sufficient description of the persons or class- priately consider whether the rule could be cuss all significant legal and factual issues es of persons likely to receive such benefits? amended to substantially decrease costs, in- presented by a rule? 32. Did final cost-benefit analysis contain a crease benefits, or provide greater flexibility 3. Did agency identify and adequately de- sufficient description of the costs of a pro- for regulatory entities? scribe all reasonable alternatives to a rule? posed rule? 59. In developing a final schedule for regu- 4. Did agency adequately explain why all 33. Did final cost-benefit analysis include a latory review, did the agency appropriately reasonable alternatives to rule were re- sufficient description of how the costs would consider whether a rule is unnecessary and jected? result from the rule? may be repealed? 5. Did agency sufficiently explain whether 34. Did final cost-benefit analysis contain a 60. In developing a final schedule for regu- a rule is expressly required by the text of a sufficient description of the persons or class- latory review, did the agency appropriately statute? es of persons likely to bear such costs? consider whether a rule would meet the 6. Did agency identify and sufficiently ex- 35. Did final cost-benefit analysis ade- decisional criteria of § 624? plain all the statutory interpretations upon quately assess costs/benefits of performance- 61. In developing a final schedule for regu- which a rule is based? based, market-based, or flexible alter- latory review, did the agency appropriately 7. Did agency identify all alternative stat- natives? consider whether the rule could be amended utory interpretations and sufficiently ex- 36. Did final cost-benefit analysis ade- to substantially decrease costs, increase ben- plain why all such alternatives were re- quately assess costs/benefits of all other al- efits, or provide greater flexibility for regu- jected? ternatives? lated entities? 8. Did agency identify each factual conclu- 37. Did agency adequately consider benefits 62. In developing a final schedule for regu- sion upon which a rule is based and ade- and costs incurred by all affected persons or latory review, did the agency appropriately quately explain how each such conclusion is classes of persons, including specially af- consider the importance of each rule relative substantially supported in the rulemaking fected subgroups? to other rules being reviewed under the sec- file? 38. Did agency adequately determine tion? 9. Did agency respond to rulemaking peti- whether benefits of rule justify costs? 63. In developing a final schedule for regu- tion under § 553(l) within 18 months? 39. Did agency adequately determine latory review, did the agency appropriately 10. Did agency appropriately deny a rule- whether the rule employs flexible alter- consider the resources expected to be avail- making petition under § 553(l)? natives to the extent practicable? able to the agency for the review?

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10100 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 64. Did petition establish substantial like- 87. If uncertainties preclude such a finding, 115. Does risk assessment adequately ex- lihood that future impact of rule would be did agency adequately justify the cleanup plain the basis for choosing particular policy equivalent of major rule? activity? judgments? 65. Did petition on its face establish sub- 88. Did agency correctly determine that a 116. Does risk assessment adequately iden- stantial likelihood that head of agency cleanup activity could not satisfy the cost- tify and explain all reasonable alternative would not be able to make the findings re- benefit decisional criterion applying the policy judgments that were not selected by quired by § 624? statutory requirements upon which the ac- agency for use in risk assessment? 66. Did agency correctly conclude that pe- tivity is based? 117. Does risk assessment adequately ex- tition did not show substantial likelihood 89. Did the agency correctly conclude that plain sensitivity of conclusions to such alter- that guidance would have effect of a major a risk assessment would not likely have an native policy judgments? rule? effect on the U.S. economy equivalent great- 118. Does risk assessment adequately ex- 67. Did agency correctly conclude that pe- er than $50 million/year? plain rationale for not using such alternative tition did not show substantial likelihood 90. Did the agency correctly conclude that policy judgments? that agency would not be able to find that a risk assessment for the issuance or modi- 119. Does risk assessment inappropriately guidance document meets criteria of § 624? fication of a permit meets the requirements combine or compound multiple policy judg- 68. Did agency complete rulemaking within of § 633. ments? two years of determination to amend a rule 91. Did the agency correctly conclude that 120. Does risk characterization appro- pursuant to § 623? conducting a risk assessment would have priately describe hazard of concern? 121. Does risk characterization appro- 69. Did agency develop adequate regulatory been impracticable due to an emergency or priately describe populations or natural re- flexibility analysis? health and safety threat likely to result in sources at risk? 70. Is a cleanup a ‘‘major environmental significant harm to the public or natural re- activity’’ (will it exceed $10 million in costs, 122. Does risk characterization appro- sources? priately explain the exposure scenarios used expenses, and damages)? 92. Is risk assessment related to rule au- in risk assessment? 71. Did agency correctly conclude that con- thorizing a product’s introduction into com- struction had commenced on a significant 123. Does risk characterization appro- merce? priately estimate population at risk? portion of the cleanup activity? 93. Is risk assessment an exempt screening 72. Did the agency correctly conclude that 124. Does risk characterization appro- analysis? priately describe likelihood of different expo- it would have been more cost-effective to 94. Is screening analysis used as the basis complete cleanup construction than perform sure scenarios? for imposing restriction on previously au- 125. Does risk characterization appro- a cost-benefit analysis and risk assessment? thorized any activities? priately describe the nature and severity of 73. Did agency correctly conclude that 95. Is screening analysis used to as the harm that could plausibly occur? cleanup delays associated with development basis for a formal determination of signifi- 126. Does risk characterization appro- of cost-benefit analysis and risk assessment cant risk from a substance or activity? priately identify major uncertainties in each would have resulted in actual and immediate 96. Does agency conduct risk assessments component of risk assessment? risk to human health or welfare? in manner that promotes informed public 127. Does risk characterization appro- 74. Did agency prepare risk assessment for input into decision-making process? priately address the influence of each uncer- major environmental management activity 97. Does the agency maintain appropriate tainty on the results of the risk assessment? in accordance with risk assessment provi- distinction between risk assessment and risk 128. Does risk assessment conclusion ap- sions of S. 343? management? propriately express overall estimate of risk 75. Did agency prepare appropriate cost- 98. Did agency apply appropriate level of as a range of probability distribution reflect- benefit analysis for major environmental detail and rigor to risk assessment? ing variabilities, uncertainties, and data management activity in accordance with 99. Did agency develop an appropriate gaps in analysis? cost-benefit provisions of S. 343? iterative process for risk assessments? 129. Does conclusion appropriately provide 76. Did agency appropriately identify the 100. Did agency correctly determine that range and distribution of risks and cor- reasonably anticipated probable future use of additional data would significantly change responding exposure scenarios? land and its surroundings affected by a the estimate of risk and the resulting agency 130. Does conclusion appropriately identify major environmental management activity? action? reasonably expected risk to general popu- 77. Did agency appropriately incorporate 101. Is risk assessment based on best rea- lation? such reasonably anticipated probable future sonably available scientific data and under- 131. Does conclusion appropriately identify use of land and its surroundings in con- standing? risk to more highly exposed or sensitive sub- ducting a cost-benefit analysis of a major en- 102. Did agency appropriately analyze the populations? vironmental management activity? quality and relevance of data used in risk as- 132. Does conclusion appropriately describe 78. Did agency appropriately incorporate sessment? qualitative factors influencing range of pos- such reasonably anticipated probable future 103. Did agency appropriately describe the sible risks? use of land and its surroundings in con- analysis of the quality and relevance of the 133. Do scientific data and understanding ducting a risk assessment of a major envi- data used? permit relevant comparisons of risk? ronmental management activity? 104. Did agency appropriately consider 134. If so, did agency appropriately place 79. For actions pending or proposed within whether data were appropriately peer-re- nature and magnitude of risks to human one year of enactment of bill, did agency use viewed or developed in accordance with good health, safety, and the environment in con- an appropriate alternative analysis to assess laboratory practices? text? the costs and benefits and risks associated 105. Does risk assessment adequately dis- 135. Did agency appropriately describe sub- with a major environmental management ac- cuss conflicts among scientific data? stitution risks? tivity? 106. Does risk assessment include adequate 136. In reviewing petition for review of 80. Did agency adequately determine discussion of likelihood of alternative inter- free-standing risk assessment, did agency whether benefits of major environmental pretations of data? correctly conclude that risk assessment or management activity justify costs? 107. Does risk assessment appropriately entry was consistent with risk assessment 81. Did agency adequately determine emphasize postulates representing the most and characterization principles in S. 343? whether the activity employs flexible alter- reasonable inferences from supporting sci- 137. In reviewing petition for review of risk natives to the extent practicable? entific data? assessment, did agency correctly conclude 82. Did agency adequately determine 108. Does risk assessment appropriately that risk assessment does not fail to take whether the activity adopts the least cost al- emphasize data indicating greatest scientific into account material new scientific infor- ternative of the reasonable alternatives? basis of support for resulting harm to af- mation? 83. Did agency correctly identify and suffi- fected individuals? 138. In reviewing petition for review of risk ciently describe scientific, technical, or eco- 109. Does agency appropriately assess assessment, did agency correctly conclude nomic uncertainties or nonquantifiable bene- whether foreign determinations of health ef- that risk assessment would not have con- fits that make a more costly alternative fects values should be utilized in agency de- tained significantly different results if prop- cleanup activity appropriate and in the pub- cisions? erly conducted pursuant to provisions of S. lic interest? 110. Does risk assessment use site-specific 343? 84. Did agency sufficiently describe why information to maximum extent practicable? 139. In reviewing petition for review of risk such alternatives are appropriate and in the 111. Does risk assessment inappropriately assessment, did agency correctly conclude public interest? rely on policy judgments or default assump- that revised risk assessment would not pro- 85. Did agency sufficiently explain why any tions? vide basis for reevaluating an agency deter- such alternative is the least cost alternative 112. Does risk assessment appropriately mination of risk that currently has an effect of the reasonable alternatives necessary to identify policy judgments used? on the U.S. economy of $50 million/year? take into account uncertainties or nonquan- 113. Does risk assessment appropriately de- 140. Does consent decree imposing rule- tifiable benefits? scribe scientific or policy judgments used? making obligations divest agency of 86. Did agency correctly determine that 114. Does risk assessment adequately ex- disrection to respond to changing cir- cleanup activity is likely to significantly re- plain the extent policy judgments have been cumstances, make policy or managerial duce risks addressed? validated by data? changes, or protect rights of third parties?

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10101 141. Did the agency appropriately apply a Mr. President, right now, we have the Frankly, I think we ought to have rule of reason in determining whether to add sole discretion of the head of the EPA. advisory boards. But the advisory or delete a chemical from the Toxics Release We have the sole discretion of OSHA boards were objected to by the Senator Inventory? and all these other places that are run 142. In determining whether to add or de- from Ohio, the Senator from Michigan, lete a chemical from TRI, did the agency ap- amok. Listen to what EPA says about Senator LEVIN, and others, who said we propriately consider the levels of the chem- its own rules. This is not some right- should not have this advisory board, ical in the environment that might result wing interest group talking about how and it would clog up the thing. from reasonably anticipated releases? badly EPA is assessing its rules. This is I think advisory boards would be use- 143. In an enforcement proceeding, did a de- EPA saying it. Its own Science Advi- ful. fendant reasonably rely on and comply with sory Board confirmed it in 1990, and we Mr. GLENN. Could the Senator tell a rule, regulation, adjudication, directive or are told, well, trust them. Let us con- me when he objected to that? I do not order? 144. Was such reliance and compliance in- tinue to go with unfettered discretion, believe there was an objection to that. compatible, contradictory, or otherwise ir- with ‘‘sole discretion.’’ Now, that is Mr. JOHNSTON. I thought it was in reconcilable with the rule, regulation or di- what Glenn-Chafee says—‘‘sole discre- our negotiating session. Does the Sen- rective for which enforcement is sought? tion.’’ ator wish to get advisory boards back Mr. GLENN. Mr. President, this is a Now, Mr. President, we have been on in? list of 144 bases upon which a rule can the floor for 6 days. This is the 6th day Mr. GLENN. I do not know what hap- be challenged using the arbitrary and on this legislation, the 6th straight day pened in our session. There were so capricious standard that you are talk- going through all of these provisions many things that occurred in those ing about. and arguing about these provisions and sessions. It would be hard to go back Mr. JOHNSTON. Well—— all that. And we are told, well, leave it and recall everything that occurred. Mr. GLENN. These can still be chal- to the sole discretion of the agency Mr. JOHNSTON. The advisory lenged. head. And then, as for new rules, if it is boards, in my judgment, are useful, and Mr. JOHNSTON. Let me ask my implicitly—whatever that means, and I I tried to sell advisory boards. I do not friend to answer this question: EPA think it means whatever in the sole think they are central to the process, does not do anything. It puts no rule up discretion of the agency head they but if the Senator from Ohio thinks for review. What is your remedy if you want it to mean—you do not have to do they are important, I will come are an aggrieved party, if you are out- for a new rule the cost-benefit analysis. back—— raged citizens, if you are millions of By the way, you do not even have to Mr. GLENN. I would be happy to talk American citizens, what is your rem- justify the cost—that benefits justify about advisory boards. We might be edy? To come to Congress? the cost. able to get some wording here that Mr. GLENN. Yes, that is the ultimate Mr. GLENN. If the Senator will yield, would be proposed as an amendment protection, Congress, where 80 percent the Senator defends the petition proc- here, and we would be glad to consider of these things start to begin with, ess in the Dole-Johnston bill. On March that if that is possible. where the requirements are put in. 14, the Senator from Louisiana re- Mr. JOHNSTON. Under the original Mr. JOHNSTON. I tell my friend that sponded to a letter that Senators Dole amendment, people would be able the American public has come to Con- LEVIN, LIEBERMAN, and I had sent to to petition as often as they wished to. gress. That is what we are doing here him asking his opinion on these, be- They would have an automatic judicial today. That is what this is all about. cause he has had a lot of experience in review of that. EPA has reviewed its own rules and these areas. We asked him to comment Sally Katzen suggested—I think it says they are not based on real risks, on S. 291 and S. 343. He sent us back a was an excellent idea. I think the Sen- they are based on public perceptions of very thoughtful and well-reasoned-out ator carried forward some of the ideas risk and we need to do something letter response of his views at that with that, which was we have 180 days about it. Everybody says let us do time. I say that within that letter—and after the publication of the initial list something about it. And now that is I will not read the whole letter because within which to petition with a very where we are. it was rather lengthy—but in talking high threshold. That is, we have to There was a 1987 study called ‘‘Unfin- about the petition process, the Senator show a substantial likelihood that the ished Business’’ where EPA systemati- from Louisiana stated the following: existing rule does not meet the test. If cally ranked the seriousness of the var- To help set priorities for the review, I pre- you do not make the application dur- ious risks that it was addressing or fer some sort of advisory committee to assist ing the 180 days, you cannot apply the agency head. I am very skeptical of the could address. The report found that petition process, which is likely to skew the again for 5 years. This is only an every there was little correlation between priorities, and I am strongly opposed to any 5-year process. the risk that the EPA staff judged as judicial review of actions taken under a The appeals from that are consoli- most threatening and EPA’s program lookback provision. dated so that there is only one appeal, priorities. Instead, EPA found a cor- It seems to me that is pretty clear as so that the very problems that I was relation between EPA’s priorities and to what the thinking was in March. talking about in my bill, that Sally public opinion on the seriousness of the Further on down in another paragraph, Katzen was talking about in our nego- various environmental threats. ‘‘Over- it says: tiating session, were accepted on terms all, EPA’s priorities appear more close- The Dole bill, however, allows any person suggested by her. ly aligned with public opinion than to petition for a cost-benefit analysis of an It deals with that problem of agency with our estimated risk.’’ existing regulation. If the analysis shows overload and court overload. We did Mr. President, these conclusions were that the regulation does not satisfy the that. I think it was an ingenious sug- confirmed in 1990 by EPA’s Science Ad- decisional criteria of the bill (that is, that gestion that she made. We accepted it the benefits of the regulation outweigh the visory Board, in its report entitled cost) the agency must either revoke the reg- hook, line, and sinker. We said, ‘‘Yes.’’ ‘‘Reducing Risks.’’ The report urged ulation or amend it to conform to the That is the problem with this bill. It is EPA to target its environmental pro- decisional criteria. Denial of the petition by hard to accept ‘‘yes’’ for an answer. tection efforts on the basis of opportu- an agency head is subject to judicial review. Mr. President, this bill, virtually ev- nities for the greatest risk reduction. Needless to say, I strongly disagree erything, virtually all the major areas So, Mr. President, I think we now with this approach. Unless I am read- of opposition to this bill as suggested have the picture. The Glenn-Chafee ing something wrong, the Senator from have been dealt with, and dealt with amendment allows aggrieved parties to Louisiana is stating one thing in successfully. come to Congress, and that is it. Other March and a different thing on the Supermandate—that is, does this than trusting in the judgment—to use floor here today. statute override any other underlying the words of the statute, ‘‘the sole dis- Mr. JOHNSTON. Mr. President, I ap- statutes? We, first of all, made it clear cretion of the head of the agency,’’ preciate that question. in the Dole-Johnston original bill and that is it. You have the sole discretion This is the very provision that we ac- Senators came back and said it is not of the head of the agency, and that is cepted, the advice of Sally Katzen, who clear. Well, we made it absolutely clear exactly what we have right now. is head of OIRA, and other Democrats. by stating it again on terms agreed to

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10102 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 by both the left and the right of this visory committee to assist the agency That was, frankly, the idea of the in- Chamber. Supermandate is solved. head. I am very skeptical of a petition terlocutory appeal. So that, if you do Judicial review, I submit, is solved. process which is likely to skew the pri- not complain about the size of the rule The language is clear. orities, and am strongly opposed to any in the first 60 days, then that is forever The $100 million threshold, that is a judicial review of actions taken under sealed in. And if they do complain and big thing. We had the amendment here a lookback provision.’’ do make the appeal, the agency head and we passed it. It is now part of the Now, that is diametrically opposed to can moot the appeal by simply going process. what the Senator is talking about here back and agreeing to do the risk as- The petition process, we accepted the today. Further, if I might continue just sessment and cost-benefit analysis. It Katzen suggestion, wholly and com- for a second here, I think in all of our is simply meant to help them. pletely, and it is now incorporated. best recollection of those here who But if that is a problem, the whole Now, they may want more. Was it were in some of those negotiating ses- thing can come out. Let me just make Samuel Gompers, the labor leader, sions, Miss Katzen never supported the a remark or two and then I will yield when they asked, ‘‘What does labor petitioner a right to have a major rule the floor. want?’’ and he said, ‘‘More, more, reviewed in 3 years. That is way too Mr. ROTH. Will the Senator yield for more.’’ Whoever said it, they should short and forces an agency to set prior- a question? have said it for this bill. Because they ities by petition and not by what is Mr. JOHNSTON. Yes, of course. come in and ask for things, and we do most important or what is most press- Mr. ROTH. Am I correct in under- them, and somehow it is not enough. ing. standing that I believe every President Effective day—we dealt with the ef- In addition, Dole-Johnston also al- since President Ford has required a fective date. The problem was we have lows for interlocutory appeal of three cost-benefit analysis to be made, but, all the ongoing rules that have to be different issues. No. 1, a major rule. No. despite that general requirement redone. We say, OK, if you have a no- 2, does it require risk assessment? No. through Executive order and otherwise, tice of proposed rulemaking out by 3, does it require regulatory flexibility it has not been adhered to? Is that cor- April 1 of this year, you do not have to analysis? It allows judicial review in rect? go back and redo any cost-benefit or the middle of the rulemaking. Mr. JOHNSTON. There has been a risk assessment. You are home free. Mr. JOHNSTON. If the Senator would risk assessment rulemaking rule out Now, I think that solves the problem allow me to answer that, first of all, on there—Executive order I should say— because if you just started with a no- the reg flex, I did not support the reg under every President since President tice of proposed rulemaking since April flex. A big bipartisan vote of 58 votes Ford. 1, you got plenty of time to incorporate approved reg flex. By the way, I have a copy of it here. that in your bill. I really do not think it is workable. The problem is that it is consensual as Superfund—Mr. President, one of the But the two Senators from Georgia, well, and it is generally ignored, as my toughest issues in this bill as to which NUNN and COVERDELL, have indicated friend suggests. there was a huge amount of disagree- that they would work on this and try Mr. ROTH. That is the point I am ment, I very strongly sided with the to relieve the burden. trying to make. It is consensual under Senator from Ohio in thinking that all Let me tell the Senator from Ohio, current conditions, and the Glenn- of this environmental cleanup, all of that is not the fault of this Senator. I Chafee would make no change, it would these Superfund provisions ought to be suspect that if by any chance the continue to be consensual. Is that cor- out of here. And we accepted. As a mat- Glenn-Chafee amendment got adopted, rect? ter of fact, we did it by unanimous con- that it would have the Nunn-Coverdell Mr. JOHNSTON. It would even more sent. We probably should have had a amendment bit. Do not criticize Dole- clearly be consensual under those be- vote to have seared that into the mem- Johnston for having Nunn-Coverdell. I cause they make sure, and they say, ory of our colleagues, but at least we was not for it, and the Senator would ‘‘in sole discretion of the agency head,’’ did it. Superfund is gone. Sayonara. get it if he had it. and then they go back, under section The sunshine amendment—the Sen- With respect to the interlocutory ap- 625, and ensure that there is no appeal ator from Ohio suggested it. We accept- peal on the size of the rule, whether it from the exercise of sole discretion. I ed it. It is done. Now, it is, I am sure, is a $100-million rule or whether it is do not know how you could otherwise not enough. I am sure that there is not one that requires a risk assessment be- have an appeal from the exercise of enough we can do to satisfy some peo- cause it pertains to health, safety, and sole discretion, but they make sure ple, other than to make this bill solely the environment, I had said all along that there is no appeal. It is non- in the discretion of the agency heads, that was a proposal which I put in. It enforceable. It is sort of the honor sys- because that in effect is what Glenn- was not in the original Dole amend- tem, or I should say the buddy system, Chafee does. Solely in the discretion, ment. It was meant to give agency the bureaucratic buddy system. not reviewable by the court, do it if heads flexibility and help. And if that Mr. ROTH. So, in a very real way, the you want to, but if you did not want to, is a real problem, it can come out. I adoption of the Glenn-Chafee legisla- do not bother. think those who criticize the interlocu- tion would mean no significant change, And you have plenty of redress by tory appeal do not understand it. I at least as far as cost-benefit is con- coming to the Congress. mean, it is meant so agency heads will cerned? Mr. GLENN. Would the Senator know at the end of 60 days whether Mr. JOHNSTON. The Senator has put yield? That is what the Senator argued they are going to have a challenge on it very, very well. No significant for in his letter. whether it is a major rule. change. And your recourse, according Mr. JOHNSTON. Not that, no, indeed. The problem you have now—for ex- to the Senator from Ohio, is to come to Mr. GLENN. Yes. I read it into the ample, we had hearings on NEPA. If Congress. letter a little while ago. I will ask any- the Senator would follow through with Mr. ROTH. As the distinguished Sen- body to reread that to see if this is not me on this, we had hearings on NEPA ator from Louisiana already pointed a change in position. and we found that EPA is spending $100 out, that is what we are doing now. It Mr. JOHNSTON. I have never said million a year on NEPA studies. As the is a fact—is it not a fact that the Vice this ought to be consensual, that it Senator knows, an environmental im- President, the head of OIRA, and oth- ought to be solely in the discretion of pact statement is much more detailed ers, have said that there are bad rules the agency head. Never have said that. and, in turn, much more expensive on the books and something needs to Never believed that. It simply is not so. than an environmental impact assess- be done? Is that not correct? I think we have delivered very, very ment. But they always do an environ- Mr. JOHNSTON. That is exactly cor- well on this letter of mine. mental impact statement rather than rect. But they say, trust us, we will do Mr. GLENN. This position, I submit an assessment because they do not them in our sole discretion. to my friend from Louisiana, is 180 de- want to wait until the end of all this Mr. ROTH. But that is the problem; grees opposed. ‘‘To help set priorities study and rulemaking and what have it has not been done. Is that not cor- for the review, I prefer some sort of ad- you and have to go back and redo it. rect?

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10103 Mr. JOHNSTON. That is, even ac- to watch what goes on in the agencies make decisions by the date required shall be cording to EPA’s own studies. They and say we will bring it back. considered final agency action. had one study in 1987 that determined The Senator from Louisiana is abso- Under the Glenn-Chafee bill, rules would that risks conformed—the EPA study lutely correct. We always have the not automatically ‘‘sunset.’’ Instead, the agency would be required to publish a notice in 1987 entitled, ‘‘Unfinished Business’’ right in Congress to do something like of rulemaking to terminate a rule. says that they ‘‘systematically failed this if we want to pass separate legisla- § 625(e)(1)(C)(iv). to properly rank risks.’’ They ranked tion. But that takes a lot of time. It is 4. JURISDICTION AND JUDICIAL REVIEW time consuming, it could go on for a them according to public opinion rath- Clarity of limitation on judicial review.— er than science. whole session of Congress. It could go Section 625(a) and (b) of the Dole-Johnston Then they came back 3 years later, in on for another year. What we did is bill (p. 38) affirmatively grant jurisdiction to 1990, had another study from EPA’s provide, in both pieces of legislation, review ‘‘any claims of noncompliance with Science Advisory Board, and said they time restraints by which Congress has this subchapter and subchapter III.’’ While were continuing to do the same thing. to complete its action. In other words, compliance is subject to judicial review I submit they are continuing to do any authorizing committee can call ‘‘only in accordance with this section,’’ sub- the same thing today. And this same back a rule or regulation for reconsid- section 625(d) arguably permits broad judi- crowd is coming in and saying, trust cial review. eration before it goes into effect. I By contrast, the Glenn-Chafee bill clearly us, we are doing it right, and no change really do not see how there could be a states there is no judicial review except as needs to be made. better protection than that. I do not provided therein. § 623(a), p. 13. Section 623 of Mr. ROTH. As I understand it, and of know what else there is that would be the Glenn-Chafee bill is very clear con- course none of us have had a chance to needed. cerning what is reviewable and what is not. review that carefully, the new lan- Let me read some things into the Procedural errors.—Section 625 of the guage of the Glenn-Chafee bill—but es- RECORD that apply to this judicial re- Dole-Johnston bill is unclear as to whether sentially what they have done is taken view: procedural errors are reviewable. It states the teeth out of the legislation that that ‘‘failure to comply’’ may be considered JUDICIAL REVIEW PROVISIONS IN GLENN- by the court solely to determine ‘‘whether was reported out by the Governmental CHAFEE AND DOLE-JOHNSTON VERSIONS OF the final agency action is arbitrary and ca- Affairs Committee? S. 343—A COMPARATIVE APPROACH pricious or an abuse of discretion (or unsup- Mr. JOHNSTON. That is exactly 1. RULEMAKING FILE REQUIREMENTS AND ported by substantial evidence where that right. The Roth bill, which came out REVIEW standard is otherwise required by law.’’ unanimously, out of Governmental Af- The Dole-Johnston bill amends the A.P.A. 625(d), p. 39 fairs, had a lot of teeth. The Senator to add elaborate rulemaking file require- The use of the words ‘‘failure to comply’’ and I have talked about that. My own ments to all notice-and-comment rule- in at least three places in section 625 sug- view was I liked some of the teeth. I making; these sections contain their own gests procedural errors are reviewable. The limitation of review to the ‘‘arbitrary thought some of the other teeth were confusing judicial review provision [553(m), p. 12] and would encourage lawsuits over the and capricious’’ or ‘‘abuse of discretion’’ test too sharp. adequacy of the file and whether items were may not be sufficient to keep courts from re- Mr. ROTH. The Senator is partly placed in the file as quickly as possible. Ad- viewing alleged agency non-compliance just right. ditionally, the Dole-Johnston bill would as they otherwise would under the A.P.A. Mr. JOHNSTON. But no need to change the standards of review for rules That was the view of one court in a case worry, all of those teeth are gone. You issued under notice-and-comment; it would where Congress limited review of agency pro- do not even have false teeth here. add 5 U.S.C. § 706(a)(2)(F) to require that the cedural error to those which rendered the Mr. ROTH. So this, in a sense, would factual basis for a rule have ‘‘substantial agency action arbitrary and capricious. That be an exercise in futility. support’’ in the rulemaking file. See discus- court had difficulty understanding the limi- sion below. tation as violation of procedure is often re- Mr. JOHNSTON. This is a waste of The Glenn-Chafee bill does not include garded as rendering the action arbitrary and time. If you want to kill this bill, enact these troublesome provisions. capricious. Small Refiner Lead Phase-Down this Glenn-Chafee amendment, beat 2. JUDICIAL REVIEW OF SCHEDULING REVIEW/ Task Force v. U.S. E.P.A., 705 F.2d, 521 (D.C. your chest, feel good about it. It has LOOKBACK Cir. 1983). See also, Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Assn. of U.S. v. E.P.A., 768 F. 2d 385 (D.C. Cir. 1985) risk assessment in the title of the bill, Section 623(e) (p. 30) of the Dole-Johnston (statutory test of action in excess of statu- but it amounts to nothing, zero. bill provides for judicial review of agency tory authority same standard as arbitrary Mr. ROTH. I congratulate the distin- non-compliance with the process for sched- and capricious). guished Senator from Louisiana for his uling of review of existing rules. However, The Glenn-Chafee bill, by contrast, makes the section does not clearly limit judicial re- very penetrating analysis. it clear that courts are not to review the un- view to only the reasonableness of the sched- Mr. JOHNSTON. I thank my col- derlying steps and procedures leading up to ule. The scope of review is broad—i.e., ‘‘agen- league and yield the floor. the cost-benefit analysis and risk assess- cy compliance or noncompliance with the re- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- ment. Section 623(d) expressly states that quirements of this section’’ and review exists ator from Ohio. ‘‘. . . the court shall not review to determine ‘‘notwithstanding section 625.’’ Review is whether the analysis or assessment con- Mr. GLENN. Mr. President, this was limited to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. formed to the particular requirements of this an interesting discussion. It shows the Review of final agency action must be filed chapter.’’ § 623(d), p. 14. The Glenn-Chafee bill complexities of this legislation and within 60 days of publication of the final would permit the court to consider the ac- why we should not be rushed on the rule. However, the section does not preclude tual documents produced by the agency to interlocutory review. floor of the Senate putting it into ef- evaluate cost-benefit analysis and risk as- Section 625(c) of the Glenn-Chafee bill (p. fect. We should be considering all these sessment in determining the reasonableness 18) provides for judicial review of the agency things and all the legal ramifications of the agency action but not to permit re- regulatory review but precludes review of of it in every respect. view of the underlying steps to development agency decisions whether to place a rule on of the risk assessment or cost-benefit anal- I come back, though, that if the the schedule and the deadlines for comple- ysis. Agency passes something that is con- tion. sidered to be not OK, or tries to put Judicial ‘‘second-guessing’’ of agency judg- 3. REVIEW OF DECISION TO ‘‘SUNSET’’ RULE something into effect, that anyone can ment and scientific expertise The Dole-John- Section 623(g)(3) (p. 33–34) of the Dole-John- ston bill creates great risk that courts will petition the Agency and say, ‘‘We ston bill grants interested parties the right second guess agency judgments and sci- think this should go back to Con- to petition the D.C. Circuit Count of Appeals entific determinations which go into the gress,’’ or notify their Congressman, to extend the period for review of a rule up cost-benefit analysis, risk assessment, and notify their Senator, we can call it to two years and to grant equitable relief to application of the prescriptive decisional cri- back. prevent termination where, inter alia, termi- teria. I do not see yet why that is not—that nation of the rule would not be in the public The Dole-Johnston bill contains many pre- is where the responsibility lies, is right interest. scriptive requirements which tell agencies here. We are the ones who passed the The last sentence of section 623(h) provides what they must consider and what they can- that the decision of an agency to not modify not. However, many of these factors are very original legislation. What we have done a major rule ‘‘shall constitute final agency difficult in application. Yet consideration of is, for the first time, put into play a action for the purposes of judicial review.’’ factors Congress has decided are not to be specific arrangement. We are detailing Section 623(j)(2) similarly states that failure considered has been cited as a basis for re- it in legislation. We are inviting people to promulgate an amended major rule or to versal under arbitrary and capricious review.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10104 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 Citizens to Preserve Overton Park v. Volpe, 401 must constantly be looking over their shoul- or not be able to later rely on them if a chal- U.S. 402, 416 91 S. Ct. 814, 823, 28 L. Ed. 2d 136 der at the possibility of judicial review, it is lenge is raised on judicial review. (1971). clear this will provide many opportunities 7. MULTIPLE OPPORTUNITIES FOR REVIEW S. 343 turns administrative law on its head for challenges to rules by the regulated in- Dole Johnston contains other provisions if it takes away agency’s ability to make dustry. permitting judicial review. Glenn-Chafee policy choices and to have those upheld so By contrast, the Glenn-Chafee bill provides contains other provisions making it clear long as they are reasonable and consistent a range of discretion to the agency decision- that judicial review is not available. See, with the statute being applied. See cases maker in section 622(f) and is much more § 636(d), p. 40, no judicial review of risk as- cited in Small Refiner Lead Phase-Down Task clear that the decisional criteria do not alter sessment guidelines’ development, issuance, Force, 705 F. 2d at 520. If Congress takes away statutory criteria for rulemaking. or publication; § 646 (p. 48), no judicial review an agency’s discretion to make policy 5. INTERLOCUTORY REVIEW OF DETERMINATION of executive oversight authority; § 6(f), p. 70, choices, then special interests challenging a OF ‘‘MAJOR RULE’’ no judicial review of study of comparative rule will argue that an abuse of discretion The Dole-Johnston bill permits interlocu- risk; § 6(f), p. 78, no judicial review of regu- standard permits the court to second-guess tory appeal of an agency decision that a rule latory accounting. the agency’s decision as to what is a ‘‘policy is not a major rule or is not subject to risk 8. GLENN-CHAFEE REDUCES UNCERTAINTY AND judgment’’ and what is ‘‘scientific under- assessment requirements. § 625(e) p. 39. INCREASES DISCRETION AND THEREBY RE- standing.’’ The Glenn-Chafee bill requires ‘‘a clear and DUCES OPPORTUNITIES FOR SUCCESSFUL Courts are not situated to ‘‘second-guess’’ convincing showing that the determination CHALLENGES TO AGENCY RULES the prescriptive requirements of the Dole- is erroneous in light of the information Johnston bill. Courts are not well situated to An example where Glenn-Chafee gets rid of available to the agency at the time the agen- review the underlying basis of cost-benefit a problem is the effective date provision, § 8, cy made the determination. § 623(c). It does analyses and risk assessments against the p. 70. By making it clear that the section not authorize interlocutory review. prescriptive standards of the bill. does not apply to pending rules and by pro- ‘‘. . . the crowded states of judicial dockets 6. DOLE-JOHNSTON AMENDS THE APA STANDARDS viding a reasonable grace period, this elimi- offers a highly practical reason why judges OF JUDICIAL REVIEW FOR ALL AGENCY nates a troublesome problem for pending will not, and probably should not, devote the RULES—GLENN-CHAFEE DOES NOT rules. considerable time and effort needed to re- Factual basis for rules—5 U.S.C. § 706(a)(2)(F) 9. REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY view a several-thousand-page agency record, The Dole—Johnston bill amends 5 U.S.C. Glenn-Chafee eliminates some of the prob- informed by a thorough understanding of the 706(a)(2) by adding (F) which requires courts lems with regulatory flexibility under the substance of risk-related regulatory prob- to set aside agency action, findings and con- Dole-Johnston bill. Section 611 (p. 48) avoids lems, in order to see whether or not that clusions found to be ‘‘without substantial inconsistent statutes of limitation where agency determination was arbitrary.’’ support in the rulemaking file, viewed as a that for the underlying rule is less than 1 Justice Breyer, Breaking the Vicious Circle: whole, for the asserted or necessary factual year. It provides that court may stay the Toward Effective Risk Regulation (Cam- basis, as distinguished from the policy or rule if a failure is not corrected within 90 bridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press legal basis, of a rule adopted in a proceeding days but does not automatically terminate a 1973), pp. 58–59 (describing why courts are not subject to section 553. . .’’ rule if not corrected in that period. Its judi- institutionally suited to resolve risk issues). The Dole-Johnston version of S. 343 also cial review standard is more limited, and it Prejudicial error [Note: Neither bill con- requires the final notice of rulemaking to ex- does not contain the decisional criteria of tains a prejudicial error provision in this plain how the factual conclusions upon the Dole-Johnston bill. section. However, Senator Johnston says which the rule is based are substantially sup- Mr. President, I think this indicates concerns with the decisional criteria and ju- ported in the rulemaking file. 5 U.S.C. to all who might be paying attention dicial review provisions are solved by the § 553(g)(4), p. 8). The ‘‘rulemaking file’’ must to this debate in the Chamber today prejudicial error test in 5 U.S.C. 706. This is identify factual and methodological material how very, very complex and how far- not an adequate protection.] that pertains directly to the rulemaking and The problems with judicial review of the was considered by the agency or submitted reaching some of these decisions are. It many prescriptive requirements of the Dole- to or prepared by or for the agency in con- is not something we can rush through. Johnston bill are also not cured by the ‘‘prej- nection with the rulemaking. § 553(j)(3)(d), p. I know it has been stated we want to udicial error’’ test in 5 U.S.C. § 706. That test, 10. move forward as rapidly as possible, which is unchanged from the current APA, Position: The standards for judicial review and I agree with that. But I also want has been described as requiring remand if the in the APA should not be changed. Agencies to make sure that while we are setting court ‘‘cannot be sure that under the correct should be able to rely on their knowledge up a new regulatory review process, we procedures the Agency would have reached and expertise in informal notice-and-com- at the same time make every protec- the same conclusion . . .’’ Weyerhaeuser Co. ment rulemaking. Review should be on an v. Costle, 590 F.2d 1011, 1031 (D.C. Cir. 1978). arbitrary and capricious standard, not re- tion for whatever existing law deserves That case invalidated a pollution emission quire that the factual basis have ‘‘substan- that kind of protection, and before we limitation rule for failure to provide ade- tial support’’ on a limited record. This new make changes that we make very cer- quate notice for comment on agency data standard will create much litigation in an tain we do it in a way which protects even though petitioner could not show that established area of the law. the health and benefit and safety of the recomputation of the data would have made This standard may encourage judicial in- American people. the process so costly as to invalidate the trusion into agency’s scientific determina- Mr. President, I would go further in limitation as an abuse of discretion. tions. In Corrosion Pipe Fittings v. E.P.A., 947 talking a little bit more about the Clogging the Courts.—The language of sec- F.2d 1201, 1213–1214 (5th Cir. 1991), the court cost-benefit analysis and the decisional tion 625 will encourage years of litigation be- held that the ‘‘substantial evidence’’ test fore even the question of what is reviewable used in the Toxic Substances Control Act for criteria. is resolved. This bill gives regulated industry notice-and-comment rulemaking was a more Glenn-Chafee has no ‘‘decisional cri- many hooks to delay rulemaking and then to rigorous standard than the ‘‘arbitrary and teria requiring agencies to pass cost- challenge the final result. If those steps are capricious’’ standard applied now to informal benefit tests before issuing a rule.’’ subject to judicial review, there will be every rulemaking and showed that Congress want- Our response to some of the charges incentive to stop regulation through com- ed the courts to scrutinize the agency’s ac- under that are, No. 1: Both the Glenn- plex and lengthy judicial review proceeding. tions more closely. The Court then proceeded Chafee and Dole-Johnston substitutes When this is combined with the increased to apply close scrutiny to the agency’s cost- require agencies to do the same type of time and cost of rulemaking under this bill, benefit calculations and invalidated the as- cost-benefit analysis. We believe in the result may be gridlock. This frustration bestos rule that had taken ten years to de- of law is not a desirable goal. velop. 947 F. 2d at 1223–1230. making agencies do such analyses to Judicial review of whether the agency New section 706(a)(2)(F) requires the agen- better understand what the costs and chose the ‘‘least cost alternative,’’ given the cy to amass a record for potential litigation benefits are of a rule. There is no prob- great differences in underlying data, will in every case. It calls into question the prin- lem with that with either bill. The dif- generate challenges.—The Dole-Johnston bill ciple that an agency can utilize its knowl- ferences, though, between our sub- takes away agency discretion and mandates edge and expertise. stitutes is how they use cost-benefit that all costs and benefits be turned into one It gives well-healed parties the oppor- analysis. number and that the agency select the ‘‘least tunity to skew the results on judicial review Glenn-Chafee uses cost-benefit anal- cost alternative’’ of those available under 624 by salting the rulemaking file with com- ysis as a tool and not just as a final (b) or (c). Yet some say that cost-benefit ments and materials which support their po- analyses may be off by a magnitude of hun- sition. Even in cases where the agency posi- decisional criteria. There is no lan- dreds. This makes it difficult for agencies to tion has an adequate factual basis in sci- guage in the Glenn-Chafee substitute achieve any certainty concerning applica- entific literature, this standard might re- that states, ‘‘An agency shall not pro- tion of cost-benefit analyses. If agencies quire the agency to list all sources in the file mulgate a rule,’’ unless it passes a

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10105 cost-benefit test. Glenn-Chafee re- sense than decisional criteria. It does Most experts who have examined the quires agencies to provide an expla- not hand over Congress’ responsibil- regulatory process, regardless of back- nation and certification of whether, ities to the agencies. ground or political bent, have con- one, benefits of the rule justify the cost Mr. President, I yield the floor. cluded that the regulatory process is and, two, the rule achieves the objec- Mr. ROTH addressed the Chair. seriously out of whack and must be re- tives of the rulemaking in a more cost- The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. formed. Few if any of my colleagues effective manner than the alternatives. FRIST). The Senator from Delaware. would dare to say publicly that we If it cannot make such a determina- Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I say to my should be happy with the status quo. distinguished friend and colleague from tion, it has to explain why not. The So the question is, why is there so Ohio that I have been in negotiations Dole-Johnston substitute has much controversy about the S. 343? The and discussions with representatives of decisional criteria that prohibit using answer is simple—it is very hard to his side of the aisle in an effort to re- a rule unless, one, the benefits justify change the status quo in a significant vise the decisional criteria with re- the costs, the rule uses flexible alter- way. It is a Herculean task to reform spect to the least cost. I am sympa- natives to the extent practicable, the one of the most untamed frontiers of thetic to the concept of utilizing a test rule is the ‘‘least-cost alternative’’ big Government—a massive regulatory of cost-effectiveness or greater net ben- that satisfies the objectives of the stat- machine that costs the average Amer- ute, and if a risk assessment is re- efit to avoid some of the problems raised in his discussion of this section. ican family about $6,000 per year. quired, the rule is likely to ‘‘signifi- I wonder if the distinguished Senator That explains why an earlier attempt cantly reduce the risks addressed by is willing to proceed along those lines at regulatory reform, S. 1080, which the rule.’’ at this time in developing such an passed the Senate 94–0 in 1982, was Why the decisional criteria are prob- amendment? killed in the House. And that explains lematic: No. 1, cost-benefit analysis is Mr. GLENN. Yes. As I understand it, why people are accusing supporters of an imprecise science. Cost and benefits what the Senator was proposing was S. 343 of wanting to expose the public are hard to quantify and are loaded that there are some negotiations going to tainted meat, breast cancer, and with assumptions, and some econo- on in this regard, and we would be will- contaminated drinking water. None of mists might even say, tell me what an- ing to proceed with further negotia- this is remotely true, and it does not swer you want and I will give you the tions with regard to cost effective as belong on the Senate floor. right numbers for costs and benefits. opposed to least cost; is that correct? We wasted days last week on Agencies should not be required to Mr. ROTH. That is correct. meritless arguments that S. 343 needs decide whether or not to promulgate a Mr. GLENN. Certainly, I always want specific exemptions for meat inspec- rule based just on a cost-benefit test. to negotiate on these things and see tion rules, mammography rules, and so No. 2, another reason why decisional what we can come out with. on. The fact is, these arguments got a criteria are problematic: Agencies Mr. ROTH. I think it important we lot of press, but such exemptions were would have to choose the least-cost al- proceed on this matter, because it is an not needed. The Dole-Johnston com- ternative. We should require agencies important one, and that we proceed as promise has a clear exemption for to choose the most cost-effective rule, rapidly as possible. To be candid, I am threats to human health and safety, as not just the cheapest. The distin- disappointed that we have not been well as other emergencies. guished Senator from Louisiana has able to address this problem on the In fact, the Glenn bill itself does not pointed to the out for agencies. They floor. have such exemptions, because, as any- can choose something other than a Mr. GLENN. I think what the distin- one recognizes who knows how these least-cost solution in the event of ‘‘sci- guished Senator from Delaware is ad- bills work, such exceptions are not entific, technical or economic uncer- dressing is one of the most important needed. tainties or nonquantifiable benefits to items in all of this legislative package. The truth is, if you compare the Dole health, safety or the environment.’’ I think it is important that we get that bill and the Glenn bill section by sec- But what if there are certain quan- one ironed out, because it is a major tion, they look a lot alike. At bottom, tifiable benefits? Agencies would still issue in how we deal with regulatory there are only a few key differences. have to put out the least-cost rule, and reform. I agree with him. that just makes no sense. Even if some- Mr. ROTH. I thank the distinguished But these few differences are critical to thing is more cost-effective, beneficial Senator for his comments. effective regulatory reform. to the people of this country, we still Mr. President, I rise to call upon my First, meaningful regulatory reform have to go with whatever the alter- colleagues to support meaningful regu- must change future rules. The key to native was that was solely least cost. latory reform. I want to explain why I ensuring that new rules will be effi- That makes no sense. believe that the Dole-Johnston com- cient and cost-effective is to have an Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, will the promise, S. 343, is the key to changing effective cost-benefit test. Senator yield? the status quo, and why the Glenn sub- The Dole bill has a focused cost-ben- Mr. GLENN. I am almost finished. stitute is not the solution to reforming efit test. The decisional criteria in sec- Another minute or two and I will be the regulatory process. tion 624 ensures that the benefits of a glad to yield. I believe that regulatory reform is rule will justify its cost, unless prohib- No. 3, agencies must prove that a one of the most important issues we ited by the underlying law authorizing rule significantly reduces risk. The face. The reason is that, overall, Gov- the rule. Section 624 is not a superman- FAA tells us, however, that some of ernment regulation has an enormous date; it does not trump existing law. It their safety rules, while quite impor- impact on our lives—for better or for simply tells the agency, if possible and tant and quite effective, may not pass worse. If regulations are well-designed allowed by law, to issue regulations the ‘‘significant’’ test. and implemented, they can do a lot of whose benefits justify their costs. That No. 4, if agencies determine that the good—by making a cleaner environ- is plain common sense. benefits of a rule do not justify its ment, safer workplaces, and safer prod- In contrast, the Glenn bill has no costs, that rule should come back to ucts. But, at the same time, regula- cost-benefit decisional criteria. The Congress. And that is a key element of tions can be very costly, and, if poorly bill requires that a cost-benefit anal- this; that rule should come back to designed, too costly—by raising prices, ysis be done, but the bill does not re- Congress if the agency determines that taxes, and paperwork; diminishing quire that the cost-benefit analysis be the benefits do not justify its costs. wages; eating up time; and wasting op- used or that the rule will be affected by Agencies should not be the ones to de- portunities to do better things with the cost-benefit analysis. cide whether to issue a rule based on a our limited resources. The cumulative The agency only has to publish a de- cost-benefit test. That rule should regulatory burden costs about $600 bil- termination whether the benefits of a come back to Congress to decide lion per year. I believe that, if this rule will justify its costs and whether whether a rule should go forward or massive regulatory machine were re- the regulation is cost-effective. But the not, and that is provided. Congres- tooled, it could do much more good at Glenn bill does not push regulators to sional veto, as it is called, makes more less cost. issue rules whose benefits actually do

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10106 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 justify their costs. I have always be- Moreover, there is no judicial review of the bill would be optional by the lieved that an effective regulatory re- of deadlines for completing the review agency, the same way it is optional for form bill should have a stronger cost- of any rules. No matter how irrational them to comply with the Executive benefit test. a rule is, no matter how many people it order that now requires these analyses. Some of my colleagues, including is burdening, an agency does not have Senator GLENN has claimed that his Senators GLENN and LEVIN, have com- to review it. If the agency happens to bill is essentially the same as S. 291— plained repeatedly about the least cost put the rule on the schedule, nothing the regulatory reform bill I introduced component of the decisional criteria. prevents the agency from procrasti- in January and which received the bi- Section 624 of S. 343 says, whether or nating for 11 years. Again, the only partisan support of the Committee on deadline is a modest 11-year deadline not the benefits of a rule can justify its Governmental Affairs. Although the for reviewing the rule. costs, the agency should select the original Glenn bill was similar to the least cost alternative the achieves the The third point I want to emphasize is that effective regulatory reform Roth bill, the current Glenn substitute objectives of the statute. seriously differs from the Roth bill. I think there is some merit to the must be enforceable to be effective. For example, Senator GLENN has seri- concern that the least cost standard is That means there has to be some op- portunity for judicial review of the re- ously weakened the review of rules pro- too limited. If a rule costs a little more vision. than the least cost alternative but pro- quirements of the legislation, just as vides much greater benefits, I believe there is with almost any law Congress The Roth bill required agencies to re- that the agency should pick the much passes. S. 343 strikes a balance by al- view all major rules in a 10-year period, more beneficial rule—even if the bene- lowing limited, but effective, judicial with a possible 5-year extension, or the fits are quantifiable or are not environ- review. I should note at the outset that rules would sunset, or terminate. The mental, health or safety benefits. Why S. 343 has been mischaracterized as a revised Glenn substitute lacks any firm not? Why not spend a little more to get lawyer’s dream and a litigation mo- requirement about the number of rules much greater benefits for the public? rass. In fact, S. 343 provides less judi- to be reviewed. Yet, while I share the concerns of cial review than is normally provided Worse still, Senator GLENN has weak- many of my colleagues, I have not been for any law that Congress passes. ened the judicial review provision that able to work out a solution. For weeks, S. 343 carves away from the standard was in the Roth bill and that originally I have tried to work out two solu- level of judicial review provided by the appeared in the Glenn bill. Section Administrative Procedure Act, which tions—a most cost-effective test or a 623(e) of the Roth bill and the original has existed for almost 50 years. The greater net benefits test—with my Glenn bill stated that the cost-benefit limited judicial review provided by S. other colleagues. I believe that either analysis and risk assessment ‘‘shall, to 343 will help discourage frivolous law- test is far better than the least cost the extent relevant, be considered by a suits, and that is why S. 343 has limited test with its vague exception for cer- court in determining the legality of the judicial review. At the same time, it tain nonquantifiable benefits. Yet, we agency action.’’ does allow an agency to be held ac- have made no progress, even though countable for complying with the That meant that the court should proponents of the substitute continue major requirements of the bill. focus on the cost-benefit analysis and to complain about the least cost stand- An agency’s compliance or non- risk assessment in determining wheth- ard. I think it is time we worked this compliance with the provisions of S. er the rule was arbitrary and capri- out in a bipartisan fashion. 343 can be considered by a court to cious. Now, the Glenn substitute Now, I want to return to a second some degree. The court can, based on strikes that language. The Glenn sub- point about regulatory reform: effec- the whole rulemaking record, deter- stitute merely asks the agency do the tive regulatory reform cannot be pro- mine whether the agency sufficiently cost-benefit analysis and risk assess- spective only; it must look back to re- complied with the cost-benefit analysis ment, but the agency can do a sloppy form old rules already on the books. and risk assessment requirements of S. job. The agency also does not have to The Dole-Johnston compromise con- 343 so that the rule passes muster act upon the analyses and issue a rule tains a balanced, workable, and fair under the arbitrary and capricious whose benefits justify its costs. In fact, resolution of how agencies should re- standard. The arbitrary and capricious the agency simply can ignore the cost- view existing rules. Agencies may se- standard is very deferential to the benefit analysis. And nobody can do lect for themselves any particular rules agency. A court would uphold the rule much about an agency that is doing a that they think need reexamination, unless that agency’s cost-benefit anal- bad job. For a reviewing court, the while allowing interested parties to pe- ysis or risk assessment was so flawed analyses are just some more pieces of tition the agency to add an overlooked that the rule itself was arbitrary and paper among the many thousands of rule. To ensure that only a limited capricious. The court would not strike pieces of paper in the rulemaking number of petitions will be filed, S. 343 down a rule merely because there were record. limits petitions to major rules and sets some minor procedural missteps in the The court does not have to focus on a high burden of proof—petitioners cost-benefit analysis or risk assess- must show a substantial likelihood the cost-benefit analysis in deter- ment. mining whether the rule makes sense. that the rule could not satisfy the cost- In contrast, the Glenn substitute, as Mr. President, that is not real regu- benefit decisional criteria of section now redrafted, does not permit mean- latory reform. That is protecting the 624. ingful judicial review of the risk as- bureaucracy at the expense of the pub- This is an efficient and workable sessment or cost-benefit analysis. The lic. method to review problematic rules. Glenn substitute only requires a court The Glenn substitute, on the other to invalidate a rule if the cost-benefit I should also mention that the Glenn hand, makes the review of agency rules analysis or risk assessment was not bill seriously weakens the risk assess- a voluntary undertaking. There are no done at all. But the Glenn substitute ment provisions of the Roth bill. The firm requirements for action—no set does not really allow the court to con- Glenn substitute significantly carves rules to be reviewed, no binding stand- sider whether the cost-benefit analysis back on the number of agencies and ards, no meaningful deadlines. The or risk assessment was done properly. programs that would have to comply Glenn substitute simply asks that, Indeed, Senator GLENN has weakened with the risk assessment requirements. every 5 years, the agencies issue a the language originally in his bill so Moreover, the risk assessment lan- schedule of rules that each agency in that now substantial portions of his guage itself is weakened. As just one its sole discretion thinks merits re- bill are irrelevant to the extent that a example, section 634(c)(1) of the Glenn view. It does not require any particular court could not require the agency to language reverses the standard inter- number of rules to be reviewed. And, if perform the cost-benefit analysis, risk pretation of how defaults should be someone asks the agency to review a assessment, or peer review in the man- used. The substitute relies on a minor- particular rule, there is no judicial re- ner prescribed by the bill. ity comment in the National Academy view of a decision declining to place Compliance with cost-benefit anal- of Science report, Science and Judg- the rule on the schedule. ysis and risk assessment requirements ment. That is, the Glenn substitute

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10107 prefers default assumption when rel- The Dole-Johnston compromise Excuse me, it is not subsection (e). It evant data is available. That is not merely directs regulators to issue regu- is subsection (f). It says it shall hold what good scientists would do. And lations whose benefits justify their unlawful an action: that is not what the majority of the costs. But the bill does not override ex- Without substantial support in the rule- National Academy would recommend. isting law. This should not be a radical making file viewed as a whole, for the as- Finally, Senator GLENN has weak- idea in the White House or on Capitol serted or necessary factual basis. ened the definition of ‘‘major rule.’’ Hill. I do not believe that the American This, as I understand it, is a principle There are no narrative provisions people think it is radical to ask that of law which is about a century old. under which OMB could list certain the benefits of regulations justify their And this codifies that view. It was first problematic rules as major rules sub- costs. proposed by Senator BUMPERS, and I ject to full analysis. Similarly, review of existing rules hope Senator BUMPERS will come over Now, as I mentioned, if you compare has been required for almost 15 years and defend this provision. S. 343 with the Glenn substitute, you under Executive order. Yet, there is a From my own point of view, it adds, would see that, section-by-section, lot of evidence that getting agencies to really, very little. It has very little to they look similar. Both have provisions review existing rules is a lot easier said do with risk assessment. It has nothing for cost-benefit analysis, risk assess- than done. In the first annual report on to do with risk assessment or cost-ben- ment, review of existing rules, com- President Clinton’s Executive Order efit analysis because that provision parative risk analysis, market mecha- 12866, OIRA Administrator Sally does not relate to risk assessment or nisms and performance standards, re- Katzen admitted that bureaucratic in- cost-benefit analysis. That relates to form of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, centives make reviewing rules a dif- the Administrative Procedure Act ap- congressional review of rules, and regu- ficult undertaking. In discussing the peals, which are outside of cost-benefit latory accounting. ‘‘lookback’’ requirement of Executive analysis or risk assessment. But without a focused and effective Order 12866, Administrator Katzen said: So it is really, in my view, not a very cost-benefit test, there is nothing to It had proven more difficult to institute important issue in this bill. I hope and require future rules to be justifiable than we had anticipated....[A]gencies are believe that Senators will be able to and cost-effective. And without an ef- focused on meeting obligations for new rules, get together on that issue. fective lookback provision with real re- often under statutory or court deadlines, at Mr. President, I believe that we have quirements, there is nothing to ensure a time when staff and budgets are being re- accommodated virtually every com- that old rules already on the books will duced; under these circumstances, it is hard plaint with this bill, save some of those be reformed. Finally, without effective to muster resources for the generally thank- which we have debated. We have not judicial review, we may as well not less task of rethinking and rewriting current yet satisfied everybody on toxic relief regulatory programs. have a statute at all—we could keep inventory. But I believe that is also in the existing Executive order 12866 that After extensive review of the regu- the total scheme of things, not a ter- governs regulatory planning and re- latory process, Vice President GORE ribly important provision of this bill. view. concluded that ‘‘thousands upon thou- But we have satisfied the critics of But the whole reason for regulatory sands of outdated, overlapping regula- the bill on the question of superman- reform legislation is that the Execu- tions remain in place.’’ The long but date. That was always the hot button tive orders for regulatory review, disappointing record of executive in this bill. The House bill has a super- issued by every President since Presi- branch review efforts necessitates a mandate; that is, under the House bill, dent Ford, have not been working well legislative mandate. But this must be a you can change existing standards enough. There is widespread consensus real mandate, with real requirements. under existing law. Expressly, they that the regulatory process is broken As redrafted, the Glenn substitute does override existing law. and that firm action is needed. There is not adequately address this pressing Mr. President, we have made it widespread agreement that many rules problem. The Dole bill will bring real clear—expressly, explicitly clear—that have been issued in violation of the re- change. there is no supermandate in this bill. quirements of the Executive orders. The Dole compromise reflects many We have straightened out the judicial Many rules could not be justified if comments and suggestions from nu- review provisions, so there is no inde- scrutinized under a cost-benefit test. merous Senators of both parties, the pendent review of the procedures as op- Yet, Executive orders since President Clinton administration, the American posed to the final agency action. Ford have required cost-benefit anal- Bar Association, and many scholars We have passed the threshold of $100 ysis. The current Executive order of and legal experts. million, the threshold that Senators so President Clinton, No. 12866, similarly In sum, the Dole-Johnston com- insisted upon. It is done. It is in the requires cost-benefit analysis, but promise strikes a balance between re- bill. It is passed. again, there is nothing to ensure that form that is strong but workable. I We have straightened out the peti- the agencies will comply. There is no urge my colleagues to set aside par- tion process so that there is one oppor- effective judicial review in Senator tisan politics and support the effort to tunity to get on the list for review, if GLENN’s substitute to solve this prob- restore common sense to the regu- you were left off. It is 180 days in lem. latory process. length. And, if you miss that 180-day I also should add that many of the Mr. President, I yield back the floor. window, then you are foreclosed for a objections that Senator GLENN and Mr. JOHNSTON. Did the Senator full 5 years. others have raised are off the mark or have a question for me? The appeal from that provision is have already been addressed. First, we Mr. ROTH. No. consolidated. So that the former criti- agree agencies should be required to The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- cism of the Dole bill, the original Dole perform risk assessment and cost-ben- ator from Louisiana. bill, which was that there would be this efit analysis. Second, S. 343 clearly Mr. JOHNSTON. Mr. President, get- multiplicity of appeals, is simply not does not override existing statutory ting back to this question of the scope here on this bill. There is one consoli- criteria. Moreover, S. 343 is not a spe- of review under section 706 of the Ad- dated appeal. It will not overload agen- cial interest bill. It does add a petition ministrative Procedure Act, which is cies or their legal staffs. There will be process to review rules so that the contained in our bill, there is a sub- simply one appeal and one rulemaking work does get done. I should also note section (e), about which there has been action with respect to the schedule. that we did add Senator GLENN’s sun- some comment and argument. Sub- We have dealt with the effective shine provision verbatim. Finally, as I section (e) adds new language as fol- date, so that those ongoing rules, have detailed, we agree with Senator lows, that: which have been in the making for, in GLENN that ‘‘judicial review should be some cases, 2 and 3 years, will not be The reviewing court shall...hold unlaw- available to ensure that final agency ful and set aside an agency action if it is: subject to either cost-benefit or to risk rules are based on adequate analysis.’’ (e)...substantial evidence in a case sub- assessment. They do not have to do it. The Dole-Johnston compromise meets ject to section 556 and 557...and otherwise They are exempted totally. In fact, all these principles. reviewed on the record. rules are exempted from cost-benefit or

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10108 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 from risk assessment, if the original We require the best science available— water? Would that not make more notice of proposed rulemaking was not the best politics, not the best bu- sense? And, of course, those who were filed on or before April 1st, 1995. If it reaucrat, not the pressure group with producing, those who wanted to dump was filed after that, they have ample the most members, not the one that chemicals and effluents and pollution opportunity to do what the law re- can make the most noise, not the one into the air, and those who dumped quires. that can meet the most people at a chemicals into the water, did not want Mr. President, we won the fight on public meeting, but the best science to change the way they did business. Superfund. Superfund environmental available. And we require them to jus- Frankly, it was costly to change the activities are now out of this bill. And tify the cost—not to get the cheapest, way they did business. we have passed the Glenn sunshine not to get the least cost, but to get I have told my colleagues before; I amendment. that which satisfies the requirement of grew up in a town of about 300 to 400 What we have not done is to go along health, safety, or the environment, and people, which is a small town, in North with what the Glenn-Chafee amend- satisfies the uncertainties of science or Dakota. When I was a young boy, my ment now requires, which is to throw data. father ran a service station and farm out any requirements and to make this Mr. President, the Dole-Johnston bill implement dealership, and part of what bill completely consensual, because the is a tightly drawn bill which serves the was done in that service station was Glenn-Chafee substitute is sham re- public well. I hope my colleagues will people would drive in and we would form. If you do not want to have cost- endorse that bill today and vote clo- change the oil in their cars. After we benefit analysis, if you do not want to ture. had changed the oil—we would take the have risk assessment, then vote for the Mr. President, I yield the floor. nut out of the crankcase and drain Glenn-Chafee amendment because it is Mr. DORGAN addressed the Chair. their crankcase of the used oil—it all consensual. If an agency head wants The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- would go into a barrel, and when the to do it in his or her sole discretion, ator from North Dakota is recognized. barrel was full, the barrel was poured then vote to put it in their sole discre- Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I have into a large tank. And when the tank tion. There is no judicial review. There listened for some long while to this de- was full of all of this used oil, we would is no requirement. And you can be sure bate and participated during previous hook the tank up to a little co-op trac- it will not be done. days in this debate on regulatory re- tor and drive up and down Main Street It will be business as usual if you form. of Regent, ND. We had a pipe on the I must say that in the early stages of vote for the Glenn-Chafee amendment. back of that tank with little drip this debate, it was beyond boring. I There is no requirement of meeting a valves on it, and we would drip that mean there are boring debates and then test that the benefits justify the cost. used oil all up and down the Main there are boring debates that are well Oh, to be sure, you must state whether Street of my hometown. the benefits justify the costs, but you beyond the definition of boring. I sup- Why did we do that? Because my do not have to meet that test. You just pose the reason for that is because the hometown did not have paved streets, give the information and go merrily on language of this legislation—and also, and it was a wonderful thing that the your way and nobody can question you. in some respects, the language of the Mr. President, the Dole-Johnston debate itself—is technical and so ar- Farmers Union Oil Co. did for Regent. amendment is a workable, logical, sci- cane and so terribly difficult to under- And for that matter, it was a wonderful entifically sound set of requirements stand. I suspect for that reason it has thing the Regent Garage did for Re- that will put agencies of this Federal not been very interesting. gent. Every so often, when they had Government to a rigorous set of logical Yet the debate itself about regu- enough used oil in their tank, they steps so that we can avoid what we latory reform, or what kind of regula- hooked it behind the tractor and drove have under the present law, which is tions we ought to have in this country, up and down Main Street and dripped regulations not based on science, not is a debate that will affect every single that oil on Main Street to keep the based on real risks, but, as EPA said in American. It is very important, espe- dust down. 1987 in their own study, that systemati- cially this debate as it relates to the That was an old-time version of cally they rate risk according to what safety of what we eat and drink and blacktop, I guess, just drip used oil on the public thinks about those risks as breathe. It relates to the controversy Main Street to keep the dust down. Of opposed to what the scientists think that we have had now for a couple of course, if you caught someone today about those risks. That is a 1987 study decades over how we do things in this riding a little co-op tractor dripping a by EPA, not some industry group, not country. barrel of used oil on Main Street of Re- some right-wing think tank, but EPA’s It was not too many years ago that gent, ND, someone would soon have own study, which said in 1987 in their we did not care much about them on the way to a penitentiary publication entitled ‘‘Unfinished Busi- environmentalism or about environ- someplace because that is a very seri- ness,’’ that their estimations of risk mental concerns. The issue was if you ous violation of Federal law and State were wrong. are going to produce widgets or you are law. You cannot decide to drop oil on In 1990, EPA’s own Science Advisory going to manufacture widgets, you get the main street of a town in order to Board made a new study of the old yourself a manufacturing plant and hold the dust down as we did because study. They made a new study to deter- you start manufacturing widgets, we understand now, many decades mine whether the old study was cor- whatever they are, and you can dump later, we were contaminating and pol- rect. And they stated that the 1987 the pollution into the airshed; you can luting and ruining our water supply. It study was correct; that is, EPA has not drop your raw chemicals into the wa- was not the right thing to do. We did been using science or the proper esti- ters and streams and lakes. It just did not know it at the time; we thought we mation of risks. not matter because you were providing were doing a good thing at the time. To bring science into the proposition jobs and producing widgets. And, of The people of my hometown thought it is not to erode health standards. It is course, what you were doing was pass- was wonderful. But we were polluting not to allow E. coli in meat. It is not to ing the costs of this manufacturing the water supply, contaminating make people less safe. To the contrary, down the road to someone else who groundwater. the way we determine whether some- someday would be required to clean up So we have rules and regulations one is at risk in the health, safety, or the air and those streams and rivers that say you cannot do that. If you are the environment is by a scientific eval- and lakes. going to take used oil out of cars, you uation. You do not decide what to do About 20 or 30 years ago, the people are going to have to figure out a way of on a health standard by consulting in this country started asking a ques- disposing of that used oil without ruin- some soothsayer or some pollster or tion: Would it not make more sense for ing our water supply—a fairly simple some political operative. You deter- us to stop spoiling this place in which requirement except it costs money. It mine what meets a standard of health we live by requiring those who produce is a pain for somebody who is changing by looking at the best science avail- and those who do certain things to do oil in cars to have to figure out what to able. That is what we do in this bill. it without despoiling the air or the do with that used oil. It costs money to

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10109 deal with that used oil in the right write them. There is no excuse for It first appeared in 1991, I understand. way. that. But we ought to deal with facts, It was alleged it happened to a woman Well, is it reasonable to require that not fiction. in Louisiana. And then when retold, we not dump that on the streets or It is interesting, in the book The apparently it happened to a woman in dump it in a ditch someplace? Yes, that ‘‘Death of Common Sense,’’ among South Carolina. And then retold again, is reasonable. And it is a cost that then other things, it is said a dentist is now it turns out it was probably a woman is passed on with the cost of doing prevented from extracting a tooth, a in Georgia. The Heritage Foundation business. child’s tooth, and giving the tooth to said that this was a woman in Wyo- In a much larger way, we have had the child. I thought to myself when I ming. Well, the Army Corps of Engi- that same debate with respect to air read that, what on Earth is happening? neers has never been able to determine pollution. In the 1970’s in North Da- Who would write a rule like that? Well, where this story might have come kota, there was a decision that we were I looked into it. It turns out it is not from. going to use a lot more lignite coal. We true—a great story, but it just is not Perhaps if Senator HATCH, or others, are part of the Fort Union Basin, which true. might tell us who this happened to and has the largest lignite coal deposits in There is a host of those kinds of give us some details, we can verify the world. In order to produce elec- myths that gain life because someone whether this is actually the case. At tricity to fuel Minneapolis, using lig- said it in an anecdote that turns out to least those who have tried to verify nite coal from North Dakota out there be just not true. In fact, there are a this say the allegation that an elderly in the prairies, they wanted to build dozen or so that have been used in the woman was prevented from planting a large coal-fired generators to burn that Chamber, which I am going to come bed of roses on her own land is simply coal and produce electricity. The prob- and describe, and most of those dozen not the case, simply not true. There lem with that was that North Dakota are not true either. I will do that in a are no facts to support it. was to host this lignite coal burning. If subsequent presentation. It is one There are a whole series of these you are going to burn lignite coal to thing if we are dealing with fact. It is myths. ship electricity to Minneapolis-St. another thing if we are not dealing No. 4 that was offered in a chart, Paul, for example, so they can have with the truth. Senator HATCH’s list of top 10 silly reg- heat in the winter and air conditioning One of the issues that has been raised ulations, was failing to approve a po- in the summer, do we want air pollu- in the Chamber as silly regulations, we tentially lifesaving drug, thus forcing a tion in our airshed in North Dakota as are told, is that a worker cannot wear terminal cancer patient to go across a result of doing that? The answer is a beard. In fact, I think it was on Sen- the border to Mexico to have it admin- no. ator HATCH’s top 10 list, No. 9. It says istered. So in the 1970’s, I and two or three forcing a man to choose between his re- Now, I want to note that we have other fellows led at the time a fight in ligion and his job because rules do not provisions of the Federal Food, Drug North Dakota to say if you are going to allow workers to wear a mask over a and Cosmetic Act in this country that build coal generating plants in North beard. A stupid rule, Senator HATCH al- do relate to the question of what drugs leged. Dakota, you are going to do it right. In patients who are terminally ill may Well, I looked into that to try to un- other words, you are going to be re- use. derstand: Is that the case? The Govern- quired to use the latest available tech- First, since 1968, the FDA has had ment, at least to the extent that I have nology with respect to your stacks, and what is called a ‘‘compassionate use been able to find—and maybe someone the effluence or emissions that come policy,’’ to permit the use of a drug will correct this—never forces workers from those coal-fired generating plants that is still being tested if there is no to choose between their safety and have to be reduced by using the latest their religious beliefs about wearing other drug available for the condition. available technology; in other words, beards. Second, the FDA may make promising wet scrubbers on those stacks to clean There are some businesses that do drugs that are still under investigation the air. Expensive? You bet. Very ex- that, that require their male employ- available to terminally ill patients be- pensive. Was it the right thing? Well, ees to be clean shaven. This actually fore the drugs go on the general mar- 20 years later, I can tell you I am proud deals with the question of respirators, ket. Third, FDA now has a new fast- of having been involved in that fight which prevent workers from breathing track procedure to speed approval of and proud of having been in a group in harmful substances such as asbestos, new drugs for serious or life-threat- that won that fight in North Dakota lead, or toxic chemicals, and appar- ening illnesses. because, yes, we burn a lot of lignite ently about 2.6 million American work- I understand that there are some coal. I am pleased that we do. But it is ers do wear respirators. One kind of concerns about the speed or the pace burned in plants that have wet scrub- respirator does not work if you wear a with which the FDA acts. It seems to bers and the latest available tech- beard, because you do not get a good me that the Congress and the FDA nology to prevent the kind of pollution seal around your mouth. have tried to address this issue. we would have had. But a better respirator can work You know, the FDA has had an inter- The result is that North Dakota met even if you wear a beard. And if you esting history in this country. They the clean air standards. We still have a use environmental engineering con- have been careful, it is true. A recent good airshed, largely because we fought trols, to stop workers from breathing study showed that 56 drugs have been the fight and said you are required to in these toxic substances in the first removed from the market in the United do this the right way. That was a regu- place, you do not need to wear a res- States, Great Britain, France, and Ger- lation, a requirement. Was it a pain for pirator at all. many since 1970. In other words, drugs somebody? Was it costly? Yes, it was. So the fact is the Government does have been removed from the market 56 But it was the right thing, as well. Had not force workers to choose between times. Of these, only nine removals oc- we not done that, we would have pro- their safety and their religious beliefs curred in the United States. Why? Be- duced power and sent it east some- about wearing beards. cause the drugs that were removed where and we would have been stuck Here is another one. An elderly from British, French and German mar- with dirty air in North Dakota. It is woman cannot plant a rose garden. No. kets were not approved by the FDA. not the right way to do things. 3 on the top 10 list of silly regulations. Mr. JOHNSTON. I wonder if the Sen- Now, the issue with respect to this We do not have any idea where that ator will yield. matter in this Chamber is an issue, it comes from. The suggestion, I guess, is Mr. DORGAN. I will be happy to seems to me, of what is reasonable. that section 404 of the Clean Water Act yield. Some call this regulatory reform. Oth- is preventing someone from gardening Mr. JOHNSTON. The Senator has ers call it regulatory rollback. I happen as they wished. As we understand it, been talking about the list of the top 10 to believe there are a lot of silly, un- the story turns out to be almost en- worst regulations. Frankly, I have not necessary, and unreasonable Federal tirely apocryphal. A number of people paid too much attention to those anec- rules and regulations, and we ought to have tried to get the facts on this silly dotal sort of things. Is the Senator get rid of them and the people who regulation, or alleged regulation. aware that EPA did a study of its own

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10110 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 regulations in 1987 called ‘‘Unfinished Mr. JOHNSTON. It differs with this now is a tough bill which incorporates Business: A Comparative Assessment of bill as night does day. all of those good provisions for clean Environmental Problems,’’ and that Mr. DORGAN. Perhaps. My point is air and water that the Senator speaks they concluded that their own esti- with respect to the regulatory reform about. mation of risk did not comport with agenda, I know the Senator has read Mr. DORGAN. I appreciate the Sen- scientific risk, but rather with the pub- the accounts and probably verified ator’s participation. I have great re- lic opinion about those risks? Is the them in discussing them with our col- spect for Senator JOHNSTON. Senator aware that was EPA’s own leagues that the bill in the House of Let me finish what I was trying to evaluation of its own regulations? Representatives was actually written say. Mr. DORGAN. I am familiar with the by a bunch of lobbyists sitting in a Mr. LEVIN. While the Senator is study, but I have not had the oppor- room saying, ‘‘This is what we need to yielding, if the Senator will yield for tunity to review it in detail. have happen.’’ an additional question. Mr. JOHNSTON. I have a copy of it I guarantee you this—I just guar- Mr. DORGAN. Yes, I yield. here. I wonder if the Senator is aware antee because I have been in these Mr. LEVIN. The Senator from Lou- that in 1990, the Science Advisory fights in North Dakota for a long time, Board did a study of that and, in effect, isiana asked if the Senator was famil- with respect to air pollution and other iar with a number of documents, and concluded that the first study was cor- matters. The corporate system is inter- rect; that is, that it did not comport there is a third document I would like ested in profit, and they should be be- to refer to, which is the March 1995 re- with scientific evaluation of those cause they are responsible to their risks, but rather with public perception port, later than the two documents to stockholders. When they sit around which the Senator from Louisiana re- of those risks. The Senator was not and propose regulatory reform legisla- aware of that? ferred. tion, they are designing to find ways to In the 1994 report of the National Mr. DORGAN. Again, I have not ex- weaken the Clear Air Act, the Clean amined the results of that study in Academy of Sciences—that report enti- Water Act and a whole series of regu- tled ‘‘Science and Judgment in Risk depth. latory standards. That is simply the However, I do not think the Senator Assessment’’—they made a number of way it works. I think that is unfortu- would use either study to demonstrate specific recommendations to the EPA nate, but they have every right to try a conclusion that the central thesis of where they might improve policies, to do that. I want to make sure we get what I am talking about, the Clean Air practices, and methods of risk assess- Act, the Clean Water Act and a whole rid of the silly and the outrageous reg- ment, but also concluded the following: range of other health, safety and envi- ulations—and there are some—but I want to keep the foundation of what EPA’s approach to assessing risks is fun- ronmental standards, are somehow not damentally sound, despite often-heard criti- grounded in science or not grounded in we have done. cisms. Is the Senator aware of this: I wonder fact. I think the Senator would not be if the Senator is aware—likely, because I ask this question of my friend—as correct if he says the bulk of what we to when the Senator was reviewing the do to make sure our water is safe, to I think he is one of the best in the Sen- ate on the issue of energy and related two earlier documents of the Senator make sure our air is clean, to make from Louisiana—whether he might also sure drugs are tested and safe, the bulk issues—that in the last 20 years, we have nearly doubled the amount of en- add to that reading list the 1994 report of what we do is inappropriate. The of the National Academy of Sciences? Senator would not be making that ergy we use, and yet the airshed in America is cleaner than it was 20 years Mr. DORGAN. I would be happy to case, would he? add that report to the list of reports I Mr. JOHNSTON. Absolutely not. As a ago? Mr. JOHNSTON. Absolutely. should review. I have heard the Sen- matter of fact, we have specifically ator from Louisiana refer to his two in stated that all of those laws to which Mr. DORGAN. If the Senator is aware of that, the Senator, I think, would previous debate. I doubt whether the the Senator refers will not be changed conclusion one can reach from them is in any way, will not be overridden. I agree with me that is not because the captains of American industry said, that you have a bunch of folks pro- thought it was clear in the original posing regulations on unscientific Dole-Johnston bill, and we have had a ‘‘We ought to invest our money to clean the air.’’ It is because Congress basis. Let us think about the facts lot of debate here, as the Senator here. knows, about the question of whether decided to do something. We decided to The fact is we use twice as much en- it was clear. We accepted the amend- say to people, ‘‘When you produce, part ergy now and have cleaner air. Why is ment that made it doubly clear; that of the cost of the production is the re- that? Because we have clean air regula- is, that each one of those laws will re- quirement not to pollute America’s tions that do not work? Of course not. main in full force and effect, all the air.’’ They have succeeded. One of the things standards will be there. Mr. JOHNSTON. And that is why we What we are dealing with here is have every single provision of that we at least ought to take credit for is rules. When you take those laws and Clean Air Act unchanged, not over- having marched in the right direction. translate them into rules, what we are ridden, and the full force and effect if I think the Senator from Louisiana saying is that you must look at those this bill passes. would not contest that. He is making laws through the lens of sound science Did the Senator know the original the case, yes, that is probably true, but and proper risk assessment, rather risk assessment was proposed by a we are not interfering with that. than public opinion, politics, emotion, Democrat, namely me, and passed over- So let us understand that what has prejudice, superstition—whatever. We whelmingly here? been done in the name of regulation, in are saying translate those good laws, Mr. DORGAN. In the last session of many instances, has been awfully good which protect public health and safety, Congress, absolutely. for this country. We now have started but do it in a rigorously logical and Mr. JOHNSTON. I do not know what to clean up America’s airshed. I think scientifically appropriate way. Would happened in the House, whether or not a lot of the kids and families would say you agree with that? lobbyists were involved in it. That is thanks for that. That is the right Mr. DORGAN. Well, as the Senator irrelevant to this bill. We took the thing. We want to live in a healthier states that principle, I have no sub- original Dole bill which came out of place. My sense is that if you ask folks stantial disagreement with him. How- committee, which, in turn, differed out there: Do you think that the food ever, the Senator understands very from the House bill, and made over 100 safety standards in this country make well what is at work with respect to changes, including all of those I talked sense? Would you sooner go into a res- this body of change and reform. The about. So I do not know how it started taurant and order a side of beef—not Senator is perhaps familiar with the or how it changed or how the House did that the Senator from Louisiana would stories of the bill that is similar to this it or what the Louisiana Legislature eat a whole side of beef at one sitting— one—though not identical—the regu- did. I am telling you what is before the but would you like to see on that side latory reform bill that went through Senate now, which is the relevant of beef one of those big stamps that the House of Representatives? thing, and what is before the Senate says ‘‘USDA inspected,’’ or would you

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10111 like to see that it has a little stamp direction. It is substantial reform. It So in the event an agency cannot cer- that says, ‘‘This side of beef was in- requires agencies to show that benefits tify that the benefits justify the cost, spected by Sid and Arnie’s justify the costs, but it does not allow someone can come to us—a constituent Meatpackers Co.’’? the cost estimates to control, just sin- can come to us and say, hey, look at Well, look, I think what we have gularly—— this cost-benefit analysis. They are done for food safety has made a lot of Mr. JOHNSTON. If the Senator will producing here something which costs sense in this country. I will not tell the yield, I submit to the Senator the $1 billion and only produced one-half stories about bread and rat poison and Glenn-Chafee bill does not make such a billion dollars in benefits. We want you meat going down the same holes in the requirement. It makes a requirement to veto that because it does not make 1900’s before we decided to have meat of stating whether the benefits justify sense. We are not going to have any ex- safety standards. the cost. But it is no longer a cuses—no more excuses, no more hid- Mr. JOHNSTON. The answer is, of decisional criterion. You state it, but ing behind regulatory agencies. So course, I want that ‘‘USDA inspected’’ you do not have to comply with it. there are significant differences be- label on there, and I want scientists to That is the point. tween the two bills, but they are not make that inspection based on sci- Mr. DORGAN. I will yield soon, but I both regulatory reform, and cost-ben- entific standards and not on some pub- say that my understanding of the efit is required in both bills. The dif- lic opinion poll or some prejudice or Glenn-Chafee substitute is that it re- ference is what happens when an agen- some superstition. Put good science in quires that the agency use a cost-effec- cy cannot certify, or should certify, the picture. That is all we are saying. tiveness standard, and the cost effec- that the benefits justify the cost under I want the inspections to continue, but tiveness standard, in looking at which Glenn-Chafee. We then take the posi- with good science. That is what we are regulatory scheme or approach to use, tion as to what should happen. about. You know, it is the scientists is substantially different than what I Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I know who discovered E. coli, not some poll- believe your proposal would require, that others want to speak. Let me ster out there reading the results of which is the least-cost standard. You make two final points on this subject. the last election. might find a standard that is the least I appreciate the comments of the Sen- Mr. DORGAN. The Senator knows cost but is less appropriate than the ator from Michigan. what has happened with E. coli in the most cost-effective standard. That is It is very hard, it seems to me, for last couple of days. He has read the re- how I view the differences in these pro- anyone to talk much about success. ports about outbreaks in three or five posals. Failure is what sells. Scandal sells. I yield to the Senator from Michigan. States in recent days. We are now Success is largely boring. Mr. LEVIN. The Senator has pointed going to be talking, one of these days— You know, Gregg Easterbrook has re- exactly to one of the major differences I hope seriously—about inspection of cently published a book about the cir- in the two bills, which is the require- fish and seafood. That is now voluntary cumstances we face in this country ment in the Johnston bill that you go in this country, and it ought not be. with our air and our water. He points with least cost, unless there is a cer- When we get to that point, I wonder out something most Americans prob- tain nonquantifiable benefit. But if the whether we will be as aggressive and ably do not know, that our air is clean- benefits are quantifiable—which they interested in making sure that that in- are in many instances—you are forced er now than 20 years ago. Is it perfect? spection is the equivalent of other flesh to go with the least cost, even though No. Are we moving in the right direc- food and that we will have the same a slightly larger cost would produce a tion? Yes. Our water is cleaner now kind of assurance for the American major additional benefit. than it was 20 years ago. Our lakes, riv- consumer that they are buying fish and So the Senator is exactly right on ers, and streams are cleaner than 20, 25 seafood that is healthy and wholesome. that. On the question of whether or not years ago. I happen to think that in some areas cost-benefit analyses were required in Think back 20 or 25 years ago. Most regulations make sense. I do not think the Glenn-Chafee substitute, it is re- people foresaw an era ahead of gloom the Senator from Louisiana disagrees quired. It is right here on page 29, line and doom. That seemed to be where we with that. But we have been in this cir- 14. I am going to read the language be- were headed—more pollution, more use cle here where if somebody holds up a cause it is required, but if it cannot be of energy, and more pollution of our silly regulation, I guarantee you—and I given, then the agency must say why, air, of our water. And they figured that know we are not debating the House in fact, the certification that the bene- we were consigned to do that. It was bill—that that bill was written by the fits justify the cost cannot be made, inevitable, they thought, because we people who want to get out from under because there are instances where an could not control it. the cost of regulations. People used agency cannot make that certification. Congress decided we wanted to do silly examples then to demonstrate the This is the language: something about it, and we passed leg- rule. Well, even if the exception is true, The agency must certify that the rule will islation and said we have to change the it does not demonstrate the rule. produce benefits that will justify the cost to way we do business. Yes, it is costly. We are always debating things the the Government and to the public of imple- Yes, it is probably a pain to do that. Government is spending. Somebody mentation of and compliance with the rule, But we insist it is a cost of doing busi- might say, gee, ‘‘Did you know some- or an explanation of why such certification ness, to keep America’s airshed clean, body in a research is studying the sex cannot be made. to clean up our rivers and streams. life of a screw worm?’’ Yes, they study And in addition to requiring that Mr. President, 20 years later we can that with public dollars. Why? They that certification be given, the Glenn- stand on the floor of the Senate and de- did that to save the beef industry in Chafee approach is that Congress is bate regulations and talk about the this country. And they did. I cannot then put in the position where, if such fact that we changed the direction this even describe to you the cost-benefit a certification is not or cannot be country was headed in. How? By regu- ratio of that work. But someone can made, then it will or can veto such a lations, by laws that say we demand make fun of that, I suppose, or the fact regulation. We are put in the position, this country change the way it is mov- that somebody was sitting in a labora- because of the expedited process here, ing. tory with dark glasses studying molds for Congress to review regulations, and Now, I happen to think that is won- and discovered penicillin. You can go where the benefits do not justify the derful. We should claim a little success on forever. costs or any other regulation, we are in areas where we have made progress. With respect to regulations, we go accountable. Those who are elected to Congress through the same kind of situation. Finally, there is some accountability under a regime of reform or change, Someone holds up a silly one—and in the elected officials of this land for who come here thinking they ought to there are some—and says, ‘‘This dem- the regulations which people might change what is successful, in my judg- onstrates the rule.’’ think are burdensome. We are not ment, jumped on the wrong wagon on I am going to support the Glenn- going to be able to hide behind the reg- the way to town. Chafee regulatory reform substitute ulators under Glenn-Chafee. We have We ought not be reforming some- because I think it moves in the right here legislative veto. thing that is working and moving us in

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10112 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 the right direction. If anyone believes old 6’s and 7’s, the same old way we areas of small business how the bur- that the direction of the regulatory re- have been doing things. dens of government regulation were form bills in the House and some that It is my contention that we simply making it impossible for them to con- have been proposed here would weaken cannot afford to do nothing. We cannot tinue to bring the jobs, to provide the the fundamental structure of our at- accept the status quo. Regulations are products that were essential, not only tempt to clean our air and clean our like water: Too little and you cannot to the economy, but to the well-being water and keep our food safe, it seems live; too much and you drown. In our of the people in that area. to me the choice is pretty clear. The crowded society, there is no question Just last month, I heard the same choice is to support the Glenn-Chafee that regulations are needed to help message from delegates to the White bill, which does reform our scheme of make our communities a better place. House Conference on Small Business. regulations in a sound and a practical As has been pointed out at length in They made it very clear to anyone who way but does not jeopardize what we the recent discussions on this floor, was willing to listen that excessive have accomplished in this country. over the last 25 years, environmental overreaching regulations and out- When I began this presentation, to regulations have helped ensure that rageous enforcement zeal are a top pri- those who took umbrage when I said the air we breathe is cleaner, the water ority for the Nation’s small entre- this debate is beyond boring, and for we drink is safer, and the rivers we fish preneurs who create large numbers of those who have participated in it, I do and play in are increasingly less pol- new jobs. not mean this personally. I say it is be- luted. These delegates came to Washington, yond boring because most of it is so Workplace regulations have made our took time away from their business, fundamentally arcane and technical jobs safer. One would think from lis- spent their money, and devoted re- and hard to understand, but it will af- tening to the recent debate that we sources and effort of extraordinary fect the life of every American citizen. were going to change all that. That is magnitude to speak on behalf of small It might be boring, but it is critically not the point. business. important. Those who argue for 25 years are not They voted on the biggest concerns If we strip the peeling off, we are being contested. But the argument is to small business from a list of several talking at the roots, yes, about E. coli; about here, today, and where we go hundred proposals, from judicial review yes, about mammograms. We are talk- from here. That is the point that has of the Regulatory Flexibility Act to ing about health, safety, clean air, been missed in some of the discussions cost-benefit analysis, to protection for clean water, and that affects every sin- we have just heard. self-audits, to sunsetting old regula- gle American. That is why this debate In recent years, the fact is that gov- tions, to reform of OSHA—the dele- is important. It is why it is important ernment regulation has risen to the gates sent a clear message to us and to we get it right. level where it is choking off the growth the President. Maybe some people Finally, it is why it is important we of jobs, the growth of economic oppor- stuck inside the beltway do not know not decide to be champions of change tunity and the betterment of the way that regulations are a big problem. But in areas where we are successful. That of life of everyone. small business knows that it is drown- makes no sense. Just like the waters of the Missouri ing in a floodtide of regulations. That is why I come here supporting River that recently rose to flood part Mr. President, I ask unanimous con- the Glenn-Chafee bill, the substitute, of my home State of Missouri, we are sent to have printed at the end of my and hope that we will not invoke clo- suffering a flood tide of regulation. The remarks the list of the top 30 concerns ture late today, and instead decide to Comprehensive Regulatory Reform Act as voted on by the delegates to the embrace the Glenn-Chafee regulatory of 1995 will go a long way to stop the White House Conference on Small Busi- reform substitute. I yield the floor. rising tide of overregulation. When the ness, so everyone can see how impor- Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I thank the President signs this legislation, as I be- tant this legislation is to small busi- Chair. I rise to support S. 343, the Com- lieve he eventually will, because he ness. prehensive Regulatory Reform Act of must, we are going to reduce the bur- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without 1995, and in strong opposition to the den of government regulations below objection, it is so ordered. amendment offered by our friends, the the flood stage so that regulations con- (See Exhibit 1.) Senators from Ohio and Rhode Island. tinue to enhance the quality of life, not Mr. BOND. I do not believe the dele- Let Members know at the outset that interfere. gates to the White House conference the Dole-Johnston substitute is not a Now, opponents of this legislation would want to see this bill weakened regulatory repeal act. It is not a regu- have taken the approach that there is by the Glenn-Chafee amendment. latory prohibition act. It is, in fact, a no problem with overregulation; regu- Let us look at environmental regula- strong, regulatory reform act. lation is only good. We have heard tions as an example of the rising cost It reforms the way Government regu- stated how many good things regula- of regulation. In the past, environ- lations are issued, with three goals in tion has done. They say, Do not worry, mental regulations were based on com- mind: First, to bring accountability to be happy; regulatory burdens are all in mon sense and they have been respon- the bureaucrats writing the regulation your imagination. To that I say, re- sible for giving us a much improved and, just as importantly, to those in spectfully, Bunk. Get outside the belt- quality of life. But increasingly they Congress, who, after all, write the laws way, ask the people who live and work are now choking off American entre- that generate those regulations; sec- in the rest of America what they think. preneurship and producing fewer and ond, it attempts to bring a little com- Ask the people who have to comply fewer benefits. mon sense to the regulations that are with the regulations. Ask small busi- I think I understand why this is hap- issued; third, it brings a little more nesses. pening. Because, to me, solving our en- honesty to the way we talk about what I have had the opportunity as chair- vironmental problems is a little like we are regulating and why some truth man of the Small Business Committee harvesting a Missouri soybean field. in regulating is necessary. and as cochair of the Regulatory Relief You can get most of the soybeans I am afraid that the Glenn-Chafee Task Force to hear plenty from people quickly and efficiently with a modern amendment comes up short when meas- in small business. Last week, I spoke combine. It is an expensive machine ured by these criteria. This is an effort on this floor about a series of field but it is worth the cost because it is to go back to the status quo. It will en- hearings the Small Business Com- fast, efficient, gets the soybeans that sure we stay where we are. It would fail mittee has held around the country. I provides a vital food source supply, and to ensure that Government agencies can say that the Senators who at- it does so in an economical way. We obey the law and follow common sense tended those hearings had our eyes could build a superefficient combine, like the rest of Americans have to do. open to what is going on with small designed to harvest almost every single If the Glenn-Chafee amendment were business and the cumulative burden of soybean, leaving almost none behind, to be adopted, we might as well do regulations. but it would sure be a lot slower and it nothing—for that is, in fact, what will As the Chair well knows, we heard in would undoubtedly be far more expen- happen. There will be no change. Same Memphis from people from all different sive. And very few farmers in Audrain

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10113 County, MO, where I am from, could af- conducted at the Harvard Center for business went in and said ‘‘You did not ford it because it would only get a few Risk Analysis has shown that if EPA comply with the Reg Flex Act,’’ the an- more soybeans. You could even take did a better job of prioritizing the re- swer in too many cases was, ‘‘Tough. that one step farther. You could get sources consumed by a sample of 90 av- There is nothing you can do about it.’’ every last bean, perhaps, if you hired erage regulations, 1,200 needless deaths There we see the provisions of the an army of people to crawl through the would be avoided. That is just 90 rules Glenn-Chafee amendment making judi- fields on their hands and knees, look- at just 1 agency. cial review almost ineffective, totally ing for any single bean the machine Across the Government, this same ineffective in many instances, if there has missed. study showed that by using common is only a show of cost-benefit analysis. The point of all this is, simply, there sense and getting the most bang for the We do not want to make that same is a diminishing return on investment buck, we could save tens of thousands mistake again. We put in an appro- at some point. Sooner or later, you of additional people every year without priate judicial review for reg flex, and have to say enough is enough and move imposing any additional cost on our on decisions such as cost-benefit anal- on to another field. When is it that you cities or businesses. These are the real ysis. say enough is enough? You say enough victims of the status quo. The com- The judicial review provisions of S. is enough when science says that it is plaints of how this bill might lead to 343 will provide a much-needed check enough. If there is something truly someone being exposed to some in- on the actions of agencies, without dangerous, if the gathering of that last creased theoretical risk pale in com- subjecting rules to judicial scrutiny of soybean out of the field has to be done parison to the deaths that occur every minute procedural steps. This provi- for critically important human health, day because we have spent our re- sion strikes the right balance between welfare and environmental needs, then sources responding to the latest media accountability and a desire not to clog yes, let us talk about getting that last scare instead of basing our decisions on up Federal courts. bean. But when there is no real danger sound science and cost-benefit anal- The bill provides for greater congres- to the environment, or to human ysis. sional accountability by including the health, what good is there to pursue Those on the other side who are ex- provisions of the Nickles-Reid Congres- perfection? posed to regulatory reform—there are sional Review Act passed by the Senate Environmental regulations work just some who are opposed to any kind of 100 to 0. There are two important like that. Initially, our regulations regulatory reform, they like it just the changes. First, the period for congres- were based on common sense and well way it is—like to trout out the phoney sional review is extended from 45 to 60 worth the money we spent to reduce scare stories of the victims of E. coli days. Second, the threshold for rules pollution. Nobody wants to go back— food poisoning. They know that this whose effectiveness is delayed during and nobody is talking about going bill contains clear safeguards for regu- the congressional review period is tied back—to the days of dirty water, dirty lations that protect us from food poi- to the overall definition of a major air, dirty food. We have made great soning. But the other side does not say rule. gains in environmental quality and sig- much about those who are inquired or The second goal of the bill is more nificantly reduced pollution at mod- killed every year because we waste re- honesty in the pronouncements of the erate costs. sources on trival risks, instead of fo- Federal Government. S. 343 would for But in the last few years, I will tell cusing on the real health and safety the first time require Federal agencies, you, something has gotten out of risks. These are the victims who are not only to tell us what they know, but whack. In many areas of environ- left with no hope if the Glenn-Chafee also to tell us what they do not know, mental protection we have found the amendment passes. when it comes to assessing risks. EPA costs to get those last few molecules of The Dole-Johnston substitute has would no longer be able to hide the ball pollution skyrocketed. Achieving addi- three simple goals: we want Govern- from the public in their analysis of reg- tional gains is exorbitantly expensive, ment regulators and the Congress to be ulations. From now on, Federal agen- with more and more money being spent more accountable for their actions. We cies will have to come clean on the as- on fewer and fewer results. In these want Government regulators to be hon- sumptions they make and the quality areas we have reached the point of dra- est. And we want them to use a little of the science they use in making regu- matically diminishing returns. common sense. latory decisions. This is a provision If we cannot achieve zero risk—and Central to increased accountability that ought to be called truth in regu- most scientists I talk to tell me that are the congressional review and tai- lating legislation. I expect and hope nature and this world is not a zero risk lored judicial review provisions of this that as a result of this legislation, environment—does this mean we bill. many so-called risks that EPA tries to should stop writing regulations to pro- Judicial review of the Regulatory regulate will turn out—like the alar tect our health and environment? No. Flexibility Act was the third highest scare—to be based more on fear than Not at all. It simply means we cannot vote-getter at a recent White House fact. After passage of this legislation, afford to regulate unwisely, as if we conference. Let me take just a moment if sound science indicates that a sig- were going to achieve a zero risk, abso- to explain why this is important. nificant risk needs to be addressed, lute perfection ideal, without regard to The Regulatory Flexibility Act, for then, of course, we must support sen- costs. those who are not familiar with the sible and cost-effective regulations. The current effort before us today in terminology, refers to a measure That is what this is all about, making this body is to pass regulatory reform. passed in 1980 by Congress. It was sup- sure that we get regulations focused on Foremost, it is to ensure that regula- posed to give a break to small business the design to get rid of those risks. tion is done wisely. Those of us who are by telling agencies that they had to be This bill is also about a return to pushing for reform believe that knowl- flexible in passing regulations that common sense in regulating. Federal edge, scientific knowledge and common deal with small business. They were agencies spend too much time focusing sense, are important parts of wisdom. supposed to conduct a regulatory flexi- on the small risks and not enough time If we are going to spend $160 billion on bility analysis to see if there are other on the big risks. This legislation would the environment, we think everyone ways of getting the same job done if it go a long way toward fixing that. This should get a better understanding of affected small business. bill directs agencies to set priorities what kinds of risks we are protecting Unfortunately, the problem was that with the goal of achieving the greatest against, the benefits of specific regula- Congress in its wisdom—and I apolo- net reduction in risk with the public tions and the cost of those regulations. gize for the oxymoron—struck any and private sector resource expended, The real tragedy of this is that our kind of judicial enforcement out of the and to incorporate those priorities in desire for perfection will bankrupt us Regulatory Flexibility Act. So what the agency budget, regulatory agenda, and divert our efforts away from more happened? Every time the Advocacy and enforcement and research activi- significant risks. Every day of every Council and the SBA went to another ties. As I mentioned last week, over year, real people die because we have agency and said, ‘‘You did not comply the last several years in the Appropria- misallocated our resources. One study with the Reg Flex Act,’’ or a small tions Committee, the ranking member

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10114 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 on the HUD–VA Subcommittee, Sen- I would ask unanimous consent to Mr. President, I yield the floor. IKULSKI ator M , and I, have been push- have printed in the RECORD at the end EXHIBIT 1 ing agencies to use comparative risk of my remarks, several letters of sup- assessments to prioritize their budgets port for the bill from these small busi- FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS—1995 WHITE HOUSE to focus on the biggest risks. The Na- nesses. CONFERENCE ON SMALL BUSINESS tional Academy of Public Administra- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without tion recently released a report to the objection, it is so ordered. Rank No./Issue Votes Committee on the EPA entitled ‘‘Set- (See exhibit 2.) 1 ...... 224 Independent Contractors ...... 1471 ting Priorities and Getting Results.’’ Mr. BOND. Mr. President, small busi- 2 ...... 214 Meals & Entertainment Expense ...... 1444 3 ...... 183 Regulatory Flexibility Act ...... 1398 One of its top recommendations was to ness is not alone in its support of this 4 ...... 218 Estate Tax Repeal ...... 1385 ‘‘Use comparative risk analysis to in- bill. The Dole/Johnston substitute will 5 ...... 87 Health Care Reform ...... 1371 ...... *63 Superfund Reform ...... 1371* form the selection of priorities and the also help the farmer who cannot use 7 ...... 91 Pension Reform ...... 1369 development of specific program strat- products that good science shows have 8 ...... 265 NII/Intellectual Property/SIC Code ...... 1358 9 ...... 51 Environmental Enforcement ...... 1342 egies.’’ It only makes sense that agen- no risk to health. Small towns will 10 ...... 200 Tort Reform ...... 1332 cies use their resources to tackle the have less to fear from arbitrary pro- 11 ...... 121 Association Export Programs ...... 1329 worst problems facing the country. 12 ...... 194 Agency Enforcement Reform ...... 1328 nouncements from Washington. I have 13 ...... 406 SBIR/Patient Capital ...... 1292 Sound like common sense, but the sad a letter from the National Association 14 ...... 144 Unfair Competition ...... 1285 fact is that is not what’s happening 15 ...... 78 100% Health Care Deduction ...... 1283 of Towns and Townships that has writ- 16 ...... 5 Pension Investments ...... 1279 today. ten me in particular support of the lan- 17 ...... 9 Bank Lending Incentives ...... 1275 The bill includes an additional way 18 ...... 385 Tax Equity ...... 1258 guage in the bill pertaining to the judi- 19 ...... 286 SBA Survival ...... 1249 to bring some common sense to regu- cial review of the Regulatory Flexi- 20 ...... 34 Home Office Deduction ...... 1239 latory decisions—cost-benefit analysis. 21 ...... 129 Export/Import Bank Financing ...... 1181 bility Act. You see, these towns know 22 ...... 57 Regulatory Takings/Brown Fields ...... 1118 The basic idea is a simple one. We that for too long, Government agencies 23 ...... 115 Intellectual Property Protection ...... 1080 should spend more resources and effort have ignored the impact of regulations 24 ...... 242 Capital Gains ...... 1054 on big problems and less on small prob- 25 ...... 164 Davis-Bacon/Service Contract Act ...... 1046 on small and rural communities. They ...... 188 Paperwork & Regulatory Reform ...... 1046 lems—that is cost-benefit analysis, are counting on this legislation to 27 ...... 41 Entrepreneurial Education ...... 1035 that is what is so scary to the oppo- 28 ...... 369 OSHA Reform ...... 1030 force Government agencies to obey the 29 ...... 24 SCOR ...... 1027 nents of this bill. We say that in meet- law and minimize the impact of regula- 30 ...... 14 Secondary Market for S.B. Investments ...... 1009 ing the requirements of existing laws, tions on small communities. Government agencies should pick a The Dole/Johnston substitute will EXHIBIT 2 regulatory solution with costs that are bring some much needed account- NATIONAL FEDERATION OF justified by the benefits. It seems as- ability to the faceless regulators sit- tounding to me—and I think it would INDEPENDENT BUSINESS, ting in their Washington office build- Washington, DC, June 28, 1995. to most people in America—that today ings cranking out the stream of new Government regulators write rules for Hon. CHRISTOPHER BOND, rules. It will also bring accountability U.S. Senate, the rest of us without an established to Congress, where some of the blame Washington, DC. procedure to evaluate costs and bene- lies for those regulations. It brings DEAR SENATOR BOND: I am writing to sup- fits, but frankly that is what is hap- sunshine and openness to the way the port your efforts to insure that the strongest pening. And it is even more astounding Government analyzes and talks about possible judicial review language is included that some people have been using emo- health risk, to give us a more honest in the Comprehensive Regulatory Reform tional appeals to generate irrational bill. The promise of regulatory reform will discussion of the problems facing us. fears of this commonsense approach not be fulfilled if the council of the self ap- Finally, it brings some common that all of us use in our everyday lives. pointed guardians of bureaucratic baloney is Finally, the bill repeals the Delaney sense to the decisions that the bureau- followed regarding amendments to ‘‘reg clause, one of the worst examples of crats make. Just like every family in flex’’. Many of those who have criticized the regulation with no basis in sound America who looks at the costs and direction you are headed with the Regu- latory Flexibility Act and with your reading sciences. Public health protections are benefits of going on vacation or buying a smoke detector, Government regu- of how it interacts with the Administrative maintained with a replacement provi- Procedures Act are only vaguely aware of sion that allows regulation unless lators are going to have to take a hard look at the cost and benefits of their the purposes or processes of either law. I there is only a negligible or insignifi- urge you to hold fast to the course you have cant foreseeable risk to human health. actions. set—a course laid out in clear language by American farmers will no longer be The claims made by some of the ex- the Regulatory Flexibility Act to fit regula- hamstrung from using safe and effec- tremist pressure groups that this legis- tions to the ability of small entities to com- tive crop protection products simply lation will harm the environment are ply with them. because our technology lets us measure simply false. By grounding our health Sincerely, MICHAEL O. ROUSH, parts per trillion or parts per quadril- and safety rules on sound science we can avoid wasting our money on phan- Director of Federal Governmental lion. Relations—Senate. We have had testimony before our tom risks. By dealing with the worst committee from scientists, including problems first, and spending our re- SMALL BUSINESS LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL, the President’s own Science Advisory sources wisely, this bill will help afford a safer and cleaner environment for us Washington, DC, June 26, 1995. Board, saying the Delaney amendment Hon. CHRISTOPHER BOND, is no longer good science. The Delaney and our children. Chairman, Committee on Small Business, Rus- amendment cannot be justified in a In contrast, the Glenn/Chafee amend- sell Senate Office Building, U.S. Senate, time and day when we are able to ment ensures that we will continue on Washington, DC. measure the most minute parts, parts our present course, the flood waters of DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: On behalf of the per trillion or even quadrillion. This is regulations will rise ever higher and Small Business Legislative Council (SBLC), I not sound science they have told us. It more and more small and large busi- wish to express our strong support for the is time to get the Delaney amendment nesses will drown in the flood. Make no ‘‘compromise version’’ of regulatory relief off the books. mistake, a vote for this amendment is legislation. We believe it is an important Mr. President, the Dole/Johnston a vote against small business, a vote step forward on behalf of the small business community. substitute will help small business that against common sense, and ultimately are hamstrung by Government redtape. a vote against the environment—be- At the recent White House Conference for cause unless we reform the way we do Small Business, several of the top 10 rec- That is why it has the overwhelming ommendations included suggestions to im- support of the small business commu- business we will continue to waste our prove the regulatory process. We note that nity, including the National Federa- resources on trivial risks, and have several of those recommendations are ad- tion of Independent Business, the nothing left over for the very real dressed within the compromise version of the Small Business Legislative Council, health, safety, and environmental regulatory relief legislation. National Small Business United, and problems that call for commonsense While the delegates to the conference did other small business groups. solutions. not rank the proposals, the number three

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10115 vote-getter at the conference was a call to International Formalwear Association. The language which you have submitted to amend the Regulatory Flexibility Act to add International Television Association. this bill will be most beneficial to small judicial review. We note that the com- Machinery Dealers National Association. businesses across the United States. It is promise version of the regulatory relief leg- Manufacturers Agents National Associa- high time that Congress and the President islation includes strong language to provide tion. act to provide small businesses with the op- the judicial review necessary to ensure that Manufacturers Representatives of Amer- portunity to hold our federal government ac- agencies comply fully with the Regulatory ica, Inc. countable for the regulations they impose on Flexibility Act. Mechanical Contractors Association of small business. Your leadership on this issue The Small Business Legislative Council America, Inc. is most helpful and NSBU is grateful for (SBLC) is a permanent, independent coali- National Association for the Self-Em- your efforts. tion of nearly one hundred trade and profes- ployed. Having just participated in the 1995 White sional associations that share a common National Association of Catalog Showroom House Conference on Small Business, I am commitment to the future of small business. Merchandisers. aware that this issue was number three (3) Our members represent the interests of small National Association of Home Builders. on the final list of recommendations to the businesses in such diverse economic sectors National Association of Investment Com- President and to Congress. Small business as manufacturing, retailing, distribution, panies. owners who were delegates to that con- professional and technical services, con- National Association of Plumbing-Heating- ference want real reform. Your language will struction, transportation, tourism, and agri- Cooling Contractors. deliver a pragmatic response to their rec- culture. For your information, a list of our National Association of Private Enter- ommendation. members is enclosed. prise. Now is not a time to compromise on this We at the Small Business Legislative National Association of Realtors. issue. It is too important to job creation and Council look forward to working with you to National Association of Retail Druggists. the growth of the small business community. see this legislation passed and ultimately en- National Association of RV Parks and Thank you for your leadership. NSBU will acted into law. Campgrounds. do all it can to support your efforts. Sincerely, National Association of Small Business In- Sincerely, JOHN S. SATAGAJ, vestment Companies. JOHN PAUL GALLES, President. National Association of the Remodeling In- President. Enclosure. dustry. National Chimney Sweep Guild. MEMBERS OF THE SMALL BUSINESS NATIONAL ROOFING National Electrical Contractors Associa- LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL CONTRACTORS ASSOCIATION, tion. Washington, DC, July 5, 1995. Air Conditioning Contractors of America. National Electrical Manufacturers Rep- Hon. CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Alliance for Affordable Health Care. resentatives Association. Alliance of Independent Store Owners and Chairman, Committee on Small Business, U.S. National Food Brokers Association. Senate, Washington, DC. Professionals. National Independent Flag Dealers Asso- DEAR CHAIRMAN BOND: The National Roof- American Animal Hospital Association. ciation. American Association of Equine Practi- ing Contractors Association (NRCA) ap- National Knitwear & Sportswear Associa- plauds your excellent language providing ju- tioners. tion. American Association of Nurserymen. dicial review for the Regulatory Flexibility National Lumber & Building Material Act of 1980 (Reg Flex) in the Comprehensive American Bus Association. Dealers Association. American Consulting Engineers Council. Regulatory Reform Act of 1995, S. 343. National Moving and Storage Association. NRCA is an association of roofing, roof American Council of Independent Labora- National Ornamental & Miscellaneous tories. deck and waterproofing contractors. Found- Metals Association. ed in 1886, it is one of the oldest associations American Gear Manufacturers Association. National Paperbox Association. American Machine Tool Distributors Asso- in the construction industry and has over National Shoe Retailers Association. 3,500 members represented in all 50 states. ciation. National Society of Public Accountants. American Road & Transportation Builders NRCA contractors are small, privately held National Tire Dealers & Retreaders Asso- Association. companies, and our average member employs ciation. American Society of Interior Designers. 35 people with annual sales of $3 million. National Tooling and Machining Associa- American Society of Travel Agents, Inc. Reg Flex requires that federal agencies tion. American Subcontractors Association. analyze the impact their regulations would National Tour Association. American Textile Machinery Association. have on small business before they go into National Wood Flooring Association. American Trucking Associations, Inc. effect and minimize that impact. But with NATSO, Inc. American Warehouse Association. no judicial review, agencies disregard it. If Opticians Association of America. AMT—The Association for Manufacturing an agency head certifies that a regulation Organization for the Protection and Ad- Technology. will have no significant economic impact on vancement of Small Telephone Companies. Architectural Precast Association. small business, the agency can ignore Reg Petroleum Marketers Association of Amer- Associated Builders & Contractors. Flex. ica. Associated Equipment Distributors. For example, OSHA’s new Fall Protection Power Transmission Representatives Asso- Associated Landscape Contractors of Standard, Subpart M, requires all persons ciation. America. working above six feet to have either a safe- Printing Industries of America, Inc. Association of Small Business Develop- ty harness on, safety nets, or scaffolding Professional Lawn Care Association of ment Centers. with a walkway and a guardrail. We estimate America. Automotive Service Association. its impact to be at least $250 million annu- Promotional Products Association Inter- Automotive Recyclers Association. ally; OSHA’s estimate is $40 million annu- national. Automotive Warehouse Distributors Asso- ally, and the agency goes on to state that ciation. Retail Bakers of America. Small Business Council of America, Inc. the standard will not have a significant im- Bowling Proprietors Association of Amer- pact upon a substantial number of small en- ica. Small Business Exporters Association. SMC/Pennsylvania Small Business. tities. Building Service Contractors Association Your judicial review language for Reg Flex International. Society of American Florists. Turfgrass Producers International. would put a stop to this kind of agency non- Christian Booksellers Association. compliance, and NRCA would oppose any ef- Cincinnati Sigh Supplies/Lamb and Co. fort to weaken it. NATIONAL SMALL BUSINESS UNITED Council of Fleet Specialists. Sincerely, Washington, DC., June 28, 1995. Council of Growing Companies. CRAIG S. BRIGHTUP, Senator CHRISTOPHER BOND, Direct Selling Association. Director of U.S. Senate, Russell Senate Office Building, Electronics Representatives Association. Government Relations. Florists’ Transworld Delivery Association. Washington, DC. Health Industry Representatives Associa- DEAR SENATOR BOND: National Small Busi- Mrs. FEINSTEIN addressed the tion. ness United is extremely pleased with your Chair. Helicopter Association International. efforts to pass into law S.B. 343. Ever since The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Independent Bankers Association of Amer- the original passage of the Regulatory Flexi- DEWINE). The Senator from California. ica. bility Act, small businesses have expected Mrs. FEINSTEIN. I thank the Chair. Independent Medical Distributors Associa- the federal government to offer more flexi- Mr. President, I have not had an op- tion. bility when imposing federal regulations on International Association of Refrigerated small businesses. Unfortunately, agencies portunity yet to speak on the bills be- Warehouses. have not been held accountable to this act. fore us, most specifically S. 343. For International Communications Industries It did not provide for judicial review which is many days now I have listened as the Association. so essential to its implementation. Senate has been debating what are two

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10116 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 major regulatory reform bills. They are metals and DDT to such an extent that unclear under Dole-Johnston whether complex and detailed and some have the public is often warned not to eat airbags could be required. said boring. But one way or another fish caught there. I remember when I Again, this is because airbags, even they will touch the life of virtually first went to live in Los Angeles, I though they are much safer, are also every American citizen. went into a restaurant and ordered more costly than manual seatbelts or The fact is that regulations serve an sand dabs and the waiter said, ‘‘Don’t lap and shoulder belts. And again, the important purpose in our society. But order sand dabs; they are bottom-feed- least cost alternative would have to be as with all laws, they have to be bal- ing fish and they are caught in the chosen. anced against other competing needs, Santa Monica Bay, and the bay is pol- Airline flight data recorders. This is and reexamined from time to time in luted.’’ the black box that we all read about order to remain effective. Economically, California’s unem- when a plane goes down. If the stand- I happen to be a great fan of the Sen- ployment rate, though beginning to ards of the Dole-Johnston bill were ap- ator from Louisiana. I believe he is a improve, is still two percentage points plied to airline flight data recorders, sound thinker. He is an effective lead- above the national average. We are the FAA tells me that it might not be er, and he has played a major role in still struggling to climb out of the re- able to require flight data recorders on the debate on these issues. I respect cession and cope with continued de- airlines. him. I also respect the majority leader, fense downsizing. This is because flight data recorders whose bill this is, as a seasoned, experi- So the last thing California busi- do not necessarily reduce immediate enced Senator who understands the im- nesses need is unnecessary or cum- risks. Instead, they provide valuable pact of regulations upon the commu- bersome regulations that drive up costs information which can greatly enhance nity regulated. and drive out jobs. airline safety in the future. As we address the issue of regulatory So I have listened with great care to The Glenn-Chafee bill, I believe, is reform, I think certain considerations this debate, and I have had the privi- far preferable. Unlike the Dole-John- should guide us in the process. lege of discussing certain of my con- ston bill, the Glenn-Chafee bill requires First and foremost, public health and cerns with the Senator from Louisiana. a rigorous cost-benefit analysis and safety must be the paramount concern. But the bottom line and the one that I permits both costs and benefits to be And we have heard that concern voiced have reached is that the Glenn-Chafee weighed intelligently, with public over and over in the debate over breast bill contains the best and most bal- health and safety given its full and cancer, over E. coli, and over a myriad anced approach to regulatory reform. proper weight in the equation. of other regulatory programs. I would like to address what I believe Now let me talk about petitions. The Second, Government regulations are the primary weaknesses in the Dole-Johnston bill’s petition process should not strangle business and com- Dole-Johnston legislation. would allow special interests to chal- merce but should seek to encourage In the area of cost-benefit, I believe lenge new rules and reopen existing economic growth as much as possible. the Dole-Johnston legislation, in a rules, giving them unprecedented That is often easier said than done, sense, throws the baby out with the power to jam up the process. particularly in the largest State in the bathwater. Cost-benefit analyses are By some estimates, the Dole-John- Union where problems are severe and supposed to weigh cost and benefit and ston bill would allow 80 to 100 new rea- often businesses will seek to choose an then allow for the best alternative to sons for challenging an agency rule. easier way and leave the State. be chosen. My source is attorneys who deal with But the bottom line is: regulations The Dole-Johnston bill does not do these matters. With 80 to 100 new rea- have to make sense. Finding the right that—it simply requires choosing the sons for challenging an agency rule, balance will be the determining factor least-cost alternative. That does not agencies will be forced to divert their as to whether we are successful in this always make sense, and it could have resources—their time, their staff, their effort. unfortunate results. dollars—to respond to these petitions. California has a huge stake in this Let me give you some examples. Dole-Johnston would open the door Seatbelts in the front seat. If the bill both from a public safety perspec- to hundreds of additional lawsuits, in- standards in the Dole-Johnston bill tive and an economic perspective. creasing the volume and complexity of were applied to seatbelts, I am told by We have the biggest air pollution Federal litigation—some want that— the National Highway Traffic Safety problem in the Nation. Children today, and further clogging the court system. born in the Los Angeles basin, suffer Administration that they would prob- This is one of the main reasons why from a 10 to 15 percent decrease in lung ably not be able to require both lap and the Justice Department strongly op- function compared with children in shoulder belts in cars. poses this bill. That is because, even though having other areas as a result of air quality. Let me give an example of some pos- both lap and shoulder belts save lives, California has 96 Superfund sites, the sible results. second largest number in the country— the lap belt alone is the least-cost al- Commuter airline safety. In recent that is almost two major toxic waste ternative. months, there have been three crashes Mr. JOHNSTON. Will the Senator dumps for every county in our State. of commuter airlines in which a total yield at that point? In 1990, I had occasion to visit one of Mrs. FEINSTEIN. The Senator is of 40 people have been killed. Following them. It is a place called Iron Moun- going to have a number of points to re- a fatal commuter airline accident in tain mine, near Redding, that had been spond to. He might want to listen to December 1994, the Secretary of Trans- owned by a chemical company and had them all first. If I could finish, I would portation proposed new commuter air- been mined for various minerals. There appreciate it. line safety regulations. were holes in this mountain, some the Mr. JOHNSTON. Sure. More and more people are flying size of 30-story office buildings. When Mrs. FEINSTEIN. I thank the Sen- commuter airlines. Having completed it rained, water interspersed with the ator very much. their own cost-benefit and risk-anal- chemicals producing sulfuric acid Seatbelts in the back seat. They ysis assessment, the FAA is close to fi- which then drained out onto the banks would also not be able to require seat- nalizing these new, urgently needed of the Trinity River actually metal- belts in the back seat. safety standards. lizing some of the banks. This Super- Because 90 percent of those killed in Again, the general counsel of the De- fund site is now in the process of being automobiles are people in the front partment of Transportation informs us cleaned up. So I am very pleased that seat, rear-seat fatalities are not likely that they will be faced with a Hobson’s the portion of the legislation impact- to meet the statistical threshold that choice. Let me give you an example. ing Superfund sites has been removed would allow the agency to require seat- They are nearly ready to finalize. The from the bill. belts in the back. My source for this in- language in Dole-Johnston would de- Santa Monica Bay, one of the most formation is the Department of Trans- rail these efforts and force the FAA to beautiful areas in the country and a portation’s general counsel’s office. either start over in order to comply premier tourist attraction in my State, Airbags. If airbags were not already with the specific least-cost and risk-as- has been contaminated with heavy required by law, which they are, it is sessment criteria in S. 343, or proceed

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10117 with the new regulations, knowing bill provide separate statutory grounds hundreds of businesses, no question they will likely be challenged and held for judicial review. The Justice Depart- about it. But you have to consider, up in court for years. ment in its letter to Senator DOLE lists what is the cost of 15 to 20 percent of So, in other words, the FAA would be the sections. Even the Justice Depart- youngsters born in the Los Angeles challenged that they do not meet the ment is unsure about how these provi- Basin having reduced lung capacity specific new cost-benefit requirements sions would relate to each other. and, therefore, a shortened span of life. or they could delay and redo the cost- Moreover, the ambiguous language How do you measure that cost? benefit and the risk assessment. But if could mean that the courts will be The San Francisco Bay area is now they move ahead, as under the present called upon to evaluate scientific and the largest metropolitan area of the legislation, as they are prepared to do, technical steps in cost-benefit analyses country that complies with the clean they run this jeopardy. and risk assessments, issues outside of air standards. In the early 1970’s, I Let me talk for a moment about an the realm of expertise of judges. served on the air board. Even major oil automatic sunset. My understanding of Let us take the issue of emergeney companies have told me that the air the legislation is that once a petition exemptions. regulations have worked. is accepted, the agency has a 3-year re- Another problem with ambiguity in Nobody should think that Glenn- view period to review the rule. If an Dole-Johnston is its definition of an Chafee is a copout, a soft bill, or that agency is unable to complete this re- emergency. it will not do the job. The Glenn-Chafee view, a sunset of the rule would result. For example, the bill refers to ac- bill is a very tough bill. So the arbitrary deadline of 3 years is tions to protect public health and safe- It represents real regulatory reform, a trigger for sunsetting some of these ty or natural resources, but the De- without unjustifiably burdening the regulations. partment of Agriculture has raised agencies or clogging the court system. This could result in an automatic with us questions about how Dole- The Glenn-Chafee bill requires cost- sunset of important health and safety Johnston would affect an emergency benefit analysis for all major rules, rules. Let me give you some examples. such as infestation of the Mediterra- just where we should be. It requires Automobile fuel efficiency standards. nean fruit fly. risk assessments for all major rules re- Food labeling regulations—which Let me explain why. The Department lated to environment, health, and safe- have served to educate consumers. of Agriculture believes the emergency ty, just where we should be. Does every Member in this body re- provisions are sufficiently ambiguous It requires peer review of cost-benefit member food labeling regulations were and relate to health and safety, not to analysis and risk assessments, just very much contested by the industries economic emergency. where we should be. affected, but they are now part of every Now, the Medfly in California is a It accounts for the special needs of product? People respect them, use major problem. Parts of the State have small businesses, allowing small enti- them, and I think they are effective. been quarantined because of the Med- ties to petition for judicial review of Regulations to ensure the safety of fly. But it is really an economic emer- compliance with the Regulatory Flexi- children’s toys, cribs, bed clothing. gency because the farmers lose their bility Act. The Glenn-Chafee bill, on the other entire crop when a Medfly is found. It requires public disclosure and hand, accomplishes regulatory review And emergency actions periodically openness in the regulatory process. of existing rules without creating regu- have to be taken, such as tree strip- And it limits judicial review to deter- latory gridlock. It requires agencies to ping, aerial spraying, and so on. It is mine: First, whether a rule is major; review existing rules every 10 years, unclear under Dole-Johnston whether and, second, whether a final rule is ar- without allowing special interests to the Animal and Plant Health Inspec- bitrary or capricious. dictate the workload of Federal agen- Most importantly, the Glenn-Chafee tion Service could act quickly enough cies whose mission is to protect public bill cuts redtape while retaining the to take the necessary steps to protect health and safety. role of Government in protecting pub- the economic interests of agriculture One of the major criticisms of the lic health, safety, and the environ- Dole-Johnston bill is that it is too am- from pest infestations. The inability to act quickly could ment. biguous. Let me tell you what I mean I believe the Glenn-Chafee substitute cost agriculture millions of dollars in by this. is a good bill, and I intend to support destruction of crops and loss of export Let us take the issue of the super- it. markets. mandate. I yield the floor. From the language of Dole-Johnston Let me conclude. Mr. JOHNSTON. Mr. President, the I support regulatory reform that and a recent amendment, it is still un- distinguished Senator from California solves problems that have been identi- clear what will happen when the bill’s has raised eight different points. There fied in the regulatory system, not one requirements conflict with require- is a full, complete, definitive and, I be- that creates more problems. ments in existing statutes. lieve, unassailable answer to each of I support reform that puts public Although the new amendment states these. If the Senator will allow me, I health and safety first. that Dole-Johnston’s requirements will tell her why in each of these in- And I support reform that makes the should not override existing statutory stances, the information she has been Federal Government more efficient and requirements, which will be given more given is dead, flat wrong. effective. weight? What legally does the word You know, Mr. President, there is a I do not believe the Dole-Johnston ‘‘override’’ actually mean? saying that ‘‘There is none that is so bill meets that test. I do not believe it Would the least-cost requirement blind as he who will not see.’’ I think is really regulatory reform. It does not trump the health-based standards of we have, on behalf of some of these simplify the process. Instead, I believe the Clean Air Act? agencies that have been advising my it will burden the agencies so that they What is the impact on annual farm friend from California, a terminal cannot do their job. And as the Justice programs? Because the Department of blindness. Agriculture currently uses greatest- Department has warned, it will burden Let us start with No. 1. We are told net-benefit criteria and not the least- the courts significantly. I simply can- again that the Dole-Johnston bill re- cost alternative required under Dole- not support it. quires the least-cost alternative. Mr. Johnston, it throws open the question Many regulations are essential to President, here is the language. protect public health, safety, and the of who can participate, what the terms Least cost alternative, or if scientific, of participation are, and what the costs environment. technical, or economic uncertainties, or non- will be. I remember when we had the worst quantifiable benefits to health, safety, or the The Dole-Johnston bill leaves these air in Los Angeles. I lived in southern environment identified by the agency in the questions up to the courts. California for 5 years, and I remember rulemaking record make a more costly alter- Let us take the issue of judicial re- when I went outside, my eyes burned native * * * appropriate or in the public in- view. and teared. The air quality is better terest * * * they can do so. According to the Justice Depart- now, and that is because of clean air Mr. President, what could fit more ment, eight different sections of the regulations. They have been hard on perfectly into these kinds of benefits

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10118 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 than shoulder belts, back-seat seat- would say that we have set forth in a Mr. JOHNSTON. Generally for the belts, and airbags? As my friend from document the difficulties with the defi- life, for the 20th or 30th time, the value California says, an airbag is ‘‘much nition ‘‘decisional criteria,’’ and this is of the life is not quantifiable by its na- safer but more costly.’’ one, I believe, if my memory is correct, ture. Now, I ask my friend, what is ambig- one of three which have been very pre- Mr. LEVIN. The definition in the bill uous about that? It is just as plain as cisely specified. I think it does address says that ‘‘if the nonquantifiable bene- the nose on your face. If it is good for the one specific one of the three we fits to health, safety, or the environ- safety, even though it is not quantifi- have raised. ment identified by the agency,’’ et able—because the value of a human life For instance, another exception, if cetera. is, by its nature, nonquantifiable—you my friend—— The number of lives in my hypo- can do it. Mr. JOHNSTON. Mr. President I thetical is very, very precise and is Black boxes on airplanes. Mr. Presi- want to keep this discussion to a ques- quantified. Now, since the agencies are dent, the same thing. tion, and not a speech. likely to read that cost-benefit anal- Now, how do my colleagues continue Again, the question is, what is the ysis and they have said that the num- to say that this language requires the value of a human life? It is, in my view, ber of lives saved is quantified in my least-cost alternative? very clearly by nature nonquantifiable. hypothetical, therefore, it would not be Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, will the That is the reason for putting in the eligible for this exception. Again, for Senator yield? language. the life of me, I do not understand why Mr. JOHNSTON. Yes. Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Would the Senator the Senator from Louisiana in his bill Mr. LEVIN. Since the Senator asked yield the floor? insists on the word ‘‘nonquantifiable and my colleagues continue to ask that Mr. JOHNSTON. Yes. benefit’’ when the word ‘‘benefits’’ as Mrs. FEINSTEIN. The point I was question, let me try to answer that defined generally, is both quantifiable trying to make is the back seat seat- question: It is because we have repeat- and nonquantifiable, and where if, in belts are quantifiable. Therefore, it edly, over and over again, said that if fact, benefits are quantified, it would would not apply. the benefits to health and safety or the seem to me it would be essential we Mr. JOHNSTON. This is for health, environment are quantifiable, your ex- allow the same exemption as when ception does not apply. for life. Mrs. FEINSTEIN. But it is quantified they are nonquantified. Now, what sense does it make to say in that only 10 percent of the people die Mr. JOHNSTON. Mr. President, I that if the benefits to health, safety, in the back seat. The problem is in the have given the answer to that question. and the environment can be quantified, front seat. I will give it again. that then we have to go with least cost, Mr. JOHNSTON. There are thousands It is because the definition of section even though a slight additional cost of people who die in automobile acci- 621 includes both quantifiable and non- would give much greater benefits? dents and many whose death could be quantifiable and because life is, by its Now, I have never understood why prevented by back seat seatbelts. That very nature, not quantifiable in value, the Senator from Louisiana insists on is a nonquantifiable value. although we may count up the number the word ‘‘nonquantifiable benefits.’’ We do not have to get least cost. The of lives. We have gone over and over that issue. very idea that we say we have a rule Point No. 2, my friend from Cali- That is the answer to the question. that would save a lot of lives, that we fornia says the petition process would Mr. JOHNSTON. It is because, Mr. have to go to the least cost which is open up 80 to 100 new reasons why at- President, the definitions in section 621 front seat instead of back seat, I sub- torneys could challenge rules. state clearly that the term ‘‘benefit’’ mit to my friend, is patently absurd. Not so, Mr. President. There is one means the reasonably identifiable sig- Mr. BOND. Will the Senator yield the single standard, which is that you must nificant, favorable effects, quantifiable floor? show a substantial likelihood that the and nonquantifiable. Mr. JOHNSTON. I am happy to yield existing rule does not meet the stand- Mr. LEVIN. Except that is limited by to the Senator. ards of this bill, which means that the the Senator’s language in subsection Mr. BOND. I wonder if the Senator is benefits do not justify the cost. It is (b). When it comes to the least costly aware that Prof. John Graham, of the one standard. You have one chance to alternative, the Senator does not say Harvard Center for Risk Analysis, who do it in the 180-day period. It is just as ‘‘benefit’’ which is, in fact, defined is an expert on risk assessment, started clear as it can be. I do not know where somewhere else. It is limited to non- off his analysis by finding that a regu- the 80 to 100 new reasons—I suspect quantifiable benefit. lation requiring airbags, for example, that there are some lawyers who were That is a question which has been was precisely the kind of regulation told that they are against this bill, and raised for the last week, and for the life that was worth the cost, and that Pro- go make up reasons, and they did not of me, I do not understand why the fessor Graham is currently or has just do a very good job of making them up. word ‘‘benefit″ means quantifiable or concluded a session with the media Point No. 3—I hope my friend from nonquantifiable for the purposes of the next door to the Chamber, pointing out California is listening—commuter air- act generally, but when it comes to the that the Dole-Johnston bill precisely lines, 40 people killed, they are ready least-cost requirement, it is only the does meet the criteria which he devel- to finalize the order, and they would nonquantifiable benefits which are oped in the Harvard Center for Risk have to start over. going to be an exception. That is the Assessment as developed for deter- Now, Mr. President, last week we put answer to the Senator’s question. mining what are reasonable regula- in an amendment specifically to deal Mr. JOHNSTON. Mr. President, let tions and, in fact, has stated that the with this question. If the notice of pro- me ask my friend from Michigan, it is Dole-Johnston substitute does permit posed ruling making was out by April right there in the definition of section the kind of analysis which would lead 1, they are not covered by these re- 621. If we took that word ‘‘nonquantifi- to the kind of life-saving regulations quirements—not covered by these re- able’’ out, would the Senator then such as the requirement for airbags. quirements. We had a long debate, and agree with me that it does not require Mr. JOHNSTON. It is absolutely true. we accepted the amendment. least cost, that this discretion is there? Professor Graham has testified before Now, Mr. President, these commuter Or is this just another one of the our committee. Of course it allows for airline proposals were out long, long ghosts, once we get out of here there that. before April 1. Now, does my friend are more ghosts to be found? Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, will the from California understand that? Did Will this solve the provision? Senator yield? someone say that amendment does not Mr. LEVIN. It solves one of three Mr. JOHNSTON. Briefly. cover this? decisional criteria raised by my good Mr. LEVIN. The Senator raises a Mrs. FEINSTEIN. If the Senator was friend from Louisiana. It addresses one question. If there are 823 lives saved, asking me a question, let me answer it of the remaining decisional criteria according to a cost-benefit analysis, for with this question back to the Senator. issues. These have been described, I the cost of $1 million, is that quan- Are they still subject to the petition think, in fairness. I think my friend tified or not quantified? process?

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10119 Mr. JOHNSTON. They are subject to Mrs. FEINSTEIN. May I just read the Mr. JOHNSTON. No. They have al- a petition process, but that does not— section on its face? Will the Senator ready had—first of all, they have had 1 the Senator said that they are ready to yield for a moment? year after the expiration—I mean after finalize, and they have to start over Mr. JOHNSTON. Yes. the effective date of the act. They have again, the rule would go into effect. Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Termination of the had 3 years minimum initially, plus Mrs. FEINSTEIN. But they would rules, page 34: they have had these 2 years—that is 6 have to face the challenge, because the If the head of an agency has not completed years. They cannot extend it beyond 6 cost-benefit risk assessment that they the review of a rule by the deadline estab- years. But they can make such orders were doing is different from the one lished in the schedule published or modified to continue the rule as is necessary. that would be required. pursuant to subsection (b) and (c), the head Now, my friend from California says Mr. JOHNSTON. No, they do not of the agency shall not enforce the rule and the supermandate language is ambig- have to do a cost-benefit or a risk as- the rule shall terminate by operation of law uous. For the life of me, Mr. President, as of such date. sessment if their notice of proposed the supermandate language we said rulemaking was out before April 1. It is Mr. JOHNSTON. But now if the Sen- was unnecessary in the first place be- just as clear as it can be. ator will look over on the previous cause the bill is clear and I believe it Let me finish answering these ques- page, subsection (3), is. But at the behest of all the people tions from the Senator from California. An interested party may petition the U.S. who said we have to have superman- My friend from California says there Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia date language, we adopted the lan- is an automatic sunset. If she would to extend the period for review of a rule on guage using their word. ‘‘Override’’ was look at the section on page 33, that is the schedule for up to 2 years, and to grant such equitable relief as is appropriate. not our word, it was the word of others. section 623, it provides that, if a rule is It says, now, ‘‘nothing in this section likely to terminate and the agency To be sure, if nobody cares, if the shall be construed to override any stat- needs additional time, and terminating agency head wants the rule to termi- utory requirements including health, the rule is not in the public interest, nate and the whole world wants it to safety and environmental require- and the agency has not expeditiously terminate and nobody cares, nobody ments.’’ completed its review, you not only can files a petition—yes. But that is a For the life of me I do not know what get up to an additional 2 years, but you whole lot different from saying that you do to please the opponents of this can get a court order to tell them to this thing automatically sunsets. provision. We first accept the principle complete the rule or to do other need- Mr. LEVIN. If the Senator will yield and put it in the bill, and it is clear. ful things. on that point? Is the Senator then will- But, oh, no, they find an ambiguity. I do not know where this automatic ing to amend his bill to say if anybody We come back and put in the precise sunset comes from. It is not an auto- petitions a court at any time opposing language, the override language that matic sunset. It is just not. And the sunset, that then it will not sunset? they want, and it is still not good words are clear. Just the act of petitioning a court? Be- enough. Mr. GLENN. Will the Senator yield? cause the Senator said ‘‘if nobody Mr. President, what can we do to sat- Mr. JOHNSTON. Yes. cares.’’ isfy the opponents of this bill? If that Mr. GLENN. But if the time came for It seems to me that is quite, quite language is not good enough—tell me the rule to expire? Let us say we are different from what is in the bill, which what is. It is incredible. reviewing the rule, the existing rule, says: Sure, if you go to a court and get Judicial review language, Mr. Presi- and the time came and went past for an order that says it does not sunset it dent—my friend from California says the review of that rule. It could sunset will not sunset. that you ought to have review of the at that point unless you asked for this But that is not the obvious meaning final agency action to determine extension. of the word sunset. whether it is arbitrary and capricious Then, if you ask for the extension, Mr. JOHNSTON. It is quite clear. It and that is the only purpose for which let us say it was granted; let us say it is a low barrier. You have to show the risk assessment and cost-benefit can be was extended. Then, when you run out rule is likely to terminate, the agency considered. of that time period, it would in fact needs additional time, that termi- I invite my friend from California to sunset. nating the rule would not be in the look at the language. That is exactly— Mr. JOHNSTON. If everybody wants public interest, and that the agency exactly what it says. If you can find an the rule to sunset it can sunset. You has not expeditiously completed its re- ambiguity in these words we will can terminate a rule today. view. change them, because there is no ambi- Mr. GLENN. Here is what we do on Mr. LEVIN. That is for the extension. guity in those words. Glenn-Chafee. We say at the end of I am not referring to the extension. I There is a lot of ambiguity in the that time period the agency has to ei- am talking about after the 2 years runs Glenn substitute and I can show you ther approve the rule or start the rule- out, if a court has not ordered that rule exactly where that ambiguity is. But making process to repeal it. And that to continue it expires. there is no ambiguity in that. It adopts lets all public comment come in, which Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Right. exactly and precisely what the Senator is a much fairer process than just run- Mr. JOHNSTON. The court has had a says. Those studies can be used solely— ning out a couple of extensions and chance to review this and has given ‘‘solely for the purpose of determining guillotining the whole thing. such orders as are necessary, which whether the final agency action is arbi- Mr. JOHNSTON. There is virtually might be—I guess what the court would trary and capricious or an abuse of dis- no difference between this 2-year ex- order is a schedule. Public comments cretion.’’ tension provision of the Dole-Johnston to be completed by such and such a Where is the ambiguity in that lan- amendment and in the Glenn-Chafee time. Final rule by such and such a guage? I am at a loss to understand. substitute. time. They have full and complete dis- I can show the Senator where the Mr. GLENN. No, I disagree with that. cretion. ambiguity in the Glenn-Chafee lan- Mr. JOHNSTON. You provide for the There may be some rules that, upon guage is, but there is clearly not any court to use section 706 of the Adminis- review by the court, should terminate. here. trative Procedure Act in order to give But it is not automatic. You have a Mr. LEVIN. I wonder if the Senator the needful review. We provide that the chance to go to court to get that rule will yield on that question? court of appeals grant such equitable extended. Mr. JOHNSTON. I will. relief as is appropriate. If anything, Mr. LEVIN. Will the Senator yield Mr. LEVIN. Because the Justice De- ours is broader than yours. for a question? partment has set forth the ambiguity The point is, it is not an automatic Mr. JOHNSTON. I think I have an- in the words ‘‘failure to comply.’’ sunset. It is just not. It may sunset, swered that. Let me move on. The question is whether or not those that is if everybody wants it to sunset. Mr. LEVIN. This is a different ques- words refer to the procedural irregular- But if anybody cares, they can petition tion. Can the court extend the period ities which could occur in the cost-ben- the court. for review beyond 2 years? efit analysis or in the risk assessment.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10120 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 Their letter dated July 11, 1995, is a first time I heard that raised—hon- tended—I do not believe my friend from pretty serious source, the Justice De- estly, to say that you cannot deal with Louisiana has too much objection to partment. They say on page 2 in a let- the medfly, that somehow that escapes it—assuming that one little issue can ter to Senator DOLE that there remain health, safety, or the environment, Mr. be addressed, does the Senator from two basic problems which create the President, if medfly is not included in Louisiana have a problem with adding potential for litigation under section the environment, I do not know what that narrowing language to his bill? 625. is; or under health. I mean we are talk- Mr. JOHNSTON. I think it does not First, section 625 provides that failure to ing about something that could destroy narrow. comply—they underline the words ‘‘with all the fruit in California. And that These two proposals, I believe—you the.’’ They now substitute the words ‘‘the does not have anything to do with have to read them In pari materia. rules pertaining to cost-benefit and risk health? Who are these people over in What I get from this last sentence is analysis.’’ the Agriculture Department telling that this is a review. You have ‘‘judi- If, in fact, that is not what the Sen- you that fruit does not have anything cial review of the agency action.’’ ator’s language—— to do with health? I mean what kind of I submit to you that review is under Mr. JOHNSTON. That is correct. contorted, convoluted logic, to say section 706 of the Administrative Pro- Mr. LEVIN. ‘‘Failure to comply with that fruit does not have anything to do cedures Act. If it is not, tell me under the rules pertaining to the cost-benefit with health? I mean it is clear, Mr. what standard it is reviewed. and risk analysis.’’ Again, they insert President. I mean these people who op- Mr. LEVIN. I think that is correct. as to what they believe you are intend- pose risk assessment are looking for Mr. JOHNSTON. That is correct. ing, that failure may be considered by ghosts, and finding them everywhere. Mr. LEVIN. I believe that is correct. the court solely for the purpose of de- And you find one ghost, you say what Under that section, the courts have termining whether the final agency ac- does it take to fix that ghost? You are adopted the following standard, that tion is arbitrary or capricious or an given the language they want, and they the procedural errors ‘‘were so serious abuse of discretion. come back and say, ‘‘Ah ha. But that and related to matters of such central When this section is read in conjunction language is ambiguous.’’ The super- relevance to the rule that there is a with the extraordinarily detailed and pro- mandate language which was unneces- substantial likelihood that the rule scriptive requirements for risk assessment would have been significantly changed and cost-benefit analyses contained else- sary in the first place which said for a second time in words that the oppo- if such errors had not been made.’’ where in the bill, it is clear that the alleged So that has been the interpretation failure to comply with any of those require- nents suggested and know it is some- ments will be the subject of litigation. Peti- how ambiguous, I mean this is a no-win under 706 by the courts, that the proce- tioners will surely argue that failure to com- situation. We have to face the fact that dural errors ‘‘were so serious and re- ply with the extensive procedural require- some people are opposed to risk assess- lated to matters of such central rel- ments is itself arbitrary and capricious. ment. evance to the rule that there is a sub- That is the Justice Department. That Now my friend from Michigan finds stantial likelihood that the rule would is a pretty solid source of a question. ambiguity in this. I now have the have been significantly changed if such Since the Senator asked, ‘‘Where is the Glenn-Chafee language here. I would errors had not been made.’’ question?’’ There it is. like to ask him how this last language That interpretation is a narrowing Mr. JOHNSTON. They do not say differs from our language when our lan- interpretation where the new lan- why it is. I must say that this letter guage says that you may consider final guage—— from the Justice Department gives me agency action to determine whether it Mr. JOHNSTON. There may be a real pause to consider what the quality is arbitrary and capricious. You did, by court interpretation of that. But you of our people in the Justice Depart- the way, have in the RECORD the risk have under your amendment a review ment is because there is no ambiguity analysis and cost-benefit, did you not? of subsection (d), ‘‘without observance here. They simply say it. They make Is that required? of the procedure required by law.’’ Ac- an unsupported statement and anybody Mr. LEVIN. Yes. cording to what you have said, you are can say anything. But you cannot read Mr. JOHNSTON. All right. How does going to review the procedure because out this the word ‘‘solely.’’ They just this differ from what we have said? that is what subsection (d) says. We do read it out. They go on to say—you will Mr. LEVIN. I think the difference is limit under our amendment. Our notice that the letters says not that in the preceding language. The dif- amendment is limited specifically to ‘‘solely’’ is not there but that it will be ference is in the preceding language in whether the final agency action is ‘‘ar- the subject of litigation. Glenn-Chafee which, if an analysis as- bitrary and capricious.’’ That is much It is like when I used to practice law, sessment had been performed, the narrower than that which you state. It Mr. President. Somebody would come courts shall review to determine is at least ambiguous. in and say, ‘‘Can I sue somebody about whether the analysis or assessment Mr. LEVIN. I am wondering, relevant such and such?’’ And I would say, conformed to the ‘‘particular require- to the answer that I gave the Senator, ‘‘Sure. You can sue. But the courts are ments.’’ I am wondering whether or not whether or not the Senator is willing not going to grant the subject of your my friend from Louisiana might be to incorporate that narrowing lan- suit.’’ You know, you can summons up willing to add that same language into guage? the witches from the briny deep. But his bill. Mr. JOHNSTON. No. I say the answer will they come? No. They will not Mr. JOHNSTON. In the first place, I is no for the third time. And the reason come. They will not. Alleging some- think it is ambiguous. What are ‘‘par- is that it is not narrowing. It is ex- thing that is clear in the four corners ticular requirements’’? That to me panding, and it is ambiguous. of the statute does not mean it has any means a de minimis test. Words are Mr. LEVIN. I am referring here substance. If they are going to sue on supposed to mean something. It means though now to the interpretation of that, let me tell you. They are going to something different than ‘‘conformed section 706. You see, that has been in- sue on Glenn-Chafee because Glenn- to the requirements of this chapter.’’ terpreted. It has been interpreted as I Chafee is ambiguous. So when it says ‘‘particular require- just read. The language of the Senator Let me finish these two other points, ments,’’ I would assume that means from Louisiana has not so been inter- and then I want to ask a question. that you need not deal with the tech- preted yet, and is open to a much more Mr. LEVIN. May I ask a narrow ques- nical—— expansive interpretation. tion of my friend? Mr. LEVIN. ‘‘Specific.’’ Mr. JOHNSTON. Look. That is pre- Mr. JOHNSTON. Let me return to Mr. JOHNSTON. ‘‘Individual,’’ but cisely the same. That is an additional this in just a moment. I will engage you look at the requirements of the interpretation. ‘‘Arbitrary, capricious, you when I finish these two other chapter. an abuse of discretion.’’ That is the things. Would not that be fair? standard that we bring forward. We My friend from California says that Mr. LEVIN. Look at the ‘‘specific re- leave out ‘‘otherwise not in accordance the emergency regulations here are not quirements.’’ But my question is since with law’’ because we wanted to leave clear, that they are ambiguous. The that is a narrowing language that is in- out the procedural review.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10121 That is one of the most litigated and Mr. JOHNSTON. Yes, I will yield for in that section. It is clear that it can- judicially interpreted phrases in all of a question. not be considered independently, that the annals of judicial review. And it is Mr. THOMPSON. I ask the Senator, you cannot take—you can look at a the same precise and exact standard is it accurate that section 625 has to do cost-benefit analysis or a risk assess- which you claim is provided in your re- with jurisdiction and judicial review? ment independently and provide your view. Mr. JOHNSTON. Section 625. The an- own independent judgment on that, but You see the only difference between swer is yes. it can only go into the final rule in yours and ours, we both use ‘‘arbitrary, Mr. THOMPSON. And with regard to making a determination as to whether capricious, an abuse of discretion.’’ But any question such as the one that the or not the final rule is arbitrary and you have ‘‘observance of procedure re- Senator from Michigan raised per- capricious, et cetera. Is that correct? quired by law.’’ But you claim that ei- taining to jurisdiction and judicial re- Mr. JOHNSTON. Exactly and pre- ther that is meaningless or that your view, would that section apply? cisely. My friend from Tennessee puts language takes it away. So I say it Mr. JOHNSTON. Would it apply? it very well. adds nothing to it other than ambig- Mr. THOMPSON. With regard to the Mr. THOMPSON. I thank the Sen- uous. questions of to what judicial review ator. Mr. LEVIN. The difference though will pertain, would that be the gov- Mr. JOHNSTON. I am reminded, I again is that the Senator’s bill has new erning section, section 625? tell my friend from Tennessee, of the language which has not interpreted Mr. JOHNSTON. You mean judicial old quotation from Groucho Marx, who failure to comply whereas the lan- review under titles II and III of cost- said, ‘‘Politics is the art of looking for guage, as the Senator points to in our benefit analysis? trouble, finding it everywhere, and ap- bill, has been interpreted in a way Mr. THOMPSON. Yes. plying to it the wrong solutions.’’ which is significantly narrower than— Mr. JOHNSTON. The answer is yes. Mr. THOMPSON. And most of it finds may I say—what the Justice Depart- Mr. THOMPSON. The question has its way into legislation, I venture to ment feels is likely or could be inter- arisen as to the language ‘‘failure to say. preted into the words ‘‘failure to com- comply’’ and how that might relate to Mr. JOHNSTON. With this bill, the ply.’’ some other section. I share the concern opponents look for ghosts and trouble That is the difference, that there is a of the Senator from Louisiana and everywhere, they find it everywhere, new test, failure to comply, in the Sen- bemusement really as to why our and they apply to it the wrong solu- ator’s language and has not been made friends refuse to read the rest of that tions. the subject of the kind of review under sentence. Instead of reading the rest of Mr. President, this language is clear, the Administrative Procedures Act. the sentence in which that phrase is and I do not care who says otherwise. Mr. JOHNSTON. We say, ‘‘Failure to contained, other sections are referred Show me where that is unclear. As I comply may be used solely for the pur- to. say to my friend from Michigan, his in- pose of determining whether that is ar- Is it not true that it is ‘‘failure to terpretation of his judicial review pro- bitrary and capricious,’’ and that dif- comply with this subsection may be vision is exactly what ours says. His fers not at all from what you have said. considered by the Court solely for the gives with the left hand a procedural You allow for a review of procedures. purpose of determining whether or not review, takes it away with the right What does it mean in subsection (d) the final agency action is arbitrary and hand in ambiguous language, and inter- when you state ‘‘without observance of capricious,’’ et cetera? prets that with court cases which he the procedure required by law’’? Mr. JOHNSTON. The Senator is cor- Mr. LEVIN. Would the Senator agree says are clear. But we obviate the prob- rect. And the critics read out of that that the words ‘‘failure to comply lem for any of that by simply saying statute the word ‘‘solely,’’ and they with’’ intend to refer to the rules per- there is no procedural review. He has a find ghosts everywhere. But ‘‘solely’’ taining to cost-benefit and to risk procedural review in his proposal. We means solely, and it is right there in analysis? That is the intention of the do not have that in ours. That is why the language. For the life of me, I can- Senate? ours is preferable. It is clearer. It is Mr. JOHNSTON. Look, we have a not understand where people find ambi- free of all ambiguity. whole big section there that speaks for guity in it other than they are looking I yield the floor. itself, of course, that means the risk for it. Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I rise analysis and cost-benefit, and it means Mr. THOMPSON. I compliment the today in strong support of the bipar- peer review. And, as I said earlier, Senator in his attempt to deal with tisan regulatory reform bill introduced there will be times when procedural de- this issue. It is as if someone would say by Senators GLENN and CHAFEE. Unlike fects, if someone calls them that, that the Senator’s desk is yellow, and the more radical Dole-Johnston pro- might throw the whole rule out. you can argue that it is not, and some- posal, this legislation would make Suppose it is a regulation on second- one else can argue that it is. But there much-needed reforms to the regulatory hand smoke. If all the scientists were comes a point at which you want to process without jeopardizing the health from the tobacco industry, it would be throw up your hands, I am sure, be- and safety of American families. fundamentally unfair and the scientific cause you are dealing with clear lan- There is widespread agreement about judgment would be important. And if I guage, and I fail to see how anyone the need for regulatory reform. Nobody were the judge I would throw it out, could misinterpret this. It has only to wants to see American businesses, our even though that is a failure to comply do with final agency action. Is that engine of economic growth, hampered because it would render the whole correct? by unnecessary regulations. We must thing as an abusive discretion and arbi- Mr. JOHNSTON. That is absolutely constantly monitor Federal agencies to trary and capricious. correct. ensure that the rules they issue are Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Will the Senator Mr. THOMPSON. And if there is a narrowly tailored and rationally en- yield for just a moment? phrase or a couple of words within that forced. The Senator had one question he provision that our friends think may in In some instances today, this is un- asked, his first question for the list of some way be ambiguous in interpreting fortunately not the case. Many resi- 80 to 100 reasons. I have 144, some of another section or another phrase in dents of my home State of Connecticut which have been remedied. I would like another section of the statute, would have told me about regulations that to enter this into the RECORD, if I may. still not section 625 be the ruling sec- are not working well. And we have all Mr. JOHNSTON. Sure. I think that tion as far as what judicial review is? heard stories about regulations that may have been put into the RECORD It is a judicial review question we are seem to defy commonsense. The an- earlier. I think that was put into the concerned with here, is it not? swer, however, is to change nonsensical RECORD earlier this morning. Mr. JOHNSTON. That is exactly regulations and implement some com- I believe we might check with Mr. right. mon sense reforms. We should not over- Weiss. Mr. THOMPSON. I share the Sen- react by bringing the Government’s Mr. THOMPSON. Will the Senator ator’s real perplexity as to what the ability to protect American families yield for a question? confusion is with regard to the review and workers to a grinding halt.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10122 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 In my view, President Clinton has success stories. American lives are equally disappointed that other amend- done an outstanding job in this area. strengthened and saved every day by ments to strengthen meat safety, As part of their ongoing effort to re- good, sound regulations. ‘‘Regulation’’ OSHA and safe drinking water stand- invent government, he and the Vice has become a dirty word in some quar- ards failed. No one should have to live President ordered all Government ters, but we should remember what a in fear of illness or death from the E. agencies to carefully examine their regulation is: the means by which the coli bacteria or tainted water. In 1993, regulatory processes and put all the law is implemented and enforced. Reg- Milwaukee drinking water became regulations they have issued under the ulation is the tool the government uses tainted and more than 100 people were microscope. Their instructions have to execute the people’s will, as ex- killed and 400,000 people became sick. been to keep what works and eliminate pressed through their elected rep- We do not want to do anything here or fix what does not. resentatives in Congress. that would limit our ability to prevent In February, the President an- Sound regulations have saved count- such tragedies in the future. nounced the first benefits from this ef- less lives and prevented numerous inju- I hope that in the coming days we fort. The administration dramatically ries in the workplace, on the highways, can achieve a bipartisan consensus on changed the Federal Government’s ap- in the air, and in the home. These regu- regulatory reform. I believe that the proach to small businesses. Paperwork lation have also saved millions of dol- Glenn-Chafee bill provides the best requirements were cut in half, and reg- lars saved in medical costs, lost wages framework for these efforts, and I urge ulators were told to take a more prac- and reduced productivity from injury. my colleagues to support its intent. tical approach to enforcement by They have also immeasurably im- Mr. SIMON addressed the Chair. stressing compliance over punishment. proved our quality of life. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- As part of this effort, the Food and I can speak to one example in par- ator from Illinois. Drug Administration has implemented ticular. Since the passage of the Clean Mr. SIMON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to set aside tempo- some major reforms. The FDA elimi- Water Act in 1972, water pollution con- rarily the Glenn-Chafee amendment to nated 600 pages of burdensome regula- trol programs have been able to greatly offer an amendment by myself, Senator tions. The agency also made changes to improve our water quality everywhere, HATFIELD, and Senator REID. its review process to help consumers including in the Long Island Sound. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there get high-quality drugs and medical de- The current water quality of the sound objection? vices more quickly and more cheaply. is directly attributable to these pollu- Mr. JOHNSTON addressed the Chair. These results are impressive, and soon tion control programs, which have been The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- other agencies will be announcing effective in the face of increasing popu- ator from Louisiana. much-needed reforms. lation and activities in and around the Mr. JOHNSTON. Mr. President, what Of course, there is a limit to what sound. is the subject of this amendment? the Administration can do on its own. Environmental cleanup in the sound Mr. SIMON. We are talking about Since many regulations result from has led to increased tourism, increased regulations that we have passed that statutes passed by Congress, Congress property values, new industry and a do not make much sense. We passed a must also act. Earlier this year, we better economy. However, the Long Is- law that among other things prohibited made a good bipartisan start by pass- land Sound cleanup is not finished. In Members of Congress from writing rec- ing the Regulatory Transition Act. It fact, today it faces new challenges ommendations. If you have a member would provide a 45-day period during from residential, commercial, and rec- of your staff who wants to get a civil which Congress could review new regu- reational development. It is crucial service job, it is against the law for lations and potentially reject rules that pollution control programs re- you to write a letter of recommenda- through a resolution of disapproval. main in force for the sake of the sound tion. If we see a page here doing a great Once that process is in place, Con- and those who live around it. job, we cannot write a letter of rec- gress would better be able to fulfill its I fear that continued attempts to ommendation. This simply permits us mission of regulatory oversight. But clean up the sound would be under- to do that, and I hope it could be dis- we also need to make improvements to mined by the Dole-Johnston bill. In posed of without great debate. ensure that the regulatory process fact, the legislation could actually Mr. JOHNSTON. Mr. President, will works properly before rules are issued. turn the clock back and reverse years the Senator yield? That is why I have cosponsored the of progress. Mr. SIMON. I will be pleased to yield Glenn-Chafee bill. In my view, the bill I am also troubled by other provi- to my colleague. does a much better job of rationalizing sions and their impact on Americans’ Mr. JOHNSTON. Mr. President, I am regulations while protecting American health and safety. The Dole-Johnston familiar with the general problem. Of families than the more drastic pro- bill is still ambiguous about what course, all of us have run into this. I posals by Senators DOLE and JOHNSTON. would become of rules currently in the am less familiar with the solution, and The Glenn-Chafee substitute is a pipeline—those that have been issued I am totally ignorant of whether the tough, fair regulatory reform bill. It is but have not yet taken effect. The bill committees of jurisdiction have had a not a catch-all for special interests. It is also unclear as to whether agencies chance to look at it and whether they would give agencies the responsibility would have to go back and redo risk as- approve or disapprove. I wonder if the to determine a schedule to review all sessment to comply with the com- Senator could withhold to a later sta- major rules in a timely manner, and plicated risk assessment provision. tus in this bill and see if this can be there would be no automatic sunset. I also worry about the impact of this cleared. I see Senator ROTH. I do not Finally, judicial review would be more bill on the Occupational Safety and know whether that is within his com- limited in scope, therefore preventing Health Administration’s ability to pre- mittee of jurisdiction. Perhaps he can an inundation of frivolous challenges vent workplace injuries and deaths. speak to it. from overwhelming the courts. OSHA is already unable to fulfil its Mr. ROTH. Reserving the right to ob- Many Senators have taken to the mandate in a timely fashion. It took ject, Mr. President, I respectfully re- floor to highlight burdensome and ri- the agency 10 years, for example, to quest that the Senator from Illinois diculous regulations. The Senator from issue rules ensuring that workers withdraw his request. Utah has even given us a top ten list. would know about the dangers of the First of all, the amendment he is pro- I would suggest that it is always toxic chemicals in their workplace. posing is not germane to the legisla- easier to ridicule what does not work These delays would grow immeasurably tion before us. It does represent a very than it is to point out what does. It is worse if, under this bill’s provisions, we considerable change in our civil service a simple, and often effective, rhetorical build even more bureaucratic delay rules that are worthy of review. But I tool to string together isolated abuses into the system. In the meantime, hope that rather than bringing it up at to give the impression that they are countless workers could be hurt unnec- this time, this is a matter that could the rule, rather than the exception. essarily. be reviewed by the Governmental Af- I want to break from this practice, While, I appreciated some changes fairs Committee which has jurisdiction however, and speak about some of the made to the Dole-Johnston bill, I was over the matter.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10123 Mr. SIMON. Mr. President, with all committee take a hard look at it. I to the very heart of this legislation, be- due respect, I do not think the Govern- want to get a vote on it. We have craft- cause we can pass all of the require- mental Affairs Committee, which cre- ed this very carefully, I want to assure ments and all of the commonsense pro- ated this law, is likely to repeal it. But my colleagues. In terms of it not being posals that we want, but if it is left to- I have talked to a number of my col- germane, the Senator from Delaware tally in the hands of the bureaucracy leagues, and I think the sentiment in and I have voted for a thousand amend- to decide whether or not they want to this body is overwhelming that we ments that are not germane to legisla- comply with it or how they want to made a mistake. tion that is up. It is in a peripheral comply with it, then it is meaningless. Let me tell you how I happened to way germane. In other words, if there is not some get into this. This is a letter I wrote to I will change my unanimous consent semblance of judicial review, even for Donna Shalala about a person who request, Mr. President. I ask unani- the most egregious conduct and out- lives in an apartment building where mous consent that when the Chafee rageous decisions, it is, indeed, mean- we live: amendment is disposed of, the Simon- ingless. DEAR DONNA: I am enclosing a resume for Hatfield-Reid amendment be up for Mr. President, this is a nation of Dennis Gowie who was a hospital adminis- consideration at that point. laws, not of men and women, the bed- trator in Washington, DC until the new ad- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there ministration here took over. rock of our country. Legislation gives I do not know him well, but he lives in the objection? tremendous authority to the executive same apartment building that Jeanne and I Mr. JOHNSTON. Mr. President, why branch. That is what this body, that is live in, and he makes an excellent impres- does the Senator not give us a little what the Congress of the United States sion and has a superior background. time to work this issue? I personally does on a daily basis: It gives great au- I don’t know where or if you are able to use have no objection to this. Rather than thority to the executive branch to im- someone with his background in your admin- seal in a nongermane amendment at plement the laws that are passed. istration, but I think his background is so this point—that may be tonight—we rich in the health care administration field The bureaucracy, the administrative that he is worthy of consideration. may be able to make some progress on agencies—and I do not use that term Cordially. some other amendments tonight. If my derogatorily—but the bureaucracy I got the letter back with a letter friend will withhold, he will have a works in that regard in adopting regu- saying I violated the law. A lobbyist, right to bring up his amendment at lations to implement the laws that we any lobbyist, can send a letter of rec- some other time. pass. This is an awesome authority ommendation for anyone, but if you (Mr. GRAMS assumed the chair.) that we give to the executive branch. Mr. SIMON. Mr. President, because I have somebody working on your staff We have seen in times past in this am interested in adopting this, and I who is doing a good job and you want country, and other nations, that power am not trying to cause problems on the to send a letter of recommendation for does tend to corrupt. Executive branch floor, I will withhold my request at a civil service job for that person, that authority has to be looked at carefully; this point. But I want to assure my col- is a violation of the law. We are in the it has to be looked at constantly. leagues on the floor, I am going to process of talking about regulations Goodness knows, this body, in my brief bring this amendment up one way or that are ridiculous. This is a law that observation, seldom has the oppor- another on this bill before it passes. is ridiculous that is a regulation on us. tunity for effective oversight. If I may add one other point, Mr. I think we ought to get rid of it. I The Senator from Ohio made a very think this is a good time to do it. I am President, and I say to my colleague from Delaware, as well as Senator impressive statement on more than one not trying to impose myself in the mid- occasion concerning the regulations of GLENN from Ohio, if there is some dle of this particular amendment, and I one particular regulation pertaining to might say to my colleague from Ohio, wording here that needs improvement, I am not wedded to this wording. We the Clean Water Act—I believe, efflu- I strongly support his amendment. But ent emissions—where he said that from if I may ask my colleague from Dela- think we have drawn it very carefully. But if there is something that is not the well to the ceiling of this Chamber ware, if I were to ask unanimous con- 1 prudent here, what we say is that is 42 ⁄2 feet, and those documents would sent to have this up on the floor of the go all the way from the well to the Senate after the Glenn-Chafee amend- where there is on the basis of personal knowledge or records of the person fur- ceiling three times—three stacks of ment is disposed of, would that be sat- documents for one regulation. isfactory? nishing we can make an evaluation of I am not sure the Senator would Mr. ROTH. Let me answer the distin- the work performance, ability, apti- share the same conclusion that I would guished Senator this way. As he knows, tude, general qualifications, valuation we are having a very serious, a very of character, loyalty, or suitability of share from that. But, obviously, we do important discussion on judicial re- such individual. I think those are the not have the time nor the inclination view. So I think it would be unhelpful kind of things that should not present to go back and revisit the laws and re- to suddenly turn to a matter that is a problem. I hope we will do this. visit the regulations, certainly, that not even directly related to the legisla- Let me just add, I am leaving this have been passed up until this time. tion before us. body. This is going to have a lot more What we can do is establish some rules Second, I think we all agree this leg- to do with the future of Senator ROTH of the road, interject some common- islation on regulatory reform is among and Senator Thompson and the distin- sense ways for the agencies to justify the most important legislation that guished junior Senator from Minnesota future rules, future regulations. shall come before us this year. For that than it will for Paul SIMON. But I want Now, this authority that we give the reason, it concerns me if we begin to to be free if I have a good staff person executive branch is proper and appro- add amendments—this would be the or I know someone would be good for a priate in our constitutional scheme. first—that are not related. job, to write a letter of recommenda- That is what it is all about. We are I would be happy to assure the distin- tion. My experience is those letters do supposed to have oversight of that. I guished Senator from Illinois that we not mean that much, but at least I can think anyone who has spent any time would be happy to take a hard look at get it off my chest. I want to have the here at all must acknowledge that that this in committee. I have had a number right to write that letter and not just is a very tenuous situation at best in of people mention the problems, the leave that right to lobbyists and oth- terms of effective oversight. We must concern it causes them, but I think if ers. look prospectively. we are going to change it—and perhaps Mr. THOMPSON addressed the Chair. So we have a system where citizens we should—then it should be done in a The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- who are affected by this legislation, manner that is most constructive ator from Tennessee. not just depending on Congress, but under the circumstances, rather than Mr. THOMPSON. Mr. President, I citizens affected by this legislation can being done on an unrelated piece of leg- would like to address the subject of ju- come into court and say basically, ‘‘We islation. dicial review which my colleagues have are not being treated right.’’ That is Mr. SIMON. Mr. President, frankly, been so eloquently discussing this all judicial review means. They come it is not satisfactory to me to have the morning. I think this, first of all, goes into the third branch of Government,

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10124 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 an independent branch of Govern- amendment, but we have created all regulatory process, let us require a ment—the judiciary—to make a deter- sorts of legislation where the Govern- cost-benefit analysis, just put down on mination as to whether or not the cit- ment will either pay the attorney’s paper whether the benefits justify the izen, the private concern, is being fees, or there are attorney’s fees shift- costs—as we have seen here, we are not treated right. ing. In other words, what could be talking about a money situation here. We can talk about special interests more of an inducement to people to Benefits are defined as social benefits, and all of that in a pejorative way, but bring lawsuits and to come with new as well as economic benefits. Costs are there are a lot of small businesses out litigation than to say you are going to defined as social costs—social costs, as there, a lot of individuals, there are a get your attorney’s fees paid for? Yet, well as economic costs; not only direct lot of public interest groups who take we do that time and time again. We are benefits and direct costs, but indirect advantage of judicial review on a daily the cause of all of that. benefits and indirect costs. What could basis. It is not just the corporate fat There are the civil rights cases, give an agency more discretion than cats who are sitting back out there to which we are familiar with; Fair Hous- dealing with something that might be be labeled as special interest to whom ing Act, Fair Labor Standards Act; Age described as an indirect social benefit? this is important. It is important to ev- Discrimination in Employment Act of That is great leeway. erybody. It is important to every cit- 1967; Equal Credit Opportunity Act; Yet, we want to limit judicial review izen. And it is really strange and inap- Civil Service Rehabilitation Act; Indi- when they make these commonsense propriate, I think, if we carve out one viduals With Disabilities Act; Reli- assessments that we say since we can- or two little pieces in this entire ad- gious Freedom Restoration Act; Vio- not and will not go back to the 3-foot ministrative framework that we are lence Against Women Act. There are stack of regulations and deal with dealing with here and say everyone has awards for attorney’s fees in tax cases them, which is what we really ought to the opportunity to come into court ex- that we give to citizens if they prevail do, we are going to at least try to cept these particular individuals, or ex- in certain tax cases. Awards for attor- apply some commonsense standards as cept in these particular circumstances, ney’s fees we give in certain lawsuits far as we go forward. That is all this is because we place so much confidence in against the States, and in certain law- about. Judicial review is the norm. It the nameless, faceless administrators suits against judges. We not only give is the way it ought to be. The Adminis- who come up with these analyses, or them a cause of action, and we not trative Procedures Act provides broad, these rules, that we really effectively only give them judicial review, we see broad discretion and judicial review. do not want any judicial review in this that their attorney’s fees are paid. We keep talking about this explosive particular area. There was the Federal Contested litigation situation that is going to de- Mr. President, I do not share the con- Elections Act; Government Employees velop from all of this. Not so. We cre- fidence that the opponents of Dole- Rights Act of 1991; Equal Access to Jus- ate no new causes of action with the Johnston seem to have in the agencies. tice Act; Freedom of Information Act Dole-Johnston bill. They do a lot of good work on many oc- and Privacy Act; Government in the The judicial review is already con- casions. But we cannot give that kind Sunshine Act; Whistleblower Protec- tained in the substantive legislation. I of authority, unchecked, unreviewed, tion Act of 1989; Civil Service Reform must say, it seems in times past when to anybody, including them. Act of 1978; NEPA; Commodity Ex- we gave authority to an agency, we We hear a lot of talk about a ‘‘law- change Act; Packers and Stock Yards have readily granted judicial review. yer’s dream.’’ We are concerned now Act; Perishable Agricultural Com- But when we are putting certain re- that we are going to create new causes modity Act; Federal Crop Insurance strictions on an agency and making of action, we are going to provide a Act, Animal Welfare Act; Agricultural them justify what they do, some seem new access for somebody coming into Unfair Trade Practices Act; Plant Va- to want no judicial review. court. I share that concern across the riety; Immigration and Naturalization The opponents say not only too much board. I think that in times past we Act; National Aeronautics and Space litigation; second-guessing scientific have not paid enough attention to that Administration Act; National Defense opinions, the rulemakers will be tied fact. But it is a strange occurrence for Authorization Act; Bankruptcy Act; up in knots. Well, the Senator from us to all of a sudden be concerned Federal Home Loan Bank Act; Home Louisiana, I think, has very, very effec- about that in the middle of this debate, Owners Loan Act; Housing Act of 1959. tively addressed most of those. I share when we are trying to bring some com- These are all acts not only where we his concern that if something is re- monsense reform to this regulatory are creating new causes of action and peated long enough, saying that it will maze that is costing every American giving people access to the court, in ad- cause an explosion in litigation and family $6,000 a year, because this body, dition giving them judicial review, but that will tie the courts up in knots, the Congress of the United States, as a we are seeing that their attorney’s fees some people will get to believe it. It is whole, are the reasons for the litiga- get paid if they prevail. That is a very just not true. Repeating it does not tion explosion in the Federal system. loose definition. make it true. It is the laws that we create, giving I will continue: National Housing Section 625, no new causes of action. judicial review almost on every occa- Act; Federal Credit Union Act; Federal Final agency action is the only thing sion, that create all of the litigation Deposit Insurance Act; Bank Holding that can be looked at. Cost-benefit and all of the new regs, and we could Company Act; Bank Tying Act—what- analysis will be included in the direc- not fill in this Chamber with all of the ever that is—Farm Credit Amendments tive. Only if the final agency action is legislation that we have passed that Act; Real Estate Settlement Proce- arbitrary or capricious will it be over- give people new causes of action and dures Act; International Banking Act; turned. In other words, no independent new motivation to come to court, and Expedited Funds Availability Act. second-guessing or analysis of the cost- new ways to burden the Federal court Mr. President, there are hundreds. I benefit analysis. It is just a part of the system. If you have a civil case any- will not take the Senate’s time with picture. It is part of the overall pic- more in the Federal court system, and reading all of them. But there are lit- ture, and it can be considered. It can be many places in this country, you may erally hundreds of pieces of legislation looked at. as well forget about it for a good long that this body has created where not Mr. President, I submit that this pro- while. Under the speedy justice acts, only do we create new causes of action vision is narrower than the law is now. criminal cases take precedence. And and provide judicial review; no ques- Traditionally, any procedure defect that is because of what we have done tion is usually ever raised about full can be appealed and be a ground for up- here in this body. Not only do we con- judicial review. All of these are impor- setting the agency action. Here it is stantly create new causes of action in tant subjects. I am not saying they only if it is a part of an overall review, this body, but on many occasions we fi- were bad legislation in every case; cer- if the final agency action is arbitrary nance it ourselves. We not only say you tainly not. I am just saying that it is and capricious. It cannot be considered can come into court and get judicial mighty strange that in the middle of independently. Under the old law if review, which effectively is being de- all of this, when we want to say let us something was faulty, if the cost-ben- nied, I submit, by the Glenn-Chafee supply a little common sense to the efit analysis was faulty, that kind of a

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10125 defect would be reviewable and enough an appeal is taken. Then if it is deter- case, if the petitioner can show that he to overturn the opinion. mined it was, in fact, a major rule, will suffer irreparable injury, not just Actually, it seems to me that as far have to go all the way back, and it af- injury but irreparable injury, if he can as this new cost-benefit is concerned, fects everything that has been done, show it is in the public interest, if he we have a narrower scope review than and you have to start back from can do all of those things, he might we traditionally have for other defects scratch. stay the proceedings for a while. Would in the process. Of course, 706 is just the This is not a problem, interlocutory we not want him to? same as under the Administrative Pro- situation, that gives the petitioner If petitioners can show that they are cedure Act that we have been dealing some great advantage. likely to prevail, that they are going to with for so many years, except with What about second-guessing sci- suffer irreparable injury, is there any- section (F). entific study and that sort of thing? I thing wrong, within that limited cir- As I understand it, we have to look at submit, Mr. President, that right now cumstance, with being able to have a (E) in conjunction with that. It is a we have courts in a position under the stay? It is a very, very rare situation, substantial evidence test in (E), sub- arbitrary and capricious standard and indeed, where that would come into stantial support test in (F). Substan- all the other standards under 702 that play. So there is no tying up of the tial evidence test, as I understand it, courts are making some kind of rough courts. There is no stopping of the where there is a record administrative determination on scientific principles courts. There is no keeping the forward law judge, substantial evidence test is of some kind, scientific analysis, to- move of the rule from making progress. something that has been applied now tally unequipped in many cases, I am What are the hurdles? Look at a situ- for years and years on the record, and sure, to do it. But under the Dole-John- ation that a petitioner has. Look at I think the thinking with (F) is apply ston bill, we have peer review. We actu- what a petitioner has to go through in that to the rulemaking process, the ally have an opportunity for the ex- order to challenge a rule. same kind of review, substantial sup- perts to come in and interject their First of all, you have the definition port test, and do we want a rule that analysis into the process. of benefit and the definition of costs does not have support in the record in Again, my understanding is that this that we referred to a little bit earlier. the rulemaking, substantial support? It is nothing new in the well-crafted rules I think we need to go back to that, be- is not a de novo review by any stretch and procedures that are done now cause I think we get away from that. of the imagination. The court must under current law. Peer review is not a The definition applies throughout for show deference to what the agency has stranger—National Academy of both subchapter 2 and 3. The defini- done under that kind of scheme. Science—and the agencies are well tions are ruling. The definitions are Will there be more litigation? I sub- equipped to do this peer review. They standard, and apply every time these mit certainly not. I submit nobody are well equipped to do the cost-benefit terms are used anywhere in the act. It knows, certainly. Nobody knows. There analysis. There is nothing new with re- says: is always litigation. There always will gard to that. Now they must do it in The term ‘‘benefit’’ means the reasonable, be litigation. Trying to pinpoint the every instance where we have a major identifiable, significant favorable effects in- cause for a particular lawsuit cause of rule. cluding social, environmental, health and action is a fruitless process. So the courts now are having to deal economic effects that are expected to result I submit a very good case could be with this scientific evidence test. Actu- directly or indirectly from implementation made for the proposition that it will ally, this legislation will assist the of a rule or other agency action. result in less litigation, Mr. President, court because of the additional peer re- So, when people talk about seatbelts, instead of more, because now at least view. The courts will not be second- or people talk about food, and people the courts have some fairly objective guessing the agency’s actions here. I talk about all those things that are criteria to look at. share with the proponents of the vital concerns to all of us—certainly Cost-benefit analysis: Do the benefits Glenn-Chafee substitute that we do not you can consider the noneconomic ben- justify the costs? Are the costs justi- want to be able to have people come in efits. You can consider the social bene- fied by the benefits? I think it could go and tie up legitimate rulemaking func- fits. You can consider the environ- to make better rules. I think the agen- tions at the drop of a hat and stop ev- mental benefits. You can consider all cies have been engaging in this process erything in its tracks. Nobody is pro- of the health benefits. And, if an agen- all along, anyway, in some rough form. pounding that. cy does a halfway decent job of ad- Any rule that we put down, certainly, What is being done here, it looks to dressing that and putting it down on I hope that agencies would consider me, the problem with it, it is such a paper, look at the hurdles that a peti- how much benefit are we going to get modest proposal, it is such a modest tioner has to overcome in order to out of this and what will it cost? By first step to interject an element of challenge that. Consider the court’s putting it down somewhere—with the common sense into a process that I natural hesitancy to second guess an tremendous prejudice in favor of the think just about everybody in this agency under those circumstances; a agency action going in, the tremendous country has concluded has gone too natural hesitancy to second guess tech- hurdles a petitioner has to overcome— far. Every once in a while things gets nical evaluations. putting it down somewhere and having out of hand. We have to get back to- Then you have the harmless error developed some case law on the sub- ward the middle of the road a little bit. rule. Suppose you go through all that. ject, and it becoming more objective, I I think that is what this legislation OK, the agency messed up. OK, even by submit that people would be less likely does in a very modest way. the loosest definition of benefit or cost, to attack it because it is less nebulous Increased delay, tie the court in the benefits did not outweigh the costs than it has been in times past. knots—it is simply not in the legisla- so the petitioner has crossed that first Will there be more litigation? There tion. These objections cannot be identi- hurdle. Then he has to get by the is very limited interlocutory review. fied and pinpointed with regard to any harmless error rule, and that is no Now, if an agency decides that some- particular section in this legislation in mean feat. That has been with us for a thing is not a major rule, it does not the Dole-Johnston amendment. Under long time. It has made a lot of agency meet the $100 million threshold, then ordinary circumstances, you cannot actions prevail in circumstances they there is review under those cir- get a stay, you cannot come in, you otherwise would not. cumstances. But I think the Senator cannot file a lawsuit and stop the pro- So, those are the hurdles that a peti- from Louisiana hit it on the head. It ceedings. That simply does not happen tioner has. Now, under the Glenn sub- looks to me to be in the interests of except in rare circumstances. stitute, first of all, for something that both sides, if the determination is What are those circumstances? Same has to do with judicial review I am made that it is not a major rule, to go old, traditional circumstances that we struck by the consistency of what is ahead and get that resolved. have already had in other situations. not subject to judicial review. I think Otherwise, we go on through the That is, if a petitioner can overcome we have five sections here and in four process, all the way to the end, get to the very high burden of proving that he of them the emphasis is on what is not the final rulemaking, get there, then is likely to prevail ultimately in the subject.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10126 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 Section 623(a): ‘‘Shall not be subject So, Mr. President, I think it just Federal regulatory actions justify their to judicial review in connection with,’’ comes down to whether or not you cost. et cetera. want to do anything about this prob- The Federal regulatory burden has ‘‘(b) shall not be subject to judicial lem. I think it comes down to whether become too heavy and too expensive. review in any manner’’ or not you want risk assessment, you There are several recent studies that ‘‘(d) court shall not review to deter- want to have a cost-benefit analysis. confirm this. One is a March 1995 publi- mine whether,’’ et cetera. Because, if you do, it cannot possibly cation of the Harvard School of Public ‘‘(e) shall not be subject to judicial mean anything. It would be totally Health which analyzed 200 Federal pro- consideration separate and apart,’’ et meaningless unless you have more of a grams and revealed that many highly cetera. redress for people who are aggrieved. cost-effective programs were not fully I will go into the details of all this I might point out, in this legislation implemented, while other highly cost- later. But is it not strange that in business, it seems to me we often go off ineffective programs were widely im- something that is supposed to deal on the basis of whose ox is being gored plemented. It suggested that a re- with judicial review, that the entire at the moment. What if you had a allocation of resources to more cost-ef- emphasis seems to be on what is not President who did not like any rules? fective programs could save an addi- subject to judicial review? It looks like Should we cut off people, public inter- tional 60,000 lives per year at no in- we are leaving a very, very narrow win- est groups, whatever, from judicial re- creased cost to taxpayers or to the pri- dow indeed. view and petitioning and doing what vate sector. The conclusion was that Let us look at the provisions of the they would want to do in order to get we could save the same number of Glenn-Chafee substitute. In the first effective rules passed and make sure lives, but with a $31 billion annual sav- place you have (b), ‘‘any determination ings to the American people. by designee of the President or the di- they are not just dismissed out of hand In an American Enterprise Institute rector that a rule is or is not a major and erroneous determinations as to policy paper, Christopher DeMuth has rule shall not be subject to judicial re- whether or not something is a major described Federal regulations this way, view in any manner.’’ It just stops in rule? Some President could decide ev- and I quote: its tracks, if I understand it correctly. erything is going to be a major rule, no That can just stop everything in its matter how minuscule it is. If he was They are much more costly than all the really an enemy of rules and regula- domestic discretionary spending programs of tracks right there. the Federal Government combined. Regu- It says in (e) that ‘‘a determination tions, he could just decide everything is going to go be a rule and make ev- latory agencies can tax and spend freely in by an agency that it is not a major rule pursuit of environmental quality, product shall be set aside by a reviewing court eryone go through the process. safety, and other regulatory goals, and the on clear and convincing evidence.’’ But It is a two-way street if we look at it costs they impose are free of the budget and who gets to decide last? If an agency that way, and I urge the Dole-Johnston appropriations controls that constrain made this determination and the Presi- amendment does that. It is a modest spending programs. dent or the director made a subsequent proposal to try to get our arms around, That is the end of the quote. determination, or contemporaneous de- in some way, and make some progress The Heritage Foundation’s ‘‘A Citi- termination, would that not be the end towards interjecting some simple, zens Guide to Federal Regulation’’ esti- of it? some commonsense principles into this mates that the cost of Federal regula- In other words, the executive branch regulatory mess that we have gotten tion to the economy exceeds $500 bil- has total discretion, it looks to me ourselves into and do not seem to know lion, or about $5,000 per household each like, in determining whether or not the how to get out of that is costing the year. EPA has estimated that environ- process goes forward in terms of cost- American taxpayers’ $6,000 per year per mental regulations alone in 1990 cost benefit analysis, risk assessment or family and going up. And then get on the U.S. economy about $115 billion. As whatever, because they can decide, no about the business of passing laws that a result of the Clean Air Act amend- matter how clear it is to most people will be subject to real oversight. I ments and other new requirements, that it meets the $100 million thresh- think that is one of the most impor- spending by business on environmental old—they could just say that it does tant provisions of this bill. I think it protection is expected to exceed $200 not and nobody can review that. No- gives us another look at these rules billion annually within 5 years. body can question that. that are going to be passed, now, and In 1993, the President’s National Per- Indeed, ‘‘If a cost-benefit analysis or give us really an opportunity to focus formance Review estimated that com- risk assessment required under this on our oversight responsibility. plying with Federal regulations cost chapter has been wholly omitted for We do pretty good at turning these the private sector $430 billion per year. any major rule, a court shall vacate laws out but it seems to me like we This is almost 10 percent of the gross the rule and remand the case for fur- wake up a few years down the road and national product. ther consideration.’’ get a deluge of citizens coming in here One of the more frequently cited In other words, if you have what has saying you did not know it at the time economists on the costs of regulation, been decided and what has been deter- but look what you have done to us. And Thomas Hopkins of the Rochester In- mined is a major rule, therefore under then it is too late to do anything about stitute, has estimated the direct Fed- the law requiring the agency to make the regulatory mess we have created. eral regulatory burden for 1994 to be the cost-benefit analysis, but the agen- We have an opportunity here to do approximately $630 billion. cy just says I am not going to do it, something about that and I urge the So whatever estimate you choose, it they suffer the severe penalty of hav- defeat of the Glenn-Chafee amendment is a big one. The burden is enormous ing the court simply remand it back to and the adoption of the Dole-Johnston and, without action on our part, it is them for further consideration. I do amendment. only going to get bigger. not know what happens if they do the I yield the floor. One sector of our economy that has same thing again and the court re- Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, we fi- come under special pressure from envi- mands it back again, and again and nally have, as the distinguished Sen- ronmental and related Federal regula- again. ator from Tennessee said, the oppor- tions is American agriculture. Exces- The rest of it I think the Senator tunity to legislate an end to the unnec- sive regulation of agriculture has be- from Louisiana has addressed. It is es- essarily costly consequences of Federal come in some instances counter- sentially very similar to the Dole- Government regulations. productive to our efforts to maintain Johnston bill in that basically it is This legislation that has been intro- the safety and integrity of the U.S. still an arbitrary and capricious test. I duced by the Majority Leader, which I food supply. did not even mention that in the hur- am cosponsoring, will make it nec- Some Federal regulations not only dles that a petitioner has to overcome, essary to consider the cost effective- impose unnecessary and burdensome which is a very, very tough test for a ness of regulations that seek to man- costs on farmers, but they make our petitioner to have to overcome to age the risks to health, safety, and our farm and food products less competi- prove that something is arbitrary and environment. In short, it will help en- tive in world markets. The Delaney capricious. sure that the benefits derived from clause, for example, enacted in 1958,

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10127 has been strictly interpreted and en- ington Times op-ed article, I described the process of defining a wetland and delin- forced in such a way that it has im- several examples where the Depart- eating sites remains confusing and conten- posed enormous expenses and burdens ment of Agriculture, the Department tious. Farmers now dutifully file requests for while providing very little benefit to of Interior, and other Federal agencies permits to make modifications to portions of their own property that have been des- the public. In many instances, the have gone beyond the intent of Con- ignated wetlands. Almost half of the applica- Delaney clause has become an obstacle gress in the regulatory requirements tions filed for a permit involve an impact on to the implementation of sensible food imposed on agriculture. less than one acre. safety policy because it has prohibited The Farm Bureau Federation esti- Bob Floyd of Muncie, Ind., had a ‘‘wet- the use of production efficiencies that mates that U.S. agricultural interests land’’ mysteriously appear on his property pose little or no risk to the public. spend between $18 and $20 billion per when a local business accidentally cut a This problem was compounded by the year complying with Federal regula- drainage pipe. Federal regulators swooped in 1992 Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals rul- to protect this ‘‘wetland’’ and forced the 80- tions. This amounts to roughly 35 per- year-old farmer to stop farming. Because of ing which invalidated the EPA’s neg- cent of total net farm income in our this wetland area (which has since dried up), ligible risk interpretation of the country. Mr. Floyd may have to sell the land his fam- Delaney clause and required a zero risk The Delaney clause, and all the other ily had farmed for a half-century. interpretation that threatens to re- Federal regulations, that are squeezing This might be funny if it were an isolated strict the use of up to 80 widely used the American farmer and food indus- incident. But it is not. At a Senate Agri- crop protection tools. These tools are tries must be subjected to a reasonable, culture Committee hearing in February, wit- important in the production of a safer, fair, and sound science-based assess- ness after witness came forward with exam- ples of farmers tangled in red tape, thou- abundant, and affordable U.S. food sup- ment of the real risks to safety, health sands of dollars incurred in filling out forms ply. and the environment. and family farms being threatened by the EPA Administrator Carol Browner While such reform will help the en- Endangered Species Act or the Clean Water has acknowledged that the pesticides tire economy, it will help U.S. agri- Act or some other regulatory requirement. affected by this recent court decision culture in particular, and it will reduce The American Farm Bureau Federation es- pose no risk to public health. Lynn costs to consumers without endan- timates that U.S. agricultural interests Goldman, Assistant Administrator of gering their health or our environ- spend between $18 billion and $20 billion per the EPA, has admitted that the year complying with federal regulations. To ment. put things in perspective, that figure is Delaney clause is an outdated approach Mr. President, the American people roughly 35 percent of total net farm income for protecting consumers from pes- want reasonable reform of the current in the United States. If this estimate is cor- ticide residues and that the loss of se- regulatory system. This legislation rect, and if anything it is probably low, lected pesticide uses may affect the provides such reform, and I urge my farmers spend $2 complying with government price or seasonal availability of par- colleagues to support it. mandated regulations for every $1 they re- ticular commodities. I also ask, Mr. President, unanimous ceive in price supports. Furthermore, in 1993, the EPA stated consent that the op-ed article I men- Clearly, things have gotten seriously out of hand. Fortunately, the utter frustration that the potential economic impact of tioned be printed in the RECORD. with this and other problems manufactured a strict interpretation of the Delaney There being no objection, the article in Washington was powerfully commu- clause could reach $1 billion per year. was ordered to be printed in the nicated through the elections last November. In rice-producing States, like my RECORD, as follows: Congress is now under new management— State of Mississippi, uncontrolled rice [From the Washington Times, April 4, 1995] and a wide range of issues, including the plant diseases can lower crop yields by (By Thad Cochran) need for regulatory relief, are being ad- dressed. Last month the Senate Government 75 to 80 percent. The fungicide REGULATORY RELIEF FOR FARMERS benomyl, which is used to control rice Affairs Committee reported two bills (S343 The regulators have run amok in America and S291) which would require federal regu- blast on 15 to 30 percent of the rice and nowhere have things gotten more out of latory agencies to prepare a cost-benefit acres in the southeastern States, is the control than on the farm. analysis (for major regulations) and incor- only fungicide registered for that pur- As long as the two key ingredients in food porate that analysis into the rulemaking pose. Under a strict interpretation of production remain land and water, agri- process. Before new rules could take effect, the Delaney clause, EPA intends to culture will be in the eye of the environ- federal agencies would have to (1) determine prohibit the use of benomyl on rice. mental storm. But it is not—and has never that the benefits outweigh the costs, and (2) This will result in higher costs to farm- been—a struggle between pro- and anti-envi- determine that the proposed rule will pro- ronmental forces. As entrepreneurs whose ers and consumers and will provide no vide a greater benefit to society than any very livelihood rests on the careful steward- other alternatives. real improvement in food safety. ship of an ecological system, farmers have If this all sounds like plain old common Mr. President, the outdated Delaney long supported measures to protect our nat- sense, the similarity is intentional. We have clause rests on a flawed premise. It as- ural resources. But those same farmers, who gotten to the point in this country where sumes that a carcinogen at any level of are already up against the uncertainties of farm and landowners are almost considered exposure can cause cancer. Because of the weather and heavy foreign government guilty until they can prove their innocence. recent advances in research, we know subsidies, now increasingly have to ‘‘do bat- The burden of proof should be on the regu- that premise is wrong. With current tle’’ with regulators in Washington. lator and the place to start is to require the The reason? Because in too many cases, technologies that allow the detection regulators to prove that the rules are nec- regulators at the Environmental Protection essary, that they benefit the public at large of minute quantities of potential car- Agency, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and generally pass the common-sense test. cinogens that were previously the Interior Department and other agencies All this is compounded by overlapping, and undetectable, the number of substances have gone far beyond the intent of Congress. in some cases competing, jurisdictions subject to the Delaney clause expands In an effort to produce a better coordi- among federal agencies. It is common for a with every advance in analytical chem- nated approach, EPA has combined, or ‘‘clus- farm enterprise or agriculture business to istry. We are now able to discover in tered,’’ certain air and water standards. The have to deal simultaneously with the EPA, food previously undetectable trace lev- goal of avoiding incompatible and contradic- the Army Corps of Engineers, the Transpor- tory rules is laudable. But the result is an- els of materials used in production and tation Department, the Agriculture Depart- other case of regulatory overkill. ment, the Occupational Safety and Health distribution that are not added to food EPA’s ‘‘cluster rule’’ for the pulp and paper Administration, and others. in any conventional sense, yet are food industry is the most costly environmental There is a groundswell of support in Con- additives under the law. rulemaking ever proposed for a single indus- gress to slow the regulatory machine until Reform of the Delaney clause, as pro- try. It is estimated that compliance with Washington can ‘‘get its act together.’’ The vided for in this legislation, is essen- this rule will cost more than $11 billion de- House of Representatives has already passed tial to preserving a safe, abundant, and spite the solid progress already made by for- a bill to place a moratorium on significant affordable U.S. food supply. And it is est and paper companies. The industry, for regulations, retroactive to November of last year. A week ago, the Senate passed legisla- long overdue. example, without the cluster rule has re- duced dioxin in effluent by 92 percent since tion giving Congress 45 days to review pro- Numerous other excessive and costly 1988. posed major regulations. The Senate bill es- regulatory burdens imposed on Amer- The treatment of wetlands is another case tablishes a ‘‘fast track’’ review process and ican agriculture will also be relieved in point. Despite a recent Memorandum of provides that any regulation can be blocked by this legislation. In a recent Wash- Agreement among several federal agencies, if both the House and Senate disapprove it

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10128 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 within the 45-day time frame. The congres- more than 40 percent of all adult men the city, in the urban center of St. sional review would apply not only to any fu- in the distressed inner cities of Amer- Louis, where the challenges are strong ture rulemaking but retroactively to any ica did not work, while a significant and the pathologies are very pervasive, significant regulation issued since Nov. 20, number worked only sporadically or where we have all the problems that 1994. Obviously, the differing House and Senate part time. Today, half of all residents attend the urban core of America’s cit- bills will have to be reconciled in conference; of distressed neighborhoods live below ies. And in order to grow and in order but it is clear we are going to restrain the the federally defined poverty thresh- to be what they wanted the business to regulators. old. In 1993, that was $14,763 for a fam- be, they had to move the business to a Even though commodity prices generally ily of four. suburban setting 50 miles from St. were solid last year, net farm income is at Why do we have these problems in Louis. its lowest point in a decade. If American ag- our inner cities? Well, as I have indi- I thought to myself, here is the Fed- riculture is to prosper, it will have to in- cated, there are a variety of reasons. eral Government, which should be find- crease productivity and capture new foreign ing a way for the people in the very markets. That is a challenge under normal But I submit that one of the significant circumstances. But it will be almost impos- reasons for all of these facts is what I heart of our cities, who have families sible if the American farmer, increasingly would call a regulatory redlining of our in need of the income and support, who tangled in a destructive web of red tape, is urban centers, a series of pervasive reg- have young minds that need the exam- forced to spend a third of his net income ulations promulgated by a variety of ple of working parents, who have the complying with government rules. Unfortu- agencies that have literally driven jobs potential but do not have the produc- nately, that is the track we are on in this from the center of America’s urban en- tivity, actually working against eco- country. It is a course that I and many oth- vironments. As a matter of fact, the nomic stability. And I thought the rea- ers in Congress are determined to reverse. older the site is, the longer there has son we do not have the productivity is Mr. ASHCROFT addressed the Chair. been industry, the longer there has too frequently the onerous rules and The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- been manufacturing, and the longer regulations that have finally accumu- ator from Missouri. there has been industrial activity, the lated at the core of our urban centers. Mr. ASHCROFT. Mr. President, I less likely the site is to qualify with Regulations that were designed to pro- thank the Chair. and escape from the kind of onerous mote health and safety and well-being, It is a pleasure to rise today to dis- regulations which drive away jobs in have redlined development out of our cuss with you an opportunity to pro- those settings. urban centers and have sent develop- vide relief from many of the threats to As well meaning as many regulations ment and jobs packing to the green the safety, security, and well-being of may have been, the reality is that they fields of suburbia. They have left an those individuals who populate our have been incredibly destructive of op- empty, hollow core in the urban cen- urban centers. Our cities today, espe- portunity in our inner cities. ters of America and have defined a cir- cially our inner cities, have become Now, there is a great debate about cumstance where 1 in 24 black males areas of hopelessness and decay and de- regulation and the regulatory burden will probably be shot at some time dur- spair. in America. But the people who live in ing his life, according to the statistics Consider these facts: our inner cities bear not only their por- we read. America’s urban areas suffer a mur- tion of the $600 billion in regulatory I thought to myself, these are well- der every 22 minutes, a robbery every costs that are built into our products, intentioned regulations, the regula- 49 seconds, an aggravated assault every they also experience and sustain a cost tions about cleanup and the fact that 30 seconds. In a survey of first and sec- of regulation which is substantially you should be able to eat the dirt in ond graders in Washington, DC, the Na- higher in many circumstances. It is a order to avoid being poisoned by con- tion’s capital, 31 percent reported hav- cost of lost opportunity. It is a cost of tamination. But the truth of the mat- ing witnessed a shooting; 39 percent poor health. It is a cost of the lack of ter is that the regulations in these said they had seen dead bodies; 40 per- personal security and safety. It is truly older parts of Missouri’s cities and of cent of low-income parents worry a lot a major challenge. America’s cities drive development out about their children being shot, com- This last year, I had the opportunity of the place where we need develop- pared to 10 percent of all parents who to spend days during the year working ment most. worry about their children being shot; in different settings around the coun- They do so with very interesting and 1 out of every 24 black males in this try. I was delighted to work in one laudable concerns about the environ- Nation, 1 out of every 24 black males in manufacturing concern in the city of ment and about health and safety. But, America, will have his life ended by a St. Louis. It was called the Anpaul frankly, the statistics tell us that the homicide. Window Co. They make windows for individuals who are poor and inhab- A report in the New England Journal home construction, for remodeling as itants of our urban centers have a lot of Medicine stated that a young black well as new construction. It is a thriv- more to worry about in lead poisoning man living in Harlem is less likely to ing business, about 40 employees, one from a .38 than they do from other con- live until the age of 40 than a young of those small business Horatio Alger taminating sources. And the truth of man in Bangladesh, perhaps the poor- stories that inspire us all. the matter is we have to find a way to est country on Earth. I noted when I went to spend my day bring jobs back into our cities. The The roots of these pathologies are there making windows with its work risks associated with unemployment various. They are at least partly cul- force, that well over half the employ- are very substantial, they are much tural, partly economic, and partly so- ees are minorities. It was a good work greater than the risks associated with cial. These challenges, these problems, force, very productive. The business a door that may be 36 instead of 38 are about values. They are about know- was thriving. As a matter of fact, it inches wide, or do not comply with a ing right from wrong. But they also was growing. And it became clear that particular statute. The risk of being have something to do with hope and the success of the business was going shot in a drive-by shooting is much meaning. For too many of our inner to be a part of its downfall, because more pressing and demanding and chal- city residents today, hope and meaning they needed to expand. And they could lenging than the risk of being contami- and opportunity, are unknown words of not expand on their site in St. Louis nated by dirt beneath the parking lot, uncertain origins. Many people are because of regulations. There were four especially dirt which was contaminated born, live, and die without ever know- EPA test wells around the facility, and in some previous industrial experi- ing what it is like to have a job, to feed the owner said he would not take that ment. a family, and to fulfill their dreams. facility on a bet. He simply could not Under the guise of noise abatement, In a number of the high schools in expand on that site. we have merely exchanged the sounds central cities, for example, the dropout So in order to expand—and I should of productivity for the sounds of silent rate rises as high as 80 percent. In 1990, also mention that the building had factories. The crack of cocaine has 81 percent of young high school drop- been designated as historic and the been the sound of productivity in our outs living in distressed urban areas doorways were not wide enough—the cities’ centers. The wail of a family in were unemployed. In that same year, owner of the business had to move from the wake of a siren, the echoing clang

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10129 of a cell door—those are the sounds for all the past sins of prior incarna- have talked about costs of everything that have abated the noise of factories, tions of industry here; you don’t have except costs to the Federal Govern- and I think we need to look carefully to make sure the dirt under your park- ment of this legislation. It seems to me at what the comparative risks are in ing lot could be eaten by an individual that in any consideration of this legis- these cases. for his or her entire 70 years of exist- lation, that has to be taken into ac- We literally have a substantial group ence. We want to have you here be- count. of people in this country at the core of cause we know that an employed per- I do not know exactly what it will our urban centers and in our cities, son is safer than an unemployed per- cost the taxpayers for the Dole-John- whose opportunities have been dimin- son; an employed person, the statistics ston bill to be carried out by the agen- ished, whose safety has been impaired, tell us, is healthier than an unem- cies as it stands right now. But I would whose health has been undermined, ployed person; that employed people like to read a letter to the chairman of whose security has been threatened, are far less likely to be killed in drive- the Judiciary Committee, Senator and whose longevity has been short- by shootings than unemployed individ- HATCH, from the Executive Office of ened because of well-meaning but mis- uals; that where there is economic vi- the President, Office of Management applied regulations. tality and industry, there is a far and Budget on July 7. It applies to the Our challenge is to find a way to greater chance that the young people original Dole bill. There have been make our urban centers places where will persist in their education, avoiding some changes made since this letter people can thrive again. But inappro- the dropout situation; and that we will was written, but I think the changes priate, or excessive regulation, without upgrade what happens in our very that were made make it even more ex- understanding the real risks that exist inner cities.’’ pensive. But I would like to read this in the center of our cities, make that a I believe that it is time for us to look letter in its entirety, because I think it very serious challenge. at those regulatory concerns as it re- is extremely important that everyone That is why I am going to be pro- lates to the well-being of the individ- understand exactly what it is we are posing an amendment to this Regu- uals in the areas in which those regula- getting into. latory Reform Act which I will entitle tions are imposed. Where there are im- Alice Rivlin, Director of the Office of ‘‘The Urban Regulatory Relief Zone’’ positions of regulations which actually Management and Budget, writes as fol- amendment. This amendment will pro- undermine the safety, undermine the lows: vide an opportunity for the mayor of a security, undermine the employability DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: On April 26, 1995, the city, any city over 200,000, to appoint of individuals, where the imposition of Senate Judiciary Committee reported S. 343, an Economic Development Commis- a regulation does not enhance safety or the ‘‘Comprehensive Regulatory Reform Act sion. This commission would have the of 1995,’’ for floor consideration. The Con- security or health or well-being or lon- gressional Budget Office estimated that the chance to assess regulations which im- gevity, it should be an option that the bill, if enacted, would impose additional dis- pair the health, safety, and well-being Economic Development Commission of cretionary costs of at least $180 million an- of the citizens by keeping jobs out of that particular urban center could sub- nually. We have worked over the last several the zone; and to weigh whether or not mit an application to the Federal Gov- weeks with both the program and the budget abatement and waiver of those regula- ernment and say, ‘‘Why don’t we abate offices of agencies with major regulatory tions could give rise to an influx of op- this particular requirement, because in programs, in order to arrive at our own esti- portunity which would provide an im- so doing, it will elevate the oppor- mate of the potential costs of the bill as re- ported by the Judiciary Committee. provement in the health, an improve- tunity of our citizens to be productive, CBO indicated in its analysis that few of ment in the security, an improvement to be healthy, to be secure and safe, to the agencies had sufficient time to deter- in the education, and an improvement be examples in their community for mine the additional costs that the bill would in the longevity of the individuals in the kind of industry and productivity impose. Further, it assumed that the sole that zone. which will inspire young people to stay feature of S. 343 that would make issuing I very seriously hope that these com- in school and inspire individuals to new regulations more costly was the low- missions of economic development have hope and to understand the mean- ering of the threshold for cost-benefit anal- ysis to $50 million. Our request to the agen- would have a view toward mobilizing ing which can change the destiny of the resources, not just as it relates to cies, however, asked them to consider not the inner cities of America.’’ only the lowering of the threshold but also the Federal Government and Federal Mr. President, I thank you for this the many additional analytic steps, such as regulations, but as they would relate opportunity. I look forward to submit- risk assessment and peer review, that S. 343 to State and local regulations as well. ting the urban regulatory relief zone would require agencies to undertake in situ- It is time for us to understand that amendment to this legislation in the ations where they are not now carried out. In regulations, sometimes misapplied, hours ahead, and I hope that we will addition, our analysis, unlike CBO’s, con- have effectively redlined development have the good judgment to share with templated the additional costs that S. 343 would impose, both by significantly expand- out of our inner cities and subjected the people of the United States the op- our inner-city population to a set of ing existing litigation opportunities and by portunity to make sound decisions substantially expanding the coverage and risks that are far greater than the about improving the standing of those the requirements of the Administrative Pro- risks which the regulations sought to who are at peril in our inner cities, the cedures Act. Our analysis, unlike CBO’s, also abate. It is time to empower cities to core of our largest urban centers. And included the costs involved in implementing apply for such waivers. It is time to I hope that we will give them the op- the many new petition processes that S. 343 say to the cities, ‘‘We will let you help portunity to get relief when that relief would create for reviewing existing regula- make a decision here about what the tions. will increase their likelihood for safe- Based on our more extensive analysis, we real well-being of your citizenry is.’’ ty, for health, for security, for produc- Then the commission would send have arrived at a cost figure that is signifi- tivity and for longevity. cantly larger than CBO’s. Our preliminary that waiver application to the Federal Mr. President, I suggest the absence estimate is that S. 343, as reported by the Ju- Government and ask that the approval of a quorum. diciary Committee, could impose discre- from an appropriate agency be made in The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. tionary costs of approximately $1.3 billion order to protect the city from further ABRAHAM). The clerk will call the roll. annually and consume the time of approxi- harm. In my judgment, this is a chance The bill clerk proceeded to call the mately 4,500 full-time employees. Although for us to change the way in which regu- roll. there have been some modifications made to lation has literally created a crisis, or Mr. GLENN. Mr. President, I ask the bill since it was reported by the Judici- participated in the creation of a crisis, ary Committee, we believe this information unanimous consent that the order for remains useful in light of CBO’s estimate. at the center of American cities. We the quorum call be rescinded. I hope this information is useful to you as can no longer afford regulations which The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without S. 343 approaches the floor. redline American cities away from de- objection, it is so ordered. Sincerely, velopment. Mr. GLENN. Mr. President, we have ALICE RIVLIN, We have to give cities a chance to talked about other costs, we have Director. say to individuals: ‘‘You can come in talked about complexities, we have I ask unanimous consent that a copy here, you don’t have to be responsible talked about the costs of business, we of this letter be printed in the RECORD.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10130 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 There being no objection, the letter dition, the estimate is to go up to be- Mr. ROTH addressed the Chair. was ordered to be printed in the tween 500 and 800 rules that would have The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- Record, as follows: to be reviewed. The Rivlin estimate ator from Delaware is recognized. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: On April 26, 1995, the from CBO of $1.3 billion in annual costs Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I would Senate Judiciary Committee reported S. 343, and the time of approximately 4,500 just observe that the additional cost the ‘‘Comprehensive Regulatory Reform Act full-time employees to comply with S. identified by the distinguished Senator of 1995,’’ for floor consideration. The Con- 343 was made before the Nunn amend- from Ohio as applying to the Dole gressional Budget Office estimated that the amendment would also apply to the bill, if enacted, would impose additional dis- ment on small business was passed. So cretionary costs of at least $180 million an- that at least doubles the number of Glenn-Chafee amendment. My reason nually. We have worked over the last several rules that would have to go back for re- for stating that is that the threshold weeks with both the program and the budget consideration, with all the analysis for a major rule in the Dole-Johnston offices of agencies with major regulatory that goes along with that. amendment has been increased to $100 programs, in order to arrive at our own esti- I know that just the number of rules million. That, of course, is exactly the mate of the potential costs of the bill as re- cannot be equated directly to a specific same as the threshold for the Glenn- ported by the Judiciary Committee. budget figure. But I think it is fair to CBO indicated in its analysis that few of Chafee bill. the agencies had sufficient time to deter- say that the cost of the bill will be I also point out that there is no ques- mine the additional costs that the bill would similar to the cost of the Dole bill, as tion, at least in my judgment, that the impose. Further, it assumed that the sole it emerged from the Judiciary Com- Nunn-Coverdell amendment—the feature of S. 343 that would make issuing mittee, which is $1.3 billion. You have amendment offered by the distin- new regulations more costly was the low- to add onto that the estimate of ap- guished Democrat from Georgia—would ering of the threshold for cost-benefit anal- proximately doubling the number of also be offered to amend the Glenn- ysis to $50 million. Our request to the agen- rules and regulations that would have Chafee bill if it were believed that that cies, however, asked them to consider not to be reviewed again, if you add the ad- legislation was going to successfully only the lowering of the threshold, but also the many additional analytic steps—such as ditional requirement of review put for- move forward. risk assessment and peer review—that S. 343 ward by the Nunn amendment. I am So, in large part, either proposal will would require agencies to undertake in situ- not saying it would double that $1.3 bil- face some increased cost. As I say, in ations where they are not now carried out. In lion, but it certainly it is going to add my judgment, it would be in somewhat addition, our analysis, unlike CBO’s, con- a considerable amount onto it. I think the same ballpark. But I think the im- templated the additional costs that S. 343 it would probably add at least half to portant point to understand is the cost would impose both by significantly expand- it. I do not base that on anything ex- of the current regulatory maze of the ing existing litigation opportunities and by cept to say that if you double the num- private sector and local government. It substantially expanding the coverage and the requirements of the Administrative Pro- ber of rules, we should add another $400 is estimated that the current regu- cedure Act. Our analysis, unlike CBO’s, also or $500 million onto that $1.3 billion. It latory requirements cost this country included the costs involved in implementing seems that would be logical. something like $600 billion a year, a the many new petition processes that S. 343 The point I am making is that we do very substantial amount. would create for reviewing existing regula- not get this for free. We want regu- It is further estimated that this tions. latory reform. But at the same time, a roughly breaks down to a cost of $6,000 Based on our more extensive analysis, we vote for the Dole-Johnston bill is a per American family. Again, a very have arrived at a cost figure that is signifi- vote to spend a minimum of $1.3 bil- substantial cost to the typical Amer- cantly larger than CBO’s. Our preliminary estimate is that S. 343, as reported by the Ju- lion, by OMB estimates, in additional ican family. diciary Committee, could impose discre- Government paperwork. What reform. One of the goals of the legislation tionary costs of approximately $1.3 billion That is not much of a reform, it seems that we all on both sides of the aisle annually and consume the time or approxi- to me. are in support of in either amendment, mately 4,500 FTEs. Although there have been So I think we have to think about agree that regulatory reform is criti- some modifications made to the bill since it this. We have not provided anywhere in cally important. One of the principal was reported by the Judiciary Committee, this legislation for that $1.3 billion an- purposes of our legislation is to get a we believe that this information remains nually that would be required, nor for better bang for the buck. useful in light of CBO’s estimate. I hope this information is useful to you as the 4,500 full-time employees. We are in Hopefully, we can do even a better S. 343 approaches the floor. the process, as a result of the Presi- job in providing clean air and clean Sincerely, dent’s national performance review, of water, at a lesser cost, because of the ALICE M. RIVLIN, reducing the civil service rolls in this regulatory reforms we are proposing. Director. country, and doing pretty well with While it may be there may be some Mr. GLENN. Mr. President, let me that reduction, also. They are trying to additional cost on the Federal Govern- further comment on this. In the bill as cut down 272,000 civil service positions ment, that should be more than sub- it originally came out, CBO estimated over a 4-year period. The last count I stantially offset by the benefits and $180 million. OMB analyzes what would had, as of about 30 days ago, we had ac- lesser costs that will be experienced by occur here with the additional petition tually reduced around 110,000 and are the private sector. processes and so on, and after can- on schedule to probably accomplish For that reason, while it is true that vassing some of the agencies, as Direc- that full 272,900 reduction by the end of regulatory reform may result in some tor Rivlin says, as much information this year. That comes at a time when, additional cost to the Federal Govern- as they could get, estimates that it at least in these departments, we are ment, that is substantially true of both would cost about $1.3 billion and with going to have some 4,500 additional proposals, whether one is supporting 4,500 full-time employees. FTE’s just to carry out the analysis the Dole-Johnston amendment or the Let me point something out. Their that would be required by the Dole- Glenn-Chafee. analysis was based on the $50 million Johnston bill, at a cost of about $1.3 I yield the floor. I suggest the ab- base, and since that time, the Nunn billion, and that was before the Nunn sence of a quorum. amendment, which was added to this, amendment took the threshold way The PRESIDING OFFICER. The adds a substantial number of regula- down, and probably, as near as we can clerk will call the roll. tions that would have to be reviewed. estimate, doubled the number of re- The assistant legislative clerk pro- In the original legislation that was ad- views that would have to be made. ceeded to call. dressed by Director Rivlin, major rules So I think, as we consider this, we Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I would probably have been somewhere want to consider whether we are also ask unanimous consent that the order between 200 and 500, something like going to up the appropriation, whether for the quorum call be rescinded. that. We do not know exactly, of that would be required, whether we are The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without course. going to up the number of FTE’s to do objection, it is so ordered. Now, under Glenn-Chafee, the major the job that would be required on this Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I rules are estimated to be between 100 legislation. rise to speak about the bill before the and 200. With the Nunn amendment ad- I yield the floor. Senate, S. 343, and the vote that will

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10131 occur at 6 o’clock p.m., a little more from iron toxicity, whether it is to en- asthma, they may have heart disease. than half an hour from now, asking sure that mammography done in this They are particularly vulnerable to that we invoke cloture on this bill. country is safe and reliable, whether it dirty, polluted, toxic air. Mr. President, the last week has seen is to protect us against the now leg- Although the statute on its face, the an intensive debate and a very thor- endary cryptosporidium, a microscopic Clean Air Act, does not prohibit con- ough debate on not just the bill but on parasite found in drinking water. This sideration of costs, EPA, for 25 years, the values and ideals and processes is why we adopt regulations. I hope has implemented the statute based on that underlie our whole regulatory this debate has reminded us of those health protection and health protec- process. underlying purposes. tion alone. And the courts have upheld While I feel from my perspective that It seems to me S. 343, as amended, EPA’s approach. we have made some progress, at least continues to present serious obstacles by my standards, have improved the to the realization of those protective For example, one of the pollutants bill, I intend to vote against cloture be- goals. I must say that, as I go around that EPA regulates is sulfur dioxide, cause I still believe that this bill, as the State of Connecticut, I find that which comes from coal-burning utili- amended, so fundamentally alters the one of the aspects of our Government ties and smelters primarily. EPA long regulatory process and increases the that people I speak to most support, ago determined that its standard for obstacles and hurdles within that proc- even though they are upset about much sulfur dioxide emissions in the air ess, that it does damage to the laws— else that we do here, is the work we do should be set, not just to protect the the public health, consumer protection, to protect the environment, to con- average group of healthy Americans, environmental protection laws—that serve the great natural resources that but to protect asthmatics as well. underlay those regulations. the good Lord has given this country There has been a 40 percent increase Mr. President, this has been, I think, and, in fact, this world, to protect in asthma in our country in the last a very important debate in which, in them from threats that they cannot decade. That is a topic for another dis- general terms, all Members here in the see in the water they drink, in the food cussion as to why that has happened. Chamber have expressed our support of they eat. My internists at home in New Haven two basic goals. One is to acknowledge They want us to continue to do this. said to me that he sees what he is call- that the regulatory process in many And I am convinced that in the layers ing an epidemic of asthma, particu- ways has grown top heavy. of hurdles—in the petition process set larly among kids. The standard EPA Senator HATCH has given the list of up within S. 343, as amended, in the sets is at a level to protect asthmatics. the bottom 10 regulations which often decisional criteria, these four very high The Clean Air Act requires that EPA seem silly and off the mark. Senators hurdles that regulations, protective periodically review this standard. And, GLENN and KERRY and others have oc- regulations will have to jump over in under the bill before us, S. 343, as casionally set the record straight on order to stay valid, in the judicial re- amended, industry—that is source of some of those bottom 10. view process, and so much else that is pollution who feel they are adversely The underlying point of Senator in this bill—that though the bill has affected by this sulfur dioxide stand- HATCH’s list, I think, is agreed to by been improved, it still needs to be im- ard—can petition to have the standard everyone here, which is that in some proved more, or we will inadvertently, reviewed under the new decisional cri- sense our regulatory process has be- I believe—I hope unintentionally—have teria, those four high hurdles that I come too complicated. It takes too made it much more difficult for Gov- have talked about. long to render decisions. It often costs ernment to protect people from threats I respectfully suggest that the likely more than it should cost. to their health and safety and well- result, under this series of decisional I think we also have another set of being that they cannot protect them- criteria, would be that despite the long values that we share. This is where we selves from. history I have talked about and the part company. Some think the reforms The best way to describe and explain court decisions, EPA could no longer of the regulatory process get in the all this is with concrete examples, and set the standard for sulfur dioxide at way of the protective goals of the un- let me give a few. The Clean Air Act re- the level to protect as much public derlying environmental protection, quires that the standards for air qual- health and as many people in our coun- consumer protection, public health and ity be set at a level to provide protec- try, including those with asthma and safety laws that generate those regula- tion of public health with an adequate respiratory problems, as they do now. tions. margin of safety. I would guess, if we Remember, the regulations do not asked constituents in our district Instead, it would be required to look arise out of nowhere. They arise, for whether they want us, when it comes at the benefits from avoiding medical the most part, out of laws that we to protecting public health, their treatment for asthmatics and weigh adopt. We adopt those laws because we health, from pollution in the air— those against the compliance costs im- are responding to problems. We are, in whether they want us to do that with posed on the sources of the pollution, the best exercise of governmental au- an adequate margin of safety, they the smelters and other facilities. thority, making judgments about cer- would say yes. Sure, people are cost Inevitably, this will mean that the tain threats to the well-being of people conscious. Obviously, they are cost standard will not be set at a level that in this country that they cannot pro- conscious. But when it comes to their will protect the asthmatics who are tect themselves from. health, their parents’ health, their protected now. And that is a lot of peo- In some measure, in our increasingly children’s health, I think they would ple. That is millions of people. It is our complicated world—much more com- want us to err on the side of that kids. It is our spouses. It is our par- plicated than when this country was health, not on the side of the cost to ents. For the first time, the degree to founded—we have extended what we the source of the pollution. which EPA is permitted to set these lawyers like to call the police power of Acting on guidance from Congress, standards for air quality based on the State to encompass not just the the Environmental Protection Agency health protection would be com- traditional prohibitions of criminal has set the standards for air quality, promised. And even if EPA could avoid acts and punishment for commission of public health, at levels which err on this strict cost-benefit weighing part of those acts, but to protect people from the side of caution, at levels which do the test that I have just described, one being assaulted, for instance, by toxic protect not just average people but of the other sections of the decisional chemicals in the air or in the water, also sensitive subgroups of the public criteria is the least-cost section, which substances that, if you listen to the such as the elderly, who are less able, says that you have to do what you are public health experts—and they are because their bodies are older, to with- supposed to do at the least cost pos- credible ones—can do as much damage stand pollution in the air; persons who sible, would require a weighing of costs to people as criminals can. have more respiratory problems; or which, again, would compromise the So we have adopted this law to pro- children; or such as subgroups in the health-based standard but, more to the tect people, whether it was against population who already are ill for one point, compromise the health of a lot food poisoning or protecting children reason or another—they may have of people in this country.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10132 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 Finally, because I see other col- Mr. President, I see other colleagues nation of those amendments. We believe that leagues on the floor, let me give a spe- on the floor. I will yield the floor. But these changes, as explained by what would be cific example of why the second to say again what I said, at the begin- legislative history, are significant improve- decisional criteria, the least-cost alter- ning, we have made some progress on ments. native, could significantly reduce pro- this bill. But there is a way to go be- On and on he goes. tection of public health and the envi- fore we accomplish both real regu- So the language that I am objecting ronment. latory reform and cut down the red to, and others who will not support clo- In 1991 EPA conducted a comprehen- tape, which all of us want to do, and ture tonight, is the exact same lan- sive cost-benefit analysis of options for the Glenn-Chafee bill does very sen- guage that a Republican administra- the rule it was issuing that dealt with sibly. But what we have not done yet is tion, that a Republican Senate, ob- lead in drinking water—lead in drink- assure that the public health, environ- jected to in 1982. It was objectionable ing water. When you open the tap and mental protection, and consumer pro- then, it is just as objectionable now. drink the water, what about the lead in tection, which generated the adoption I do hope that cloture will not pre- it? Several options had been suggested of the laws that gave birth to these vail. ranging from simply telling people to regulations, are going to continue to be I thank the Chair. I thank the Sen- run their water before drinking it, adequately protected. And until that is ator from Massachusetts. which reduces the problem in some but so, I will vote as I will in a short while The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- not all cases, and depends on assuring against cloture on this bill. ator from Massachusetts. that, for instance, children and others I thank the Chair. I yield the floor. Mr. HATCH. Will the Senator yield will run the water for a couple of min- Mr. KERRY addressed the Chair. for a request? utes before drinking. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- Mr. KERRY. I yield for a request. Mr. President, I do not know about ator from Massachusetts. Mr. HATCH. I ask unanimous consent your kids—they are younger than Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, I see the that following the remarks of the dis- mine—but I do not think mine will run Senator from Rhode Island wants to go tinguished Senator from Massachusetts a tap for a few minutes before drink- forward for a few minutes. I ask unani- that I be permitted to speak a few ing. mous consent that he proceed for 4 words on this before cloture. Other alternatives for dealing with minutes, and that I then be recognized The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there lead in water, drinking water, would for 5 minutes. objection? require universal use of a corrosion-in- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without Mr. GLENN. Reserving the right to hibiting chemical and the replacement objection, it is so ordered. object, Mr. President, would we still of all lead-contaminated pipes or set- The Senator from Rhode Island. have the vote at 6 o’clock? ting an ‘‘at-the-tap’’ standard for lead. Mr. CHAFEE. Thank you. I want to Mr. HATCH. Oh, yes. So there were three or four alter- thank the distinguished Senator from Mr. GLENN. We have both leaders natives available to EPA for dealing Massachusetts for permitting me to go who wish to speak. with this problem, the real public for 2 minutes. Mr. HATCH. That is right. I will be health problem of lead in drinking I would like to make a couple of short. We want to allow enough time water. points. One of the major objections to for both Senators to have a few re- EPA conducted a detailed cost-ben- the Johnston bill is the so-called judi- marks. efit analysis for three alternative cial review. We have dealt with the lan- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there rules, all of which had benefits greater guage of the Johnston bill and judicial objection? Without objection, it is so than costs. EPA chose the middle-of- review before. What is the language ordered. the-road option, requiring some but that is so objectionable? It is in section The Senator from Massachusetts. not all water utilities, water compa- F. It says, ‘‘The reviewing court shall Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, I con- nies, to use a corrosion-inhibiting hold unlawful and set aside agency ac- gratulate my colleague from Rhode Is- chemical and requiring replacement of tion findings or conclusions found to be land for his comments, and also the the worst lead pipes, but over a 22-year without substantial support in the Senator from Connecticut, who in a de- schedule to phase it in. rulemaking file viewed as a whole.’’ tailed fashion has summarized why this It is very likely that under S. 343, if That is complicated. But it is a very bill is not prepared to be passed on by it is adopted as amended, the least-cost high standard to meet. It is very, very the Senate, and why colleagues sought alternative would have been to issue a difficult. And what it means for those to oppose cloture at this point. much more limited chemical treatment who are implementing the rule—any of Mr. President, this bill flies directly rule. the agencies, whether it is EPA or contrary in its current form to the Under the alternative selected by whatever it is—it is very hard for them principles espoused by Philip Howard EPA, the benefits have been enormous. to have a rule that cannot be thrown in ‘‘The Death of Common Sense,’’ and For a little more expenditure, we have out by the courts under this definition. to the whole concept of reform. Reform received and obtained much greater We have done this before. is supposed to create simplicity. It is health benefits, assuring, according to In 1982, Senator BUMPERS had an supposed to create fairness. It is sup- public health experts, that thousands amendment that came out of the com- posed to reduce the paperwork and re- of children would not have elevated mittee when we were doing regulatory duce the opportunities for litigation. blood lead levels and others with vul- reform in that year, which had exactly This bill in its current form is a law- nerability to lead because of heart con- the same language that we—I and oth- yer’s and an accountant’s dream. ditions would be saved, quite literally, ers on this side—are objecting to, and Mr. President, here is list of 88 new from heart attacks. that Senator HATCH and others put opportunities for litigation in the Dole- That EPA middle of the road rule had into this bill. Johnston bill before us. This bill is sup- far, far greater benefits than the least- So we had a Republican administra- posed to simplify. We keep hearing in cost alternative that would be driven tion. We had a Republican Senate, and the U.S. Senate about how there is too by S. 343, as amended, in terms of pub- that group—the administration and the much litigation. However, there is no lic health—and that means children Republican Senate—vigorously ob- such opportunity for litigation in the have higher blood lead levels, they jected to the language that was in that current law for these items. But under lower IQ’s. It is pretty hard to cal- bill, the so-called ‘‘Bumpers language,’’ this bill, here are the opportunities for culate the cost of that, but in my opin- which is exactly the same as the Hatch litigation—88 new opportunities—for ion it is incalculable. language today. lawyers to dream up ways they can EPA would simply not have been able So Senator BUMPERS came up with an come into court. This is not specula- to adopt the sensible midcourse alter- amendment. He changed that objec- tive. This is by the very language writ- native it selected if we adopted the bill tionable language. And the Vice Presi- ten in this bill. as amended. That would not have made dent of the United States, on February For instance, section 622, (c)(2)(C)(1), good common sense and obviously it 23, 1982, George Bush, wrote the letter. ‘‘Did the agency adequately identify would not have made good public DEAR DALE: We have received your pro- alternatives that require no govern- health. posed amendments to S. 1080 and the expla- ment acts?’’

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10133 If somebody wants to sue suggesting Mr. JOHNSTON. Is the Senator there is nothing to those arguments that they did not, all they have to do is aware that the original Roth bill that that have been argued here. make the claim, come into court, and came out of committee unanimously, With regard to what Senator CHAFEE that review will take place. as the Senator says, required a review said, Senator JOHNSTON does, indeed, ‘‘Did the agency adequately describe of rules? amend section 706 of the Administra- attempts to verify quality, reliability Mr. KERRY. Yes. tive Procedure Act to apply the ‘‘sub- and relevance of science?’’ Section 622, Mr. JOHNSTON. This is the excep- stantial evidence test’’ to informal— (d)(2)(A)? tion. There is no rule that needs to be notice and comment—rulemaking. I can go through the entire bill reviewed, unless the agency head wish- I wish to point out that this test is where, because they are opening up es to in his sole discretion, and that is hardly novel. It has been codified in procedure to review—not just sub- not reviewable. the Administrative Procedure Act for stance but procedure—you are going to Mr. KERRY. The Senator is not only almost 50 years—section 706(2)(E)—as tie up an agency in court. aware of it, but that is the standard the standard to apply in adjudicatory Mr. President, they will come back which we would embrace in this bill. rulemakings. and say, ‘‘No, no, no, we do not want But because of the judicial review Moreover, Congress has in specific the procedure to be reviewed.’’ And standard that the Senator from Lou- statutes required the substantial evi- they will suggest that there is lan- isiana is pressing and because of the dence test for informal rulemakings guage here that precludes that. petition process which the Senator since the late 1960’s. Just some exam- I respectfully say that is not the from Louisiana is pressing, we totally ples include the Occupational Health case; there is sufficient ambiguity that inundate the agencies. and Safety Act of 1970 and the Magnu- lawyer-legislators on both sides are ar- What is going to happen here, Mr. son-Moss FTC Improvement Act of guing about it. And the question is, President, is that a process that is sup- 1975. therefore, if their intent is not to cre- posed to simplify is going to swamp the In 1981, the Administrative Con- ate that avenue of judicial review, if agencies. The EPA currently has a very ference of the United States rec- their intent is to do as they say, to pre- clear graph that shows how many ommended that section 706 of the APA clude it, then why do we not make it hours go into rulemaking from busi- be amended to include a substantial clear in this legislation? Every attempt ness. Business currently spends about evidence test for informal to try to make it clear has been 70,000 hours putting together the re- rulemakings. That was recommenda- rebuffed. ports for the process of rulemaking. tion No. 81–2. The Administrative Law So I respectfully suggest that, just as Under this process, you are going to Section of the American Bar Associa- in the area of least cost alternative triple or quadruple the amount of in- tion made a similar recommendation where they suggest that there is not a dustry input. You are going to at least in 1986. rigid rule precluding judgment and dis- double the governmental input, and Also, in 1981, the Senate approved the cretion by the agency head, there will there will be no commensurate in- Bumpers amendment to S. 1080, the be sort of discretion. We are saying no. crease in resources or budget. precursor to present S. 343 that passed The language of this bill provides a ri- The effect will be they will be the Senate 94 to 0 in 1982. That amend- gidity, and we do not want that rigid- swamped, because there is a clever lit- ment’s language applying the substan- ity in this particular legislation. tle clause in here that says if you do tial evidence test to informal In addition, I would like to point out not get your review done in 3 years, we rulemakings is virtually similar to the that in today’s Washington Post, there are going to throw the rule out. So language of Dole-Johnston. I might add was an article that talked about being first they swamp the agency. Then that the American Bar Association buried by paperwork. It had the they provide a whole bunch of opportu- strongly recommended including the amounts of money, and how the regu- nities for litigation. And they say if substantial evidence test for informal latory paper trail leads nowhere. But you have not performed your responsi- rulemakings in S. 343. interestingly enough, almost every dol- bility within that span of time, which The substantial evidence test is the lar in this article was in the SEC and is impossible, we throw the rule out appropriate standard for judicial re- the IRS, both of which are exempted anyway. That is stripping America of view when examining whether the fac- under the Dole-Johnston bill. 25 years of effort to try to have a rea- tual basis of the rule justifies the rule- So the very place where you find the sonable process of regulation. making. Contrary to assertions made problem, they have exempted it. Then I wish to give all colleagues time by some of my colleagues, the substan- they come in and say, well, there is here, but I just say, Mr. President, I tial evidence test is not so stringent as $500 billion worth of cost to our econ- am prepared to vote for a reasonable to impede the implementation of rules. omy. Yet the GAO has shown that reform bill that has a reasonable judi- It is now recognized that the sub- study is totally faulty, that in point of cial review standard, a reasonable cost- stantial evidence test is the functional fact there is only about $225 billion benefit analysis and risk-assessment equivalent of the standard arbitrary total cost to a $1.6 trillion economy. approach, but that does not tie the and capricious test. Indeed, a number All the additional costs that they Government in knots and that does not of courts and legal commentators have throw into their pot are costs that are take the current 1-page Administrative concluded that, when applied to court related to what we call transfer pay- Procedure Act approach to rulemaking review of factual conclusions made by ments and process costs that have and add an additional 64 new pages agencies, the distinction between the nothing to do with the regulatory proc- from the Dole-Johnston bill. substantial evidence test and the arbi- ess itself. That is not simplification. That is trary and capricious standard is large- So, Mr. President, if we want to sim- not reform. That is an opportunity for ly semantic.—Association of Data Proc- plify, which we do, you have an alter- lawyers to have a field day in court and essing Service Organizations v. Board of native. It is the Glenn-Chafee, or to prevent us from ever having a rule Governors, 745 F.2d 677, 684 (1984) (and Chafee-Glenn bill. It is similar to a bill that addresses the public safety and cases cited therein). that came out of committee 15 to noth- health needs and environmental needs Nonetheless, adoption of this test is ing in a bipartisan form. That is a bill of this country. important because it is the appropriate which has review. It is a bill which has Mr. HATCH addressed the Chair. standard for courts to employ when re- a cost-benefit analysis. It is a bill that The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- viewing factual determinations. In has risk assessment. But it does not ator from Utah. other words, the substantial evidence create a rigid rule that denies discre- Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, what 343 standard aids the court in determining tion or judgment to the agency heads requires is that when there is a major whether an agency abused its discre- who deal with these issues. rule, if there is going to be litigation, tion in promulgating a rule. Mr. JOHNSTON. Will the Senator it has to be the whole rule. It cannot be I notice the distinguished majority yield at that point? nit-picked to death as has been sug- leader is here. Mr. KERRY. I am happy to yield for gested under the language there. And Mr. President, just let me say this. a question. every major rule is litigated now. So Despite all of the hysterical rhetoric

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10134 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 that we have heard on this bill, this amendments that have been offered in And perhaps most important, this bill is simply a commonsense bill. It is large measure have been offered by bill includes close to 20 different pro- a reasonable effort to rationalize the those on the other side, and recognize tections for health, safety, and the en- regulatory process. Meaningful regula- as well that as complicated as this is, vironment. tions in the areas of health, safety, and it is imperative we continue to try to These are the facts. Those facts—as environment are important and nec- work through the bill, as difficult as it opposed to the twisted version reported essary. This bill does nothing to repeal may be. by the media—suggest that those who or change needed and reasonable regu- I believe we can do it. I am still opti- oppose our reforms have some explain- lations. All this bill does is require a mistic that we can accommodate all ing to do. Those who seek to stall re- reasonable process whereby we ensure Senators in trying to achieve our ob- form will have to answer to the Amer- that the benefits from these regula- jective of reaching some ultimate com- ican people. tions justify the costs. We have a Gov- promise on this legislation and vote in And in the end, I am confident that ernment out of control. This is a mod- a bipartisan manner. But we cannot do we can pass this bill with broad bipar- est attempt to try to get it back into that today; we cannot do that by cut- tisan support. control, and I hope everybody will vote ting off debate. We cannot do that by Mr. President, I would be very will- for cloture on this bill. precluding Senators’ rights to offer ing to sit down with the Democratic I yield the floor. amendments as they have been doing leader and figure out how we could Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I know now for about a week. bring this matter to a conclusion to- that we are about ready to cast the I yield the floor. morrow or even on Wednesday. But vote. I will be very brief. Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, tonight we this is the seventh or eighth day we As we have said over and over take the first step toward bringing this have been on this bill. It is a very im- throughout the debate today and over important debate to a close. portant bill. Many of the amendments the course of the last several days, the Despite all the horror stories, despite offered by proponents were in response fact is that there has been a very good all the distortions, despite the des- to requests from those who opposed the debate about a number of extraor- perate attempts to shift the focus of bill—this would make it better, this is dinarily complex issues, issues that this debate, I want to make very clear a compromise, work it out. There have ought to be aired, issues that ought to that I intend to fulfill the mandate been a number of amendments. In fact, be raised in the context of both regu- given to us by the American people— we took a major amendment of the latory reform and public safety. and bring some common sense to the Senator from Ohio, who was prepared We have done that. We have offered regulatory process and get the Govern- to debate it for 2 hours. We said we will amendments. We have had a good de- ment off our backs. take it. It is the sunshine amendment, bate. There have been very few quorum On one side of this debate stand the a major amendment. calls. There is no filibuster. I hope all defenders of the status quo. Regulatory We have taken a number of amend- colleagues consider this vote very care- reform is a direct threat to their smug ments. We have addressed the 180 days fully and vote against cloture this assumption that Washington knows problem. We have addressed a number afternoon. best and that it cannot do any better. of major problems, as I understand it. Let me remind my colleagues that 38 The defenders of the status quo can So now there are 267 amendments amendments, so far, have been of- only win by delay and distortion. pending at the desk, first- and second- fered—38 amendments over the last 7 On the other side of this debate stand degree amendments—267 or 260-some. days or so. Of the 38 amendments that those Senators—and I must point out How do you finish a bill with that were offered, 24 of those amendments that we have Republicans and Demo- many amendments? In fact, it is worse were offered by proponents—24 of them. crats—who understand that we have to than the tax bill where sometimes you Only 14 of the 38 amendments which provide relief to American families and have 80 or 100 amendments. And I must have been offered have been offered by small businesses who bear the burden say some of those amendments are on those who are not supporters of the of overregulation. We understand we this side so they are not just coming legislation. Of those, 7 were adopted, 3 can do so in ways that protect health from that side. I do not want to leave were rejected by a 2-vote margin, 2 and safety. that impression. Most are coming from were withdrawn, 1 was the only one to Though I do not really expect to that side but some are coming from lose by more than 10 votes, and 1 is close off debate tonight, it is important this side. pending right now, the Glenn-Chafee to understand that we intend to win, We thought last week, or last Thurs- substitute. and that it is our obligation to pass day or Friday, according to our list— So if you take the substitute away, 13 meaningful regulatory relief, not just not everybody would tell us what their amendments are all the amendments some watered down version that ac- amendments were—there were prob- that have been offered on our side to complishes nothing. ably two or three on this side and five date. And of those, very few were re- Therefore, if cloture is not invoked or six on the other side, including the jected—in fact, only one was rejected— tonight, we will vote again on cloture major substitute which we are on right by more than 10 votes. tomorrow. And if we do not succeed at now. I think the point of all this is very that time, we will vote again to close I do not want to shut off anybody. If clear. We are making a good-faith ef- debate on Wednesday. we cannot get cloture, we cannot get fort to try to work through this issue The issues at stake are too impor- cloture, we will not have regulatory re- in a meaningful way. Even if the sub- tant. Unfortunately, those issues have form. That is not a threat, but if you stitute is declared germane, as I under- often been obscured by those like just take out the calendar—there are stand it has been, there are a number Ralph Nader and President Clinton who already people complaining about not of additional relevant amendments, repeatedly make basic factual errors getting a full August recess and there amendments that we have been waiting about this bill. are probably going to be more and to offer, amendments that we hope to The reality is not so hard to under- more complaints as we get closer to be able to propose at some point in the stand: August 4. I would like to accommodate not-too-distant future, most likely This bill has been amended over 100 most people to get out at least a part even with time agreements. We are times, incorporating comments and of August. But if we want to spend willing to do that, but if we are going suggestions from the Clinton adminis- more time on this bill than we should, to be able to offer those amendments, tration and Democrat and Republican do not be coming around to the major- invoking cloture now would preclude a Members; ity leader saying, ‘‘Oh, you can’t take lot of Members from having the right This bill largely codifies President away our August recess.’’ to do so. Clinton’s Executive order on the regu- I do not want to take away anything. So I urge our colleagues to oppose latory process; I have a lot of places I can go in Au- cloture, recognize that we are not fili- This bill incorporates whole sections gust, would like to go in August, other bustering, we are not extending debate of S. 1080, a bill passed unanimously in than Iowa and New Hampshire. unnecessarily, recognize that the the Senate in 1982; [Laughter.]

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10135 We are not going to get cloture. We Mr. LOTT. I announce that the Sen- sive regulatory reform bill. Had I been have four or five absentees. We have ator from Utah [Mr. BENNETT], the present for the vote, I would have two or three who have not seen the Senator from Idaho [Mr. KEMPTHORNE], voted in the affirmative. light on this side yet, maybe four. But the Senator from Arizona [Mr. I was unable to be here for the vote despite all the horror stories, despite MCCAIN], and the Senator from South due to a number of travel problems all the distortions and despite the des- Dakota [Mr. PRESSLER], are necessarily that occurred on my flights from Sioux perate attempt to shift the focus of absent. Falls to Washington, DC. Specifically, this debate—in fact, the President said Mr. FORD. I announce that the Sen- the aircraft that was to have taken me on Saturday on the radio show if you ator from Alabama [Mr. HEFLIN] and from Sioux Falls to Minneapolis was adopt this bill, there are going to be the Senator from Nebraska [Mr. kept on the ground due to mechanical more air crashes. And this is the same KERREY], are necessarily absent. problems. The delay, in fact, forced me President a week ago who said we The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. to take a later flight on another plane. should be more civil, we should not SANTORUM). Are there other Senators I was further delayed at Minneapolis make statements like this, we should in the Chamber desiring to vote? due to weather surveillance. I regret treat everybody with civility. And he The yeas and nays resulted—yeas 48, this series of flight delays prevented charges Republicans, on a bill like this, nays 46, as follows: me from being present during the clo- with air crashes, dirty meat, dirty [Rollcall Vote No. 309 Leg.] ture vote earlier this evening.∑ water, dirty air, two or three other YEAS—48 ∑ Mr. KEMPTHORNE. Mr. President, I things. He did not have much time on Abraham Frist McConnell rise today to explain my absence from the air. He mentioned three or four ri- Ashcroft Gorton Murkowski the floor during Senate vote No. 309 to diculous, ludicrous, exaggerated state- Bond Gramm Nickles invoke cloture on S. 343. I was nec- Breaux Grams Packwood ments like that. Brown Grassley Pell essarily detained on my return flight We think we have made a lot of Burns Gregg Roth to Washington, DC, due to severe progress. We think this is a bipartisan Campbell Hatch Santorum weather conditions causing flight Coats Helms Shelby delays. Had I been present for vote No. effort. If I have missed something Cochran Hutchison Simpson somewhere along the line, then I think Coverdell Inhofe Smith 309, I would have voted ‘‘aye.’’∑ we should try to address it. I am will- Craig Johnston Snowe Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, as an ing at any time to set down a schedule D’Amato Kassebaum Stevens original cosponsor of Majority Leader DeWine Kyl Thomas DOLE’s regulatory reform package, I of amendments to finish this bill. I am Dole Lott Thompson ready to vote tomorrow morning, to- Domenici Lugar Thurmond am delighted to have this opportunity morrow noon on the big substitute. Faircloth Mack Warner to discuss the many benefits to be Maybe that is one way. Once we deter- NAYS—46 gained from its enactment. For perhaps mine how that is going to come out, Akaka Feingold Lieberman the first time, we are confronting the maybe that will move the debate. Baucus Feinstein Mikulski astoundingly sensible idea that the I think we may as well vote. We do Biden Ford Moseley-Braun regulations we impose at the Federal Bingaman Glenn Moynihan level should reflect risk-assessment not have the votes. Those who are not Boxer Graham Murray and cost-benefit analyses. These impor- ready for regulatory reform will vote Bradley Harkin Nunn ‘‘no.’’ Those who are will vote ‘‘aye.’’ Bryan Hatfield Pryor tant tools will ensure that limited dol- Bumpers Hollings Reid lars are spent on solving our most seri- f Byrd Inouye Robb Chafee Jeffords ous problems and in turn will return Rockefeller CLOTURE MOTION Cohen Kennedy the greatest results. Sarbanes Conrad Kerry Throughout this debate, we have The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under Simon Daschle Kohl been treated to a barrage of rhetoric the previous order, the hour of 6 p.m. Dodd Lautenberg Specter having arrived, the clerk will report Dorgan Leahy Wellstone from naysayers, the opponents of com- the motion to invoke cloture. Exon Levin mon-sense regulating. Those in favor of The assistant legislative clerk read NOT VOTING—6 realistic balance have been portrayed as coldhearted calculators determined as follows: Bennett Kempthorne McCain Heflin Kerrey Pressler to destroy the environment, eradicate CLOTURE MOTION the safe workplace, and jeopardize the The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this We the undersigned Senators in accordance health of every American. with the provisions of rule XXII of the vote, the yeas are 48, the nays are 46. Mr. President, that simply is not Standing Rules of the Senate do hereby Three-fifths of those duly chosen and true. move to bring to a close debate on the pend- sworn not having voted in the affirma- Regulations imposed by the Federal ing substitute amendment to S. 343, the reg- tive, the motion is rejected. ulatory reform bill. Government should bear a direct rela- EXPLANATION OF ABSENCE Bob Dole, Bill Roth, Fred Thompson, tionship to the potential risk to public Spencer Abraham, Kay Bailey Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, the distin- health, safety, and the environment. Hutchison, Jon Kyl, Chuck Grassley, guished Senator from South Dakota, They should also reflect a significant Craig Thomas, Orrin Hatch, Larry E. Senator PRESSLER, was necessarily ab- benefit for the costs incurred. Craig, Mitch McConnell, Conrad Burns, sent during the cloture vote on the Those dual considerations form the Bob Smith, Jesse Helms, Jim Inhofe, Dole-Johnston substitute amendment centerpiece of the Dole-Johnson sub- Judd Gregg. to S. 343, the regulatory reform bill. stitute. f Senator PRESSLER was on his way The measure directs Federal agencies back to Washington from Sioux Falls, to conduct a cost-benefit analysis for CALL OF THE ROLL SD, but has experienced a number of major regulations, defined as having a The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under flight delays due to mechanical dif- gross annual economic impact of $50 the previous order, the mandatory ficulties and weather surveillance. Had million in reasonably quantifiable di- quorum call has been waived. Senator PRESSLER been here for the rect and indirect costs. Where appro- f vote, he would have voted to invoke priate, standardized risk assessments cloture. reflecting the best available science VOTE (At the request of Mr. DOLE, the fol- also would be conducted, with public The PRESIDING OFFICER. The lowing statements were ordered to be participation and peer review. Since question is, Is it the sense of the Sen- printed in the RECORD.) many speakers have preceded me, I will ate that debate on amendment No. 1487 EXPLANATION OF ABSENCE not belabor the specific provisions of to S. 343, the regulatory reform bill, ∑ Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, I was this package. shall be brought to a close? necessarily absent during rollcall vote Earlier this year, the Environment The yeas and nays are required. The No. 309 on the motion to invoke cloture and Public Works Committee, on which clerk will call the roll. on the Dole-Johnston substitute I have served for 9 years, held a hearing The legislative clerk called the roll. amendment to S. 343, the comprehen- on the impact of regulatory reform

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10136 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 proposals on environmental and other anyone would not want to see bene- changes. He suggests that perhaps the statutes. That hearing confirmed a ficial rules and regulations, which pro- Postal Rate Commission and the re- glaring certainty: Federal agencies are tect from real risk while outweighing quirement for binding arbitration with not using the discretion at their dis- their costs. At a time when budgetary employee unions be eliminated, and posal to adequately consider or appro- constraints are a serious priority, we that the Postal Service should have the priately weigh costs and benefits. Bur- should—we must—spend those scarce ability to close small, unprofitable densome Government regulations are dollars wisely. Regulations associated post offices if service could be main- imposing significant costs on our na- with high levels of risk undoubtedly tained through other means such as tional economy, our productivity, and may be expensive to comply with, but leasing space in local businesses. our ability to compete in the global if they are deemed necessary to protect In addition, Mr. Comarow observes marketplace. To reverse that trend, we the national health, safety, and the en- that the monopoly on first-class letters must include cost-containment fea- vironment, the compliance costs will as well as universal service at a uni- tures and regulatory impact analyses be money well spent. form price should be maintained. How- whenever any new Federal regulation However, excessive rules and regula- ever, the Postal Service should be able is considered. Agencies should be re- tions associated with minimal public to compete for large contracts and quired to include sound science before risk amounts to hunting fleas with an offer experimental services, and he they promulgate rules and regulations elephant gun. It is neither fair nor rea- does not believe that employees should anew; the public should be allowed to sonable to ask the taxpayers to bear be given the right to strike—a right petition for the review of risk assess- such expense. not possessed by any other Federal em- ments made by agencies. ORDER OF PROCEDURE ployees. Mr. President, less regulation will Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I hope we Mr. President, I do not here pass not result in less protection for the can now agree on a time to vote on the judgment on the conclusions reached public if our dollars are used effi- substitute. We have had a lot of debate by Mr. Comarow, but he provides an ciently. On the contrary, the net effect on the substitute. I hope we can reach historical reference and raises some of using sound science and real risk as- an agreement before we depart, with issues which ought to be considered sessment to prioritize regulations the managers, on when we can vote on during any debate on the future of the would be more real protection. Best of the Glenn substitute—hopefully tomor- Postal Service. In the interest of reduc- all, that enhanced protection of health row morning or by noon tomorrow. ing costs, I will not ask unanimous and safety would be cost-effective. There will be no more votes tonight. consent that the text of Mr. Comarow’s We are all aware that life will always I think the first thing we want to do is paper be reprinted in the Congressional involve some risk—we cannot and have a vote on the substitute and per- RECORD. Copies of the complete paper should not attempt to protect everyone haps we can reach some agreement on can be obtained by contacting Mr. from every possible degree of risk. In- that. Comarow directly at 4990 Sentinel stead, we must prioritize on the basis Mr. STEVENS. I ask unanimous con- Drive, No. 203, Bethesda, MD, 20816– of definitive risk factors. Each rule sent that I may have a few moments to 3582. must be carefully scrutinized; choices speak as in morning business to intro- Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I must be based on relative risks and as- duce a bill and make a few remarks. suggest the absence of a quorum. sociated costs. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without The PRESIDING OFFICER. The My interest in regulatory reform has objection, it is so ordered. clerk will call the roll. been honed further by my membership Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I The legislative clerk proceeded to on another committee—Agriculture. thank the Chair. call the roll. I am deeply concerned with the eco- (The remarks of Mr. STEVENS per- Mr. DEWINE. Mr. President, I ask nomic health of the agriculture com- taining to the introduction of S. 1043 unanimous consent that the order for munity, especially that of the family are located in today’s RECORD under the quorum call be rescinded. farmer. One of the most debated issues ‘‘Statements on Introduced Bills and The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without concerning agriculture and agricul- Joint Resolutions.’’) objection, it is so ordered. tural chemicals today is the so-called f Mr. DEWINE. Mr. President, I ask Delaney clause. Under its restrictions, U.S. POSTAL SERVICE unanimous consent to proceed as in pesticide residues found in processed morning business. foods are considered food additives. Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, there The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without The Delaney clause prohibits the inclu- has been much discussion lately about objection, it is so ordered. sion of any chemicals or additives in the future of the U.S. Postal Service. Mr. STEVENS. Again, Mr. President, processed foods, including pesticides Should the Postal Service be freed I do not think the Senate is in order and inert ingredients, which have been from current statutory restrictions in for my friend to speak, any more than found to be carcinogenic in humans or order to become more competitive? it was when I was speaking. animals. Should the Postal Service be The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- Ironically, the very good intention of privatized? ator is correct. The Senate will come the Delaney clause—to protect con- Many observers believe there are to order. sumers from unsafe exposure to chemi- problems which need to be resolved in The Senator from Ohio. cals which might induce cancer—is order for the Postal Service to con- being subverted. Technological ad- tinue into the next century. Unfortu- f vances which make it possible to de- nately, there is not a consensus on the tect trace compounds in parts per tril- solutions to the problems—and, indeed, lion and greater have made the zero not everyone agrees that there are HEMOPHILIA AND HIV risk standard of the Delaney clause un- problems which require changes in cur- Mr. DEWINE. Mr. President, the In- reasonable. The very scientific ad- rent law. stitute of Medicine—or IOM—last vancements which should be enhancing As part of the ongoing review of the Thursday released the findings of a consumer safety are instead hindering. Postal Service, I received a paper writ- major investigation into how Amer- It would be far more reasonable to in- ten by Murray Comarow. Mr. Comarow ica’s hemophilia community came to stitute a negligible risk standard. For served as the Executive Director of be decimated by the HIV virus. It is a carcinogens, such a standard would President Johnson’s Commission on very sad and compelling story. represent an upper-bound risk of 1 in 1 Postal Reorganization in the late 1960’s In the early 1980’s, America’s blood million over a lifetime, calculated and was a Senior Assistant Postmaster supply was contaminated with HIV. using conservative risk assessment General. Many Americans have become HIV- methods. Again, we are talking about a In the paper he urges the appoint- positive by transfusions of the HIV- matter of sensible risk assessment. ment of a nonpartisan commission to tainted blood. Mr. President, listening to this de- analyze the root causes of the Postal One particular group of Americans bate, I have had to ask myself why Service’s problems and recommend has been extremely hard-hit by this

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10137 public health disaster. There are ap- ond, the epidemiological pattern of viduals with hemophilia and trans- proximately 16,000 Americans who re- AIDS was similar to that of another fusion recipients had little information quire lifelong treatment for hemo- blood-borne disease—hepatitis. about risks, benefits, and clinical op- philia, a genetic condition that impairs According to the report, these two tions for their use of blood and blood the ability of blood to clot effectively. facts should have been enough of a tip- products.’’ The response of ‘‘policy- In the early 1980s, more than 90 per- off to the public health authorities. As makers’’ was ‘‘very cautious and ex- cent of the Americans suffering from early as December 1982, the report posed the decision makers and their or- severe hemophilia were infected by the says, ganizations to a minimum of criti- HIV virus—more than 90 percent, an (p)lasma collection agencies had begun cism.’’ absolutely unbelievable figure. screening potential donors and excluding In effect, Mr. President, the inertial That is a major human tragedy. I be- those in any of the known risk groups. reflex of bureaucratic caution led to a lieve we should look to the IOM report The report says that Federal authori- serious failure to protect the public released last Thursday for answers as ties should have required blood banks health. That really is the bottom line. to the level of Federal Government cul- to do the same. The Americans suffering from hemo- pability for this disaster. Question 2: Did the Federal agencies philia were relying on their govern- Last Wednesday, on this floor, I dis- move as quickly as they should have to ment to exercise due care about the cussed three questions that I believed approve blood products that were po- safety of the blood supply. It is my were going to be addressed in the IOM tentially safer? Again, the report’s an- view, in light of the very important re- report. swer is ‘‘No.’’ port released today, that the Govern- First, did the Federal agencies re- The report says that certain heat ment failed to meet its responsibilities sponsible for blood safety show the ap- treatment processes—processes that to the hemophilia community. propriate level of diligence in screening could have prevented many cases of It is therefore my intention to intro- the blood supply? AIDS in the hemophilia community— duce, in the coming days, legislation Second, did the Federal agencies could have been developed earlier than that will offer some measure of relief move as quickly as they should have to 1980. to those who have been seriously approve blood products that were po- In the interval between the decisions of harmed by this governmental failure. tentially safer? early 1983 and the availability of a blood test I have had a discussion with my col- Third, did the Federal Government for HIV in 1985, public health and blood in- league from Florida, Senator GRAHAM, warn the hemophilia community, when dustry officials became more certain that who has been a leader in this area, who the Government knew—or should have AIDS among hemophiliacs and transfused has been working for a long time with patients grew. As their knowledge grew, known—that there were legitimate these officials had to decide about recall of the hemophilia community and those concerns that the blood supply might contaminated blood products and possible who have been impacted by this hor- not be safe? implementation of a surrogate test for HIV. rible tragedy. And I would expect to be Mr. President, if the answer to any of Meetings of the FDA’s Blood Product Advi- working with him in the future in re- these three key questions is no, it sory Committee in January, February, July gard to legislation to be introduced. seems to me it should be clear that the and December 1993 offered major opportuni- Mr. President, at this time, I yield Federal Government had not met its ties to discuss, consider, and reconsider the the floor. limited tenor of the policies. responsibilities in this area. As a re- f sult, the Federal Government would I say again, Mr. President: ‘‘Major COMPREHENSIVE REGULATORY have a clear duty to provide some opportunities,’’ major opportunities to REFORM ACT measure of relief to the people with he- change the course of the government’s mophilia who have been infected with blood-protection policies. The Senate continued with the con- the HIV virus. The report continues: sideration of the bill. Mr. President, today the report is in. For a variety of reasons, neither physi- Mr. FAIRCLOTH addressed the The answer to each of these ques- cians . . . nor the Public Health Service Chair. tions is, in fact, no. agencies actively encouraged the plasma The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- fractionation companies to develop heat ator from North Carolina. Question 1. Did the Federal agencies treatment measures earlier. responsible for blood safety show the Despite these opportunities and others to Mr. FAIRCLOTH. Mr. President, as I appropriate level of diligence in screen- review new evidence and to reconsider ear- have listened to the debate and edito- ing the blood supply? The report’s an- lier decisions, blood safety policies changed rializing surrounding the Comprehen- swer is ‘‘No.’’ very little during 1983. sive Regulatory Reform Act I am In January 1983, scientists from the Mr. President, I cannot avoid agree- struck by the extreme rhetoric and Centers for Disease Control rec- ing with the conclusion of this report: baseless accusations made by oppo- ommended that blood banks use donor ‘‘(T)he unwillingness of the regulatory nents of this legislation. If you were to screening and deferral to protect the agencies to take a lead role in the cri- believe all that has been said, you blood supply. According to this report, sis’’ was one of the key factors that would be convinced that this bill would ‘‘it was reasonable’’—based on the sci- ‘‘resulted in a delay of more than 1 undermine all of our health and safety entific evidence available in January year in implementing strategies to protections. You would also believe 1983—‘‘to require blood banks to imple- screen donors for risk factors associ- that the Clinton administration has ment these two screening procedures.’’ ated with AIDS.’’ dramatically reformed the regulatory The report says that ‘‘federal au- Question 3. Did the Federal Govern- process during its 2 years in office. thorities consistently chose the least ment warn the hemophilia community, Well, Mr. President, nothing could be aggressive option that was justifiable’’ when the Government knew—or should further from the truth. on donor screening and deferral. have known—that there were legiti- Let us first examine the Clinton ad- The report’s conclusion is: mate concerns that the blood supply ministration’s record on regulatory re- The FDA’s failure to require this is evi- might not be safe? form. Despite rhetoric claiming sup- dence that the agency did not adequately use The report’s answer is ‘‘No.’’ port for a more reasonable approach to its regulatory authority and therefore According to the report, ‘‘a failure of regulation, Federal regulatory activity missed opportunities to protect the public (government) leadership may have de- has significantly increased during the health.’’ layed effective action during the period past 2 years. In November 1994, the ad- By January 1983, epidemiological from 1982 to 1984. This failure led to ministration itself identified over 4,300 studies by the Centers for Disease Con- less than effective donor screening, new rulemakings underway throughout trol strongly suggested that blood weak regulatory actions, and’’—this is the Federal Government—4,300 new products transmitted HIV. First of all, the key, Mr. President—‘‘insufficient ones working their way through the it was becoming clear that blood re- communication to patients about the process. cipients were getting AIDS—even risks of AIDS.’’ The Institute for Regulatory Policy though the recipients were not mem- As a result, Mr. President, and I am recently studied EPA regulations bers of a known high-risk group. Sec- again quoting from the report: ‘‘indi- issued by the Clinton administration.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10138 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 This study examined all EPA proposed these provisions claim that they will The time is long overdue to increase and final rules published in the Federal lead to gridlock. I claim that such re- oversight of agencies by the judicial Register during the second 6 months views are essential to hold unelected and legislative branches of Govern- after President Clinton’s regulatory re- bureaucrats accountable to the Amer- ment. Perhaps such oversight will in form Executive order took effect. ican people for the rules and regula- some instances result in a slowdown in Based on an analysis of 222 tions which they would impose on us. the implementation of some regula- rulemakings, the study found that only Can you imagine anything more ridicu- tions. And if it does, that is exactly six rulemakings offered a determina- lous than an unelected bureaucrat not what we need and what the country tion that there was a compelling public being held subject to judicial and legis- needs. need for regulation. That is 6 out of 222 lative review? Some will say that such a slowdown regulations. Only six of them were I would like to give an example of is intolerable. I believe it is absolutely worth the paper they were printed on. how Government infringement upon essential to preserve our hard-won con- This demonstrates that the benefits private property rights in the form of stitutional liberties and freedoms to justify the cost of the regulations on uncompensated regulatory takings can have such review. only six. have negative environmental impacts. I oppose the Glenn-Chafee substitute, To put Federal regulation in histor- I would like to illustrate this problem which I believe fails to address many of ical perspective, during the 1960’s, the by talking about the case of a con- the central issues in regulatory reform. Federal Register—where regulations stituent of mine, Mr. Ben Cone, of Therefore, I strongly support the Dole- are published—devoted approximately Ivanhoe, NC, who has been mentioned Johnston substitute amendment and 170,000 pages to Federal regulatory re- previously during debate on this bill. urge its adoption. quirements for that decade. In the Mr. Cone owns 8,000 acres of timber Mr. President, I yield the floor. 1970’s, this number jumped to approxi- land in North Carolina. Over the years, Mr. DOMENICI addressed the Chair. mately 475,000 pages. During the early Ben Cone has deliberately managed The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- 1980’s, President Reagan achieved a sig- much of his land in such a way so as to ator from New Mexico. nificant reduction in the growth of reg- attract wildlife to his property. Mr. Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I be- ulations. Unfortunately, at the end of Cone has actively and intentionally lieve the Domenici amendment has President Clinton’s first year in office, created wildlife habitat. Through selec- been set aside so that the Senate could the number of Federal Register pages tive logging and long rotation cycles. consider the Glenn substitute to the reached the highest annual level since Mr. Cone has been very successful in whole bill. Is that correct? 1980. his efforts, attracting many species to The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- Once you strip away the rhetoric and his land—from wood duck and quail to ator is correct. look at the facts, it is clear who stands black bear and deer. Mr. DOMENICI. I further understand Mr. Cone has also provided habitat on the side of restraining our runaway Senator GLENN on the Democrat side for the red-cockaded woodpecker, an bureaucracy and who seeks to defend and Senator ROTH on the Republican endangered species. the status quo. And the bureaucracy is side have no objection to my getting In response, the Federal Government unanimous consent that my amend- and has run away. It is clear who has placed a large portion of his land ment now be in order and the Glenn stands on the side of protecting indi- off limits to logging. The value of his amendment remain as is but that we vidual liberties and who stands on the land has been reduced by approxi- side of handing-over unchecked polit- mately $2 million. This has taught Mr. dispose of the Domenici amendment to- ical power to unelected bureaucrats. It Cone a lesson: He should no longer night. is clear who stands on the side of in- manage his land in such a way that The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- creased economic growth and economic would attract the red-cockaded wood- ator may call for the regular order and opportunity, and who would allow our pecker if he wants to be able to use it. that will bring the amendment in economy and our opportunities as a In other words, if he allows the trees order. free people to be strangled by redtape. to mature, he simply cannot cut them Mr. DOMENICI. I call for the regular Although the legislative language of because of the red-cockaded wood- order. this bill can be complex and confusing, peckers. So what he is doing and can do The PRESIDING OFFICER. The it is really based on a handful of easily- is cut the trees that they do not in- pending question now is the Domenici understandable commonsense prin- habit and ultimately they will go amendment. ciples. away. AMENDMENT NO. 1784 TO AMENDMENT NO. 1533 First, the bill would require agencies I believe the case of Ben Cone and the (Purpose: To facilitate small business in- to conduct risk assessment. Risk as- central issue at stake in this legisla- volvement in the regulatory development sessment is a scientific process that re- tion is about preserving fundamental process, and for other purposes) quires regulators to evaluate and com- liberties under our constitutional sys- Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I send pare the risks of different activities in tem of checks and balances. In short, a substitute to the desk in behalf of order to focus regulations and scarce our problem is one of limited account- myself and Senators BOND, BINGAMAN, Federal dollars on those activities pos- ability. It is about who regulates the ABRAHAM, COHEN, HUTCHISON, and ing the greatest threat to consumers. regulators. And it is about whether the ROTH, and ask for its immediate con- Too often in the past, regulations have executive branch alone should oversee sideration. been aimed at issues identified through our massive Federal bureaucracy or The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there media attention rather than sound whether Congress and the Federal is no objection, the clerk will report science. courts should have a greater role in the amendment. Second, this bill would require cost- this process. The legislative clerk read as follows: benefit analysis to ensure that agen- I firmly believe that the Congress The Senator from New Mexico [Mr. DOMEN- cies do not impose undue burdens on and the courts should have the major ICI], for himself, Mr. BOND, Mr. BINGAMAN, the public. The premise of cost-benefit role in regulating the bureaucracy. Mr. ABRAHAM, Mr. COHEN, Mrs. HUTCHISON, analysis is simple. Before an agency I believe that one of the lessons of and Mr. ROTH, proposes an amendment num- issues a regulation, it should be re- our experiment with big Government bered 1784 to amendment No. 1533. quired to systematically measure the in the last half of this century is that Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I ask benefits of the regulation and compare agencies tend to take on a life of their unanimous consent that reading of the them to the costs. Such an analysis al- own. Despite the efforts of various amendment be dispensed with. lows a more accurate understanding of Presidents to rein in agencies, they The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without the regulatory burden imposed on con- have continued to grow in size, cost, objection, it is so ordered. sumers by the Federal Government. and power. We have ceded increasing (The text of the amendment is print- Finally, the Dole-Johnston sub- power and control over our lives to a ed in today’s RECORD under ‘‘Amend- stitute amendment permits judicial ‘‘fourth branch’’ of Government which ments Submitted.’’) and congressional review of various has consistently resisted efforts to be Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I note agency determinations. Opponents of held accountable. that a number of other Senators had

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10139 cosponsored the original Domenici Input from small business representatives Essentially, it will depend on whether small business advocacy bill, but since should be required in any future legislation, the bureaucrats want to listen to small I have changed it I have not had time policy development, and regulation making business. But at least they will be affecting small business. given a chance to participate in what is to ask them if they want to be cospon- Congress shall enact legislation . . . to in- sors, and so I am going to send to the clude the following: require all agencies to happening in the regulatory process. I desk a list of the cosponsors and ask simplify language and forms required for use look for some good things to come that overnight Senators’ offices decide by small business . . . and eliminate dupli- from it, not because they will get their whether they want to be original co- cate regulations from multiple Government way all the time, because nobody ex- sponsors, in which event tomorrow I agencies. pects that, but I think they will have would seek unanimous consent that Require agencies to assemble information the kind of input so they will not in a they be made original cosponsors as if through a single source on all business related few years be telling us that small busi- government programs, regulations, reporting ness does not know what the regu- I had done it this evening. requirements, and key federal contact’s Mr. President, I wish to thank Sen- names and phone numbers. latory process is all about, what they ator BOND, the chairman of the Small Congress shall enact legislation to include are doing to them and then the regs are Business Committee, for offering a the following: Require all agencies provide a without commonsense. package of amendments to the original cooperative/consulting regulatory environ- Small businesses panels will be re- Domenici small business advocacy rep- ment that follows due process procedures sponsible for providing technical guid- resentation amendment, and then I and that they be less punitive and more solu- ance for issues impacting small busi- tion oriented. wish to thank Senator GLENN and Sen- nesses, such as applicability, compli- ator ROTH for their cooperation and These are the highlights concerning ance, consistency, redundancy, read- Senator JOHNSTON and his staff. I think regulations from the final 60 rec- ability, and any other related concerns we have now crafted a measure that ommendations the delegates made to that may affect them. will be accepted this evening by the the President. They were among hun- They will then provide recommenda- Senate, and I feel very proud of the dreds of grass-roots ideas the delegates tions to the appropriate agency per- amendment because I think ultimately voted on. sonnel responsible for developing and the cry by small business across this The delegates felt so strongly about drafting the relevant regulations. land that they ought to be somewhat the recommendations I just read, that The panels will be chaired by a senior official of the agency and will include involved, albeit it in an informal way, they received an overwhelming number staff responsible for development and in the development of regulations that of votes. drafting of the regulation, a represent- affect them, both before they are final- The President’s own welcoming let- ative from OIRA, a member of the SBA ized and after they are finalized, will ter to the delegates states, ‘‘Small Advocate Office, and up to six rep- have been accomplished. businesses are the heart of America. Last year, five agencies including We look to you for our new best resentatives from small businesses es- Small Business, EPA, and OSHA held ideas***’’ My amendment will imple- pecially affected. The panel will have a total of 45 days small business forums on regulatory ment these ideas. each to meet and develop recommenda- reform, and this report is their find- Mr. President, what we have accom- tions before a rule is promulgated or ings, findings and recommendations of plished in the first part of this amend- ment, which will then be followed by before a final rule is issued. Forty-five the industry working groups. days, in the context of rules that are In that document, which was put to- the ombudsman legislation that Sen- ator BOND, chairman of the Small Busi- years in development, is not a delay. gether by the executive branch of Gov- In fact, these agencies know months ness Committee, has put in, small busi- ernment, the small business people re- in advance that they will be preparing ness panels will come into play in each cited over and over again that the in- these regulations. Sometime during of the States and the small business ability of small business owners to this period, the agencies can seek these advocate within Small Business will comprehend overly complex regula- panels’ advice get them together on an informal basis tions and those that are overlapping This will allow the actual small busi- with five or six of the lead Government and inconsistent and redundant was a ness owners, or their representative as- officials who work in this area of regu- major problem. They continued to sociations, to have a voice in the mas- lation, and together they will go over state over and over the need for agency sive regulatory process that affects the regulatory problems that are com- regulatory officials to understand the them so much. nuances of the regulated industry and ing up on regulations as we define Finally, this amendment will also the compliance constraints of small them in this bill. provide for a survey to be conducted on business. They stated over and over This means that if this works, for the regulations. This idea is analogous to that the need for more small business first time in history as part of our Gov- what the private sector routinely prac- involvement in the regulatory develop- ernment we will recognize in each tices. ment process, particularly during the State the need for small business, that A customer survey, contracted and analytic risk assessment and prelimi- is, the Small Business Administration, conducted with a private sector firm, nary drafting stages, was imperative if which some people wonder what do will sample a cross-section of the af- in fact we were going to have common- they do for business in general, they fected small business community re- sense regulations. will now go out and pick six small busi- sponsible for complying with the sam- So let me once again read the conclu- ness people, men or women, generally pled regulation. sion of this very large group of small from our States, and they will work I believe that this panel, working to- business people: The need for more with them regarding the regulatory ac- gether so all viewpoints are rep- small business involvement in the reg- tivities that are taking place that are resented, will be the crux of reason- ulatory development process during approaching finalization. There is plen- able, consistent and understandable analytic risk assessment and prelimi- ty of time to get it done because these rulemaking. nary stages is of utmost importance. regulations take a long time. It is not Further, my amendment enjoys the What we have done in this com- intended to be formal. It is a real bona support of the National Federation of promise measure, which many have fide effort to see if cooperation and Independent Business. participated in drafting, is we have partnership can be generated by stat- Mr. President, I believe this amend- complied with a number of the White ute law which will bring small business ment will help reduce counter- House Conference on Small Business people into direct contact with those productive, unreasonable Federal regu- final recommendations which are in- who are preparing regulations, all lations at the same time it is helping cluded in this document. I will make under the auspices of the Small Busi- to foster the nonadversarial, coopera- those a part of the RECORD. I will just ness Administration and its advocates tive relationships that most agree is recite a few of the 60 recommendations bringing this together. long overdue between small businesses to the President and the Congress. I am There are some technical issues I and Federal agencies. going to cite just four of them and they need not mention but that are part of Mr. President, a second part of this are in here, in this amendment: this which I think will make it work. amendment would greatly aid small

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10140 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 businesses as they deal with these This new front will, for the first time, nesses assurance that their confiden- seemingly endless Federal regulations. take the fight outside the beltway and tial complaints and comments will be Mr. President, I yield the floor to attack regulations and agencies where recorded and heard. These ombudsmen Senator BOND who wants to talk about they impact people in their day-to-day also will coordinate the activities of the second part of the amendment, and lives. volunteer Small Business Regulatory then I assume Senator GLENN will Since the election, there has been Fairness Boards, made up of small speak and we will, hopefully, have the tremendous activity in reforming the business people from each region. Senate adopt the amendment this way Federal agencies develop and issue These Boards will be able to report on evening. regulations, and I have been deeply in- and make recommendations about Mr. BOND addressed the Chair. volved in this effort as cochair of the troublesome patterns of enforcement The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- regulatory relief task force. S. 343 is so activities. Any small business that is ator from Missouri. important because it makes funda- subject to an inspection or enforce- Mr. BOND. I thank the Chair and my mental changes in the way Govern- ment action will have the chance to distinguished friend from New Mexico. ment regulations are developed. It is rate and critique the inspectors or law- Mr. President, I will abide by the vitally important if we are to reduce yers they deal with. In dealing with suggestion that we keep this short be- the flood of runaway regulations. And small businesses today, agencies seem cause I do believe, first, thanks are in it is particularly important for small to assume that every one is a violator order to Senator DOMENICI for the con- business to add meaningful judicial en- of their rules, trying to get away with cept of this amendment. I was pleased forcement provisions to the Regulatory something. Some agencies do a good to join with him on adding provisions Flexibility Act, and I am very pleased job of fulfilling their legal mandate with respect to the ombudsmen, but to see the strong reforms of the Reg while assisting small business, but sincere thanks to Senator GLENN, Sen- Flex Act in this bill. many agencies seem stuck in an en- ator LEVIN and their staffs because So far, most of our efforts have fo- forcement mentality where everyone is they made very helpful and construc- cused on changing the way agencies presumed guilty until proven innocent. tive suggestions that we think can im- enact regulations. The Domenici-Bond- I think we should let small businesses prove the working of these provisions. Bingaman amendment begins to reform compare their dealings with one agen- The part of the amendment which I the way Government officials enforce cy to dealing with another so the abu- had earlier introduced legislation on Federal regulations. After all, most sive agencies or agents can be weeded provides a means for small businesses people, most small business people, do out and exposed. Agencies should be who feel that they are being abused by not have the time to concern them- trying to see who can fulfill their stat- a particular regulator to get some re- selves with the process of reviewing utory mandate in a way that helps and lief without having to risk heightening and commenting on proposed and final empowers small business. the animosity of that particular regu- rules in the Federal Register. Small This is an important amendment. It lator by going through the Small Busi- businesses have to deal with regula- has the strong support of small busi- ness Advocacy Council in the Small tions when the regulator shows up on ness. I believe it will help to bring Business Administration. This, we the doorstep to inspect their facility or about a more cooperative relationship think, will respond to the many com- to enforce a new Federal mandate. As I between regulators and small business. plaints we have heard in hearings we have taken the Senate Small Business I urge my colleagues to support the had in New Mexico, in my State, and Committee around the country, I have amendment. other places around the country, where heard numerous horror stories about In recent weeks, we have heard from they think the enforcement is exces- burdensome regulations. But as I have the President about all the ways he is sive. listened and learned from business men going to reduce the burdens of Govern- There was a suggestion by the Sen- and women with real life problems, I ment regulations. I commend him for ator from Michigan that we have the have become increasingly convinced recognizing the forces at work in Con- appointment of the regional small that the enforcement of regulations is gress and responding quickly to it. He business regulatory fairness board by a problem as troublesome as the regu- has found a parade and now is hustling the SBA Administrator so it would not lations themselves. to get in front of it, as a good politi- be burdensome, having to go through The Domenici-Bond-Bingaman cian will do. Presidential directives Presidential and congressional leader- amendment will begin to make funda- and agency policies can change as often ship appointment. I think that im- mental changes in the way regulatory as the weather, though, and I want the proves the bill. agencies think about small business. It comfort of knowing that Congress has I express my appreciation to the should be every regulatory agency’s passed a law that permanently changes managers on both sides for their help mission to encourage compliance by the enforcement attitudes of Federal in getting this amendment through. I making rules easier to understand and regulators so small business can get on really think this is going to be a sig- by not enforcing their regulations in a with what they do best, creating jobs nificant step forward for small busi- way that unnecessarily frustrates law- and driving the engine of America’s ness. As Senator DOMENICI has pointed abiding small businesses. This is the economy. out, small business has expressed their essence of President Clinton’s call for frustration with regulations. Now they Government regulators to treat small I appreciate the willingness of the will have an opportunity to sit in on businessmen as clients and not crimi- managers to accept the measure. the crafting of the regulations. nals, partners not adversaries. In fact, Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I rise in They will also have a place to go if the administration should support this support of the Domenici-Bond amend- they are treated unfairly by particular amendment. It establishes a type of ment. regulators or the particular agencies. I performance-based standard for regu- In 1980, Congress enacted the Regu- hope that there will not be a need for lators that the Vice President has latory Flexibility Act in recognition of the small business ombudsmen. I hope talked about in the national perform- the fact that Government regulations that with the establishment of this ance review. This allows the cus- have a disproportionate impact on procedure, there will be a strong push tomers—small business—to rate the small business. In that act we asked and a greater effort on behalf of all regulators. Government agencies to take this fact agencies to become servers of the busi- The Domenici-Bond-Bingaman into account in issuing regulations. nesses and the people they regulate and amendment is designed to give small Today, some 15 years later, it is gen- the people of the United States. businesses a place to voice complaints erally accepted that the 1980 act has Mr. President, I want to speak briefly about excessive, unfair, or incompetent been an ineffective response to a grow- about the need for the Domenici-Bond- enforcement of regulations. It sets up ing problem. Bingaman amendment. This amend- regional Small Business and Agri- The pending amendment is an effec- ment opens a new front in our fight culture ombudsmen through the Small tive remedy. It flashes out what two against oppressive, onerous, and overly Business Administration’s offices agencies—EPA and OSHA—must do to meddlesome Government regulations. around the country to give small busi- take the concerns of small business

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10141 into account. It formalizes a dialog be- Mr. GLENN. Mr. President, I want to ness, but I support workers and teach- tween small business and those agen- comment briefly on the amendment of- ers too, and we are not giving them cies which, I am sure, will be helpful to fered by Senator Domenici. equivalent access. both. With this amendment, these First of all, I do want to recognize Second, I am concerned about the agencies can no longer brush aside the his concerns regarding the ability of survey these review panels may order legitimate concerns of small business. small businesses to have a role in the to assess the impact of a final rule. We There is a real difference in how regu- regulatory process. Like all other hear alot about government redtape lations impact a conglomerate and a Americans, their voices should be and the endless burden of paperwork. sole proprietor. heard. But now we are going to have an Fifteen years ago we notified agen- I also want to acknowledge the agency contracting with a private sec- cies that they should recognize this dif- charges made by Senators DOMENICI tor firm to do an assessment—from a ference and gave them discretion. But and BOND and their staffs to address cross-section of affected small busi- that discretion has not been exercised concerns raised by myself and others, nesses—which, it would seem to me, as it should have been. So no Congress including Senator LEVIN. will add to the burden of paperwork must respond with more precise direc- I am pleased that the sponsors have that the Paperwork Reduction Act is tion. done away with the Federal Advisory supposed to reduce. I hope OMB re- This amendment embodies a second Committee Act [FACA] exemption. I views any such survey proposal care- major component. It establishes re- will have more to say about the impor- fully. gional small business ombudsmen to tance of FACA when I offer my amend- I understand the sponsor will not re- solicit and receive comments from ment to strike the FACA exemption for quest a roll call vote. On that basis, I small businesses regarding enforce- the risk assessment peer review panels will not oppose the amendment. ment activities of Federal agencies and in the underlying Dole-Johnston bill. Mr. President, we are going to accept periodically evaluate how responsive In fact, we spent a whole day dis- this. It is my intention to do that. I agencies have been to small business cussing FACA on the floor last August want to recognize the concerns of Sen- concerns. when we eliminated such exemptions in ator DOMENICI regarding the ability of This amendment impresses me as an the health care bill. small business to have a role in the appropriate solution to the concerns of I am also glad that the role of the regulatory process. Their voices should small business. The requirements of small business designated representa- be heard. There were changes made the pending amendment regarding the tives has changed somewhat—they will that took care of some of our problems issuance of rules pertain only to two be primarily to furnish information to with FACA, in particular, the Federal agencies and, there, only formalize the review panel. Advisory Committee Act, which re- what should now be taking place—a di- Second, I am glad that we were able quires a balance on certain commit- alog between small business and the to straighten out the definition of rules tees, and so on. agencies. for when these panels come into play, I will have some more to say about Mr. President, Government must be so it mirrors the language in the un- that later on, not in regard to this par- made sensitive to the regulatory bur- derlying bill. ticular amendment, but to the under- den on small business. Small business Third, I am pleased that we have lying bill. There are some problems is the backbone of America—a crucial clarified that any information made still in that area. provider of jobs, a wellspring of entre- available to the small business des- I have expressed some concerns about preneurial innovation, and a central ignated representatives will also be how this might be applied to other spe- part of the American dream. I con- publicly accessible. They will not be ciality areas that we have some con- gratulate Senators DOMENICI and BOND privy to any information that other cern about, but that is of no concern in for their efforts to help America’s mil- citizens will not be able to access. this particular area. We may want to lions of small business owners, their Fourth, regarding the surveys which address some of that later. employees, and their families. may be ordered, we not only will know With that, I will be glad to accept the I urge the adoption of this amend- the results, but also the cost paid by amendment. ment. taxpayers to undertake them. The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there Mr. DOMENICI addressed the Chair. Having said this, let me also voice is no further debate, the question is on The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- my concerns over some of the provi- agreeing to amendment No. 1784 to ator from New Mexico. Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, the sions in the amendment. amendment No. 1533. So the amendment (No. 1784) was small business advocacy review panels Let me be clear: we are giving one agreed to. that are created by this amendment special interest—no matter how meri- Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I move to should make the regulatory processes torious their cause—a leg up over all reconsider the vote by which the of OSHA and the Environmental Pro- other citizens in the regulatory proc- ess. amendment was agreed to. tection Agency more user friendly and, Mr. GLENN. I move to lay that mo- in a sense, bring small business and These small business review panels will come into play even prior to the tion on the table. those two regulatory agencies into The motion to lay on the table was some kind of cooperative spirit where issuance of a notice of proposed rule- making. That is a marked departure agreed to. heretofore they seemed to have kind of The PRESIDING OFFICER. The thrived on being adversarial. from current practice. We don’t have special review panels question now occurs on agreeing to I want to thank Senator HATCH who to hear from labor interests prior to amendment No. 1533, as amended. is managing this bill for helping us get So the amendment (No. 1533), as our amendment to this point. I under- issuance of regulatory proposals. Work- ers will have an interest—perhaps their amended, was agreed to. stand he, too, is going to express a will- Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I ingness to accept it. I thank him for safety or lives depend on it—in pre- senting their views, also. move to reconsider the vote by which that. I yield the floor. the amendment was agreed to. Mr. HATCH addressed the Chair. We do not have teachers giving their Mr. HATCH. I move to lay that mo- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- comments prior to the promulgation of tion on the table. ator from Utah. a rulemaking notice for an education Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I want to proposal by the Department of Edu- The motion to lay on the table was thank my friend and colleague from cation. agreed to. New Mexico and compliment him for I understand what the proponents of AMENDMENT NO. 1785 TO AMENDMENT NO. 1487 his amendment. We are prepared to ac- this amendment are trying to do. It is (Purpose: To repeal the Medicare and Med- cept this amendment at this point, and important to reach out and consult icaid coverage data bank, and for other I believe the other side is as well. with those of our citizens who will be purposes) Mr. GLENN addressed the Chair. most affected by a proposed rule. I do Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I send an The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. not disagree with the principle, and I amendment to the desk for and on be- THOMAS). The Senator from Ohio. am a strong supporter of small busi- half of Senators MCCAIN and

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10142 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 LIEBERMAN and ask for its immediate costs to Medicare or Medicaid when a in a much more efficient manner than consideration. third party is the primary payor. This that required under OBRA 1993. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The is a legitimate objective. However, if Foe example, OBRA 1989 provides for clerk will report the amendment. the objective of the data bank is to pre- HCFA to periodically match Medicare The legislative clerk read as follows: serve Medicare and Medicaid funds, beneficiary data with Internal Revenue The Senator from Utah [Mr. HATCH] for Mr. why is it necessary to mandate infor- Service employment information—the MCCAIN, for himself and Mr. LIEBERMAN, pro- mation on all employees, the vast ma- data match program. Also, HCFA di- poses an amendment numbered 1785 to jority of whom have no direct associa- rectly asks beneficiaries about primary amendment No. 1487. tion with either the Medicare or Med- payor coverage. To the extent that the Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I ask icaid Program? data bank duplicates these efforts, any unanimous consent that the reading of Last year, I introduced S. 1933 to re- potential savings will not be realized. the amendment be dispensed with. peal the Medicare and Medicaid Cov- It is clearly preferable to require HCFA The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without erage Data Bank. Unfortunately, this to use the information it already has objection, it is so ordered. bill did not pass in the 103d Congress, than to require the private sector to The amendment is as follows: in part because of a questionable Con- provide duplicative information. At the end of the amendment, insert the gressional Budget Office analysis that The GAO report found that ‘‘the data following new section: estimated that the data bank would match not only can provide the same SEC. . REPEAL OF MEDICARE AND MEDICAID save the Federal Government about $1 COVERAGE DATA BANK. information [as the Data Bank] with- billion. In contrast, the General Ac- out raising the potential problems de- (a) REPEAL.— counting Office found that ‘‘as envi- (1) IN GENERAL.—Section 13581 of the Omni- scribed above, but it can do so at less bus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 is sioned, the data bank would have cer- cost.’’ It also recognized that both the hereby repealed. tain inherent problems and likely data match and data bank processes (2) APPLICATION OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY achieve little or no savings to the rely too much on an after-the-fact re- ACT.—The Social Security Act shall be ap- Medicare and Medicaid Programs.’’ covery approach, and recommended en- plied and administered as if section 13581 of Still, due primarily to the fiction that hancing up-front identification of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of the data bank would save money, S. 1993 (and the amendments made by such sec- other insurance and avoiding erroneous 1933 was not enacted last year. payments. In this regard, it docu- tion) had not been enacted. The GAO report on the data bank law (b) STUDY AND REPORT.— mented that HCFA has already initi- also found that employers are not cer- (1) STUDY.—The Secretary of Health and ated this prospective approach. tain of their specific reporting obliga- Human Services (hereafter in this subsection For these and other reasons, the tions, because HCFA has not provided referred to as the ‘‘Secretary’’) shall conduct Committee on Labor and Human Re- a study on how to achieve the objectives of adequate guidance. Much of the infor- sources appropriations report last year the data bank described in section 1144 of the mation which is required is not typi- contained language prohibiting the use Social Security Act (as in effect on the day cally collected by employers, such as of Federal funds for developing or before the date of the enactment of this Act) Social Security numbers of dependents in the most cost-effective manner, taking maintaining the data bank. However, and certain health insurance informa- into account— this provision by itself did not revoke tion. Some employers have even ques- (A) the administrative burden of such data the requirement that covered entities tioned whether it is legal for them bank on private sector entities and govern- must still provide the required infor- under various privacy laws to seek to ments, mation on the health coverage of cur- (B) the possible duplicative reporting re- obtain the required information. quirements of the Health Care Financing Ad- The GAO report further found that rent and former employees and their ministration in effect on such date of enact- employers are facing significant costs families. This would have resulted in ment, and in complying with the reporting re- the bizarre situation in which covered (C) the legal ability of such entities and quirements, including the costs of rede- employers would have had to report governments to acquire the required infor- the information, but there would have mation. signing their payroll and personnel sys- tems. It cites one company with 44,000 been no data bank to process or re- (2) REPORT.—The Secretary shall report to trieve it. the Congress on the results of the study de- employees that would have costs of ap- scribed in paragraph (1) by not later than 180 proximately $52,000 and another com- Finally, in response to the public days after the date of the enactment of this pany with 4,000 employees that would outcry about this Federal mandate, the Act. have costs of $12,000. Overall, the Health Care Financing Administration Mr. MCCAIN. Mr. President, this American Payroll Association esti- [HCFA] indicated that it will not be en- amendment which is cosponsored by mated last year that this requirement forcing the data bank’s reporting re- Senator LIEBERMAN and Senator KYL will cost between $50,000 and $100,000 quirements in fiscal year 1995. It stated would eliminate a large and unjustified per company. that in light of the refusal of Congress administrative burden imposed on em- I would add that the reporting re- to fund the data bank, ‘‘we have agreed ployers by an ill-considered piece of quirement applies only to employers to stay an administrative action to im- legislation passed 2 years ago. Specifi- that provide health insurance coverage plement the current requirements, in- cally, it would repeal the Medicare and to their employees. It is unconscion- cluding the promulgation of reporting Medicaid Coverage Data Bank, section able that we are adding costs and pen- forms and instructions. Therefore, we 13581 of OBRA 1993, a law that is ex- alties to those who have been most will not expect employers to compile tremely expensive, burdensome, puni- diligent in providing health coverage the necessary information or file the tive, and in my view, entirely unneces- to their employees. The last thing that required reports. Likewise, no sanc- sary. the Federal Government should do is tions will be imposed for failure to file The data bank law requires every em- impose disincentives to employee such reports.’’ ployer who offers health care coverage health care coverage, which is one of This was a major step in the right di- to provide substantial and often dif- the unintended consequences of the rection. However, the data bank and its ficult-to-obtain information on current data bank law. reporting requirements are still in the and past employees and their depend- Perhaps the most disturbing aspect law and are still scheduled to be imple- ents, including names, Social Security of the data bank law is that its enor- mented in the next fiscal year. Con- numbers, health care plans, and period mous costs have little or no cor- sequently, this year I have reintro- of coverage. Employers that do not sat- responding benefit. The GAO report duced my data bank repeal bill, S. 194. isfy this considerable reporting obliga- concluded that ‘‘The additional infor- I have recently been informed that the tion are subject to substantial pen- mation gathering and record keeping CBO has revised its scoring to recog- alties, possibly up to $250,000 per year required by the data bank appears to nize that the data bank would not save or even more if the failure to report is provide little benefit to Medicare or the Federal Government any money. found to be deliberate. Medicaid in recovering mistaken pay- This removed the only argument in The purported objective of the data ments.’’ This is in part because HCFA favor of the data bank and the only bank law is to ensure reimbursement of is already obtaining this information major impediment to its repeal.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10143 Mr. President, the Federal Govern- Federation of Independent Business be ical Bank, Chevron Corp., Chrysler Corp., ment continues to impose substantial printed in the RECORD. They represent CIBA-GEIGY Corp., CIGNA Corp., Citibank financial burdens on the private sector the numerous associations, organiza- N.A., The Coastal Corp., Coopers & Lybrand, Dana Corp., Deere & Co., Delta Air Lines without fully accepting its share of the tions, and individual employers that Inc., Digital Equipment Corp., The Dow burden to implement a program. We continue to demand repeal of this law. Chemical Co., Dresser Industries Inc., du- should once again expect the worst Their message is clear. The Federal Pont Co., case scenario to occur: employers will Government must stop imposing un- Eastman Kodak Co., Eli Lilly and Co., provide the required information at justified burdens on the private sector. Enron Corp., Ernst & Young, Exxon Corp., substantial administrative burden, There being no objection, the letters Federated Department Stores Inc., FMC there will be no data bank in which to were ordered to be printed in the Corp., Ford Motor Co., A. Foster Higgins & Co. Inc., RECORD, as follows: make use of it, and even if a data bank General Electric Co., General Motors were funded and established, the infor- THE ERISA INDUSTRY COMMITTEE, Corp., The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., W.R. mation stored could not be used effi- July 11, 1995. Grace & Co., Grand Metropolitan, GTE Corp., ciently to save Medicare or Medicaid Hon. JOHN MCCAIN, Halliburton Co., Harris Corp., Hazlehurst & funds. U.S. Senate, Senate Russell Office Building, Associates Inc., The Hearst Corp., Hewitt As- I do not want this repeal to be con- Washington, DC. sociated LLC, Hewlett-Packard Co., DEAR SENATOR MCCAIN: We understand IBM Corp., ITT Corp., strued, in any way, as opposition to that you are planning to offer a floor amend- John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Co., HCFA obtaining the information it ment to S. 343, the Comprehensive Regu- Johnson & Johnson, needs to administer the Medicare and latory Reform Act of 1995, to repeal the re- Kimberly-Clark Corp. Medicaid Programs efficiently, and ob- quirement that employers report certain The LTV Corp., taining reimbursement from third- health coverage information to the Health MCI Communications Corp., McDonnell party payors when appropriate. To as- Care Financing Administration (HCFA) for Douglas Corp., William M. Mercer Incor- use by the Medicare and Medicaid Data porated, Merck & Co. Inc., MetraHealth, sure that HCFA has the information it Bank. The members of the ERISA Industry Metropolitan Life Insurance Co., Michelin needs, the bill also requires the Sec- Committee (ERIC) strongly support your North America Inc., Minnesota Mining & retary of HHS to conduct a study and amendment. Manufacturing Co., Mobil Corp., J. P. Mor- report to Congress on how to achieve The ERISA Industry Committee is a non- gan & Co. Inc., Motorola Inc., Mutual of New the purported objectives of the data profit employer association committed to York, bank in the most cost-effective manner the advancement of the employee retire- Nestle USA Inc., NYNEX Corp., ment, health and welfare benefit plans of Occidental Petroleum Corp., Olin Corp., possible. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp., The Secretary’s study would have to America’s major employers. ERIC represents the employee benefits interests of more than Pacific Gas & Electric Co., Pacific Telesis take into consideration the adminis- 125 of the nation’s largest employers. As Group, Pathmark Stores Inc., J. C. Penney trative costs and burden on the private sponsors of health, disability, pension, sav- Co. Inc., Pennzoil Co., PepsiCo Inc., Pfizer sector and the Government of proc- ings, life insurance, and other welfare benefit Inc., Philip Morris Companies Inc., PPG In- essing and providing the necessary in- plans directly covering approximately 25 dustries Inc., Price Waterhouse, The Procter formation versus the benefits and sav- million plan participants and beneficiaries, & Gamble Co., The Prudential Insurance Co. ings that such reporting requirements ERIC’s members provide coverage to about of America, 10 percent of the U.S. population. Ralston Purina Co., Rockwell Inter- would produce. It must also consider The reporting requirement was created by national Corp., current HCFA reporting requirements OBRA’93, P.L. 103–66, ERIC’s analysis has Sears Roebuck & Co., Shell Oil Co., The and the ability of entities to obtain the concluded that the employer reporting re- Southland Corp., required information legally and effi- quirement neither successfully addresses Tenneco Inc., Texaco Inc., Texas Instru- ciently. HCFA’s concerns regarding the prevention of ments Inc., Textron Inc., Time Warner Inc., Too often, Congress considers only mistaken primary payments nor justifies the Towers Perrin, The Travelers, TRW Inc., the cost savings to the Federal Govern- enormous reporting burdens it imposes on Unilever United States Inc., Union Camp Corp., Union Pacific Corp., Unisys Corp., ment of legislation while ignoring employers. Therefore, its repeal is consistent with the laudable goal of reducing unneces- United Technologies Corp., Unocal Corp., U S costs to other parties. The Medicare sary and inappropriate regulation. West Inc., USX Corp., and Medicaid Data Bank is a case in ERIC is committed to working with you Westvaco Corp., Weyerhaeuser Co., Whirl- point. Congress required information and others to find alternative means to ad- pool Corp., The Wyatt Co., Xerox Corp., on millions of employees to save the dress HCFA’s secondary payer enforcement Zeneca Inc. Federal Government money. Yet, it and compliance needs that do not impose dis- will cost employers more money to proportionate financial and administrative COALITION ON EMPLOYER HEALTH COVERAGE REPORTING AND THE comply than the Government saves. burdens on employers. In particular, the multiple sources of data and data collection MEDICARE/MEDICAID DATA BANK Congress must stop passing laws that vehicles already available to HCFA should be July 11, 1995. impose large, unjustified administra- fully implemented rather than imposing Hon. JOHN MCCAIN, tive burdens on other entities. It must massive new reporting burdens on employ- U.S. Senate, Senate Russell Office Building, consider the impact of its actions on ers. Washington, DC. the whole economy and not just on the In conclusion, we applaud your efforts to DEAR SENATOR MCCAIN: We understand Government. repeal this onerous reporting requirement that you are planning to offer a floor amend- In summary, the reporting require- and urge your colleagues in the Senate to ment to S. 343, the Comprehensive Regu- latory Reform Act of 1995, to repeal the re- ment for the Medicare and Medicaid support your amendment. Sincerely, quirement that employers report certain Data Bank is duplicative, burdensome, MARK J. UGORETZ, health coverage information to the Health ineffective, and unnecessary. The GAO President. Care Financing Administration (HCFA) for has characterized it as creating ‘‘an av- use by the Medicare and Medicaid Data alanche of unnecessary paperwork for THE ERISA INDUSTRY COMMITTEE—MEMBER Bank. On behalf of the Coalition’s members, both HCFA and employers.’’ It penal- COMPANIES I would like to express their support for your izes employers who provide health care Aetna Life & Casualty, Alexander & Alex- amendment. benefits to their workers—exactly the ander Inc., Allied-Signal Inc., American Ex- The Coalition on Employer Health Cov- erage Reporting and the Medicare/Medicaid opposite goal we should be pursuing. press Co., American Home Products Corp., American International Group, American Data Bank consists of more than 90 The data bank should be repealed and a National Can Co., Ameritech, Amoco Corp., assocations, organizations and individual more cost-effective approach should be Anheuser-Busch Companies Inc., Apache employers working together since January found to ensure that Medicare and Corp., Ashland Oil Inc., AT&T Corp., Atlan- 1994 in a joint effort to repeal the reporting Medicaid are appropriately reimbursed tic Richfield Co., requirement. by primary payors. Bankers Trust Co., Baxter Healthcare The reporting requirement was created by Mr. President, I ask unanimous con- Corp., Bell Atlantic Corp., Bell Communica- OBRA’93, P.L. 103-66. The Coalition’s anal- sent that letters of support from the tions Research, BellSouth Corp., Bethlehem ysis (summary attached) concluded that the employer reporting requirement neither suc- Coalition on Employer Health Cov- Steel Corp., The Boeing Co., BP America Inc., Bristol-Myers Squibb Co., Buck Con- cessfully addresses HUFA’s concerns regard- erage Reporting and the Medicare/Med- sultants Inc., ing the prevention of mistaken primary pay- icaid Data Bank, the ERISA Industry Caterpillar Inc., Champion International ments nor justifies the enormous reporting Committee [ERIC] and the National Corp., Chase Manhattan Bank N.A., Chem- burdens it imposes on employers.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10144 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 We applaud your efforts to repeal this on- with high work force turnover. Further, em- ment efforts. HCFA’s enforcement efforts in- erous reporting requirement and urge your ployers’ ability to collect certain informa- stead should be focused on preventing mis- colleagues in the Senate to support your tion (e.g., dependents’ social security num- taken claims before they occur by requiring amendment. bers) may be limited by privacy laws. Collec- health care providers to bill the proper par- Sincerely, tion of information in cases where employers ties. ANTHONY J. KNETTEL, contribute to, but do not administer, Taft- Director, Health Policy, The ERISA Hartley multi-employer health plans will NATIONAL FEDERATION Industry Committee Coalition also be difficult, if not impossible. OF INDEPENDENT BUSINESS, Requiring employers to collect the data for Coordinator. July 12, 1995. HCFA is incredibly inefficient. Only a Hon. JOHN MCCAIN, COALITION ON EMPLOYER HEALTH COVERAGE minute amount of the information employ- U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. REPORTING AND THE MEDICARE/MEDICAID ers must collect and report will be of any use DATA BANK—.JULY 11, 1995 to the data bank because only a small frac- DEAR SENATOR MCCAIN: On behalf of the COALITION ANALYSIS: REPORTING REQUIREMENT tion (less than 5 percent) of employees and over 600,000 members of the National Federa- IMPOSES UNREASONABLE COSTS ON EMPLOY- their dependents are Medicare or Medicaid tion of Independent Business (NFIB), I am ERS BUT STILL FAILS TO REMEDY HCFA’S SEC- beneficiaries. In effect, more than 95 percent writing to strongly support the McCain- ONDARY PAYER PROBLEMS of employers’ effort will be wasted because Lieberman amendment to repeal the Medi- care and Medicaid Data Bank. This data Summary: The Coalition’s analysis has the data collected will be irrelevant to sec- bank is nothing short of another regulatory concluded that the employer health coverage ondary payer enforcement. and paperwork nightmare for America’s al- reporting requirement,1 which is intended to The data bank won’t improve secondary ready overburdened small businesses. provide data for the Medicare/Medicaid Data payer enforcement in any case. The data to Bank, neither successfully addresses the con- be reported by employers was intended to be Unless repealed, this provision will require cerns of the Health Care Financing Adminis- matched against government records in an employers to report detailed health insur- tration (HCFA) regarding mistaken primary effort to identify (after the fact) mistaken ance coverage information for more than 140 payments nor justifies the burdens imposed reimbursements for health care services by million individuals—including employees, re- on employers. Therefore, the data bank re- Medicare and Medicaid. But in many cases tirees and their dependents. Information porting requirement should be repealed as the data reported by employers will still not from the Health Care Financing Administra- soon as possible. be sufficient to enable HCFA (by its own ad- tion (HCFA) suggests these statistics will be Unreasonable costs imposed on employers: mission) to identify or prevent mistaken useless 98 percent of the time. payments. Moreover, it is unlikely HCFA The administrative and financial burden im- Ironically, the government currently re- would be able to process any relevant infor- posed on employers by full compliance with ceives much of the information the data mation it did receive fast enough to meet ap- the reporting requirement is enormous. A bank would mandate. Through better man- plicable claims filing deadlines and recover significant portion of the information to be agement of current resources, and with in- mistaken payments. reported to the data bank is not currently formation gathered through the study your Data bank compounds ‘‘Pay-and-chase’’ in- maintained by most employers for any busi- amendment directs the Secretary of Health efficiencies: Mistaken primary payments by ness purpose. In many cases this information and Human Services to undertake, we be- Medicare and Medicaid most often result will have to be compiled manually (i.e., most lieve the federal bureaucracy can avoid this from health care providers billing the wrong employers do not have payroll systems and costly and time consuming burden alto- parties. Yet HCFA’s secondary payer en- computer data bases that are designed to gether. collect and maintain this required informa- forcement efforts are based on a ‘‘pay-and- tion) at tremendous cost. chase’’ strategy—reconciling mistaken pay- Thanks for your continued leadership on GAO determines that the data bank won’t ments with employers (not providers) years behalf of small business. We look forward to work: On May 6, 1994, Leslie Aronovitz testi- after the fact. The data bank reporting re- working with you to pass this important fied on behalf of the General Accounting Of- quirement does not alter this ‘‘pay-and- anti-paperwork amendment. fice (GAO) before the Senate Committee on chase’’ strategy significantly because of the Sincerely, Governmental Affairs that ‘‘the enormous time delay implicit in the collection and DONALD A. DANNER, administrative burden the data bank would processing of the information to be reported Vice President. place on HCFA and the nation’s employ- to the data bank. Better alternatives are available: To date Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I under- ers. . . likely would do little or nothing to stand that both sides have approved enhance current efforts to identify those the federal government has not made effec- beneficiaries who have other health insur- tive use of relevant and more timely infor- this amendment and will agree to its ance coverages.’’ The basis for GAO’s conclu- mation it already receives or could obtain adoption. sions is discussed in detail in a report, from sources other than the data bank in The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there ‘‘Medicare/Medicaid Data Bank Unlikely to order to prevent mistaken payments before further debate? If not, the question is they occur. For example, HCFA already re- Increase Collections From Other Insurers,’’ on agreeing to the amendment. prepared at the request of Senator Joseph ceives or could obtain much of the same in- Lieberman and released the same day. formation when claims are filed by health So the amendment (No. 1785) was Coalition’s analysis supports GAO’s con- care providers. This is because the UB–92 and agreed to. other claim forms require secondary payer clusions: The data bank’s employer reporting Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I move to requirement will not solve HCFA’s secondary information to be included on the form. In payer enforcement problems—despite the fact, secondary payer information has been reconsider the vote by which the massive administrative burdens and ex- sent to HCFA for years, but HCFA has not amendment was agreed to. penses it imposes on employers—for the fol- been successful at fully incorporating this Mr. GLENN. I move to lay that mo- lowing reasons: information into its systems. HCFA has also tion on the table. In many cases it is impossible for employ- been unable to take full advantage of addi- ers to fully comply with the reporting re- tional information it receives or could ob- The motion to lay on the table was quirement. Collection of such information tain from other sources, such as new bene- agreed to. from employees is even harder for employers ficiary questionnaires. Rather than over- Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I think than it is for the government to obtain it di- whelm HCFA with new data that the agency we are about ready to shut the Senate rectly from Medicare and Medicaid bene- can’t effectively utilize, it makes more sense ficiaries. Obtaining information about de- to help HCFA manage the information it al- down in just a minute or so. I suggest pendents, in particular, will be very difficult, ready has or could readily obtain. the absence of a quorum. time consuming, expensive, and in many Compelling arguments for repeal: The pre- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The cases impossible—especially for employers ceding analysis suggests several compelling clerk will call the roll. arguments for repealing the data bank re- porting requirement, including: The bill clerk proceeded to call the 1 Beginning January 1, 1994, current law requires roll. employers to report the health insurance coverage Employers’ compliance costs will far out- status of employees and their dependents to a data weigh (by orders of magnitude) any potential Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I ask bank to be administered by HCFA. This reporting government savings. For all of the reasons unanimous consent that the order for requirement was created by OBRA ’93 (P.L. 103–66). discussed above and in the GAO’s 1994 report, HCFA has indefinitely suspended implementation of the data bank reporting requirement will the quorum call be rescinded. the data bank because Congress has not appro- generate little or no additional savings for The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without priated any funds for that purpose. The coalition the federal government despite tens of mil- strongly supported the Appropriation Committees’ objection, it is so ordered. lions of dollars in annual employer compli- decision not to appropriate funds for data bank im- Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, the dis- ance costs. plementation. Employers remain subject to the stat- tinguished Senator from Missouri utory obligation to collect and report the data, how- The data bank reporting requirement com- ever, so repeal of the reporting requirement is still pounds rather than solves the inherent inef- would like to send an amendment to urgently needed. ficiency of HCFA’s ‘‘pay-and-chase’’ enforce- the desk.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10145

AMENDMENT NO. 1786 TO AMENDMENT NO. 1487 SEC. 204. ELIGIBILITY FOR WAIVERS (3) the basis for the city’s findings that the (Purpose: To provide for the designation of (a) ELIGIBLE CITIES.—The mayor or chief waiver of a regulation would improve the distressed areas within qualifying cities as executive officer of a city may establish an health and safety and economic well-being of regulatory relief zones and for the selec- Economic Development Commission to carry the city’s residents and the data supporting tive waiver of Federal regulations within out the purposes of section 205 if the city has such a determination. such zones) a population greater than 200,000 according SEC. 207. WAIVER OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS. Mr. ASHCROFT. Mr. President, I to: (a) SELECTION OF REGULATIONS.—An Eco- (1) the U.S. Census Bureau’s 1992 estimate send an amendment to the desk and nomic Development Commission may select for city populations; or for waiver, within an Urban Regulatory Re- ask for its immediate consideration. (2) beginning six months after the enact- lief Zone, Federal regulations that— The PRESIDING OFFICER. The ment of this title, the U.S. Census Bureau’s (1)(A) are unduly burdensome to business clerk will report. latest estimate for city populations. concerns located within an area designated The bill clerk read as follows: (b) DISTRESSED AREA.—Any census tract as an Urban Regulatory Relief Zone; or The Senator from Missouri [Mr. ASHCROFT] within a city shall qualify as a distressed (B) discourages new economic development proposes an amendment numbered 1786 to area if— within the zone; or amendment No. 1487. (1) 33 percent or more of the resident popu- (C) creates undue economic hardships in lation in the census tract is below the pov- the zone; or Mr. ASHCROFT. Mr. President, I ask erty line; or (D) contributes to the social deterioration unanimous consent that reading of the (2) 45 percent or more of out-of-school of the zone; and amendment be dispensed with. males aged 16 and over in the census tract (2) if waived, will not substantially endan- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without worked less than 26 weeks in the preceding ger health or safety. objection, it is so ordered. year; or (b) REQUEST FOR WAIVER.—(1) An Economic The amendment is as follows: (3) 36 percent or more families with chil- Development Commission shall submit a re- dren under age 18 in the census tract have an quest for the waiver of Federal regulations At the end, add the following new title: unmarried parent as head of the household; to the Office of Management and Budget. ‘‘TITLE II—URBAN REGULATORY RELIEF or (2) Such request shall— ZONES (4) 17 percent or more of the resident fami- (A) identify the area designated as an SECTION 201. SHORT TITLE. lies in the census tract received public as- Urban Regulatory Relief Zone by the Eco- This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Urban Regu- sistance income in the preceding year. nomic Development Commission; latory Relief Zone Act of 1995’’. SEC. 205. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMIS- (B) identify all regulations for which the SEC. 202. FINDINGS. SIONS. Economic Development Commission seeks a The Congress finds that— (a) PURPOSE.—The mayor or chief execu- waiver; and (1) the likelihood that a proposed business tive officer of a qualifying city under section (C) explain the reasons that waiver of the site will comply with many government reg- 204 may appoint an Economic Development regulations would economically benefit the ulations is inversely related to the length of Commission for the purpose of— Urban Regulatory Relief Zone and the data time over which a site has been utilized for (1) designating distressed areas, or a com- supporting such determination. commercial and/or industrial purposes in the bination of distressed areas with one another (c) REVIEW OF WAIVER REQUEST.—No later past, thus rendering older sites in urban or with adjacent industrial or commercial than 60 days after receiving the request for areas the sites most unlikely to be chosen areas, within the city as Urban Regulatory waiver, the Office of Management and Budg- for new development and thereby forcing Relief Zones; and et shall— (1) review the request for waiver; new development away from the areas most (2) making application through the Office (2) determine whether the request for waiv- in need of economic growth and job creation; of Management and Budget to waive the ap- er is complete and in compliance with this and plication of specific Federal regulations title, using the most recent census data (2) broad Federal regulations often have within such Urban Regulatory Relief Zones. available at the time each application is sub- unintended social and economic con- (b) COMPOSITION.—To the greatest extent mitted; and sequences in urban areas where such regula- practicable, an Economic Development Com- (3) after making a determination under tions, among other things— mission shall include— paragraph (2)— (A) offend basic notions of common sense, (1) residents representing a demographic (A) submit the request for waiver to the particularly when applied to individual sites; cross section of the city population; and Federal agency that promulgated the regula- (B) adversely impact economic stability; (2) members of the business community, tion and notify the requesting Economic De- (C) result in the unnecessary loss of exist- private civic organizations, employers, em- velopment Commission of the date on which ing jobs and businesses; ployees, elected officials, and State and local the request was submitted to such agency; or (D) undermine new economic development, regulatory authorities. (B) notify the requesting Economic Devel- especially in previously used sites; (c) LIMITATION.—No more than one Eco- opment Commission that the request is not (E) create undue economic hardships while nomic Development Commission shall be es- in compliance with this Act with an expla- failing significantly to protect human tablished or designated within a qualifying nation of the basis for such determination. health, particularly in areas where economic city. (d) MODIFICATION OF WAIVER REQUESTS.— development is urgently needed in order to SEC. 206. LOCAL PARTICIPATION An Economic Development Commission may improve the health and welfare of residents (a) PUBLIC HEARINGS.—Before designating submit modifications to a waiver request. over the long term; and an area as an Urban Regulatory Relief Zone, The provisions of subsection (c) shall apply (F) contribute to social deterioration to an Economic Development Commission es- to a modified waiver as of the date such such degree that high unemployment, crime, tablished pursuant to section 205 shall hold a modification is received by the Office of and economic and social problems create the public hearing, after giving adequate public Management and Budget. greatest risk to the health and well-being of notice, for the purpose of soliciting the opin- (e) WAIVER DETERMINATION.—(1) No later urban residents. ions and suggestions of those persons who than 120 days after receiving a request for SEC. 203. PURPOSES. will be affected by such designation. waiver under subsection (c) from the Office The purposes of this title are to— (b) INDIVIDUAL REQUESTS.—The Economic of Management and Budget, a Federal agen- (1) enable qualifying cites to provide for Development Commission shall establish a cy shall— the general well-being, health, safety and se- process by which individuals may submit re- (A) make a determination of whether to curity for their residents living in distressed quests to the Economic Development Com- waive a regulation in whole or in part; and areas by empowering such cities to obtain mission to include specific Federal regula- (B) provide written notice to the request- selective relief from Federal regulations that tions in the Commission’s application to the ing Economic Development Commission of undermine economic stability and develop- Office of Management and Budget seeking such determination. ment in distressed areas within the city; and waivers of Federal regulations. (2) Subject to subsection (g), a Federal (2) authorize Federal agencies to waive the (c) AVAILABILITY OF COMMISSION DECI- agency shall deny a request for a waiver only application of specific Federal regulations in SIONS.—After holding a hearing under para- if the waiver substantially endangers health distressed urban areas designated as Urban graph (a) and before submitting any waiver or safety. Regulatory Relief Zones by an Economic De- applications to the Office of Management (3) If a federal agency grants a waiver velopment Commission— and Budget pursuant to section 207, the Eco- under this subsection, the agency shall pro- (A) upon application through the Office of nomic Development Commission shall make vide a written statement to the requesting Management and Budget by an Economic De- publicly available— Economic Development Commission that— velopment Commission established by a (1) a list of all areas within the city to be (A) describes the extent of the waiver in qualifying city pursuant to section 205; and designated as Urban Regulatory Relief whole or in part; and (B) upon a determination by the appro- Zones, if any; (B) explains the application of the waiver, priate Federal agency that granting such a (2) a list of all regulations for which the including guidance for the use of the waiver waiver will not substantially endanger Economic Development Commission will re- by business concerns, within the Urban Reg- health or safety. quest a waiver from a Federal agency; and ulatory Relief Zone.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10146 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 (4) If a Federal agency denies a waiver quence be limited to 10 minutes in Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and under this subsection, the agency shall pro- length. Forestry. vide a written statement to the requesting The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without EC–1181. A communication from the gen- Economic Development Commission that— objection, it is so ordered. eral counsel of the Department of Defense, (A) explains the reasons the the waiver transmitting a draft of proposed legislation substantially endangers health or safety; and f to designate defense acquisition pilot pro- (B) provides a scientific basis in writing for grams in accordance with the National De- such determination. CLOTURE MOTION fense Authorization Act for fiscal year 1991 (f) AUTOMATIC WAIVER.—If a Federal agen- Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I send a and for other purposes; to the Committee on cy does not provide the written notice re- cloture motion to the desk. Armed Services. quire under subsection (e) within the 120-day The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clo- EC–1182. A communication from the Sec- period as required under such subsection, the retary of the Treasury, transmitting, pursu- waiver shall be deemed to be granted by the ture motion having been presented ant to law, a report on specialized govern- federal agency. under rule XXII, the Chair directs the ment securities brokers and dealers; to the (g) LIMITATION.—No provision of this Act clerk to read the motion. Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban shall be constructed to authorize any Fed- CLOTURE MOTION Affairs. eral agency to waive any regulation or Exec- We, the undersigned Senators, in accord- EC–1183. A communication from the presi- utive order that prohibits, or the purpose of ance with the provisions of rule XXII of the dent and chairman of the Export-Import which is to protect persons against, discrimi- Standing Rules of the Senate, do hereby Bank, transmitting, pursuant to law, a state- nation on the basis of race, color, relation, move to bring to a close debate on the Dole- ment with respect to a transaction involving gender, or national origin. Johnston substitute amendment to S. 343, United States exports to Morocco; to the (h) APPLICABLE PROCEDURES.—A waiver of a the regulatory reform bill. Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban regulation under subsection (e) shall not be Bob Dole, Christopher S. Bond, Bill Roth, Affairs. considered to be a rule, rulemaking, or regu- Frank H. Murkowski, Rod Grams, John EC–1184. A communication from the presi- lation under chapter 5 of title 5, United Ashcroft, Spencer Abraham, Craig Thomas, dent and chairman of the Export-Import States Code. The Federal agency shall pub- Pete V. Domenici, Bill Frist, Fred Thomp- Bank, transmitting, pursuant to law, a state- lish a notice in the Federal Register stating son, Mike DeWine, Thad Cochran, Larry E. ment with respect to a transaction involving any waiver of a regulation under this sec- Craig, Bob Smith, Chuck Grassley. United States exports to Japan; to the Com- tion. mittee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Af- (i) EFFECT OR SUBSEQUENT AMENDMENT OF f fairs. REGULATIONS.—If a Federal agency amends a MORNING BUSINESS EC–1185. A communication from the presi- regulation for which a waiver under this sec- dent and chairman of the Export-Import tion is in effect, the agency shall not change Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I ask Bank, transmitting a draft of proposed legis- the waiver to impose additional require- unanimous consent that there now be a lation to amend the Export-Import Bank Act ments. period for the transaction of morning of 1945, as amended; to the Committee on (j) EXPIRATION OF WAIVERS.—No waiver of a business, with Senators permitted to Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. regulation under this section shall expire un- speak therein for up to 10 minutes EC–1186. A communication from the Sec- less the Federal agency determines that a retary of Housing and Urban Development, continuation of the waiver substantially en- each. transmitting, pursuant to law, the 1994 an- dangers health or safety. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without nual report of the Government National SEC. 208. DEFINITIONS. objection, it is so ordered. Mortgage Association; to the Committee on For purposes of this Act, the term— f Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. (1) ‘‘regulation’’ means— EC–1187. A communication from the direc- (A) any rule as defined under section 551(4) MESSAGES FROM THE PRESIDENT tor of the Office of Management and Budget, of title 5, United States Code; or Executive Office of the President, transmit- Messages from the President of the ting, pursuant to law, a report on direct (B) any rulemaking conducted on the United States were communicated to record after opportunity for an agency hear- spending or receipts legislation within 5 days ing under sections 556 and 557 of such title; the Senate by Mr. Thomas, one of his of enactment; to the Committee on the (2) ‘‘Urban Regulatory Relief Zone’’ means secretaries. Budget. EC–1188. A communication from the Sec- an area designated under section 205; f (3) ‘‘qualifying city’’ means a city which is retary of Commerce, transmitting, pursuant eligible to establish an Economic Develop- EXECUTIVE MESSAGES REFERRED to law, a report required under the Antarctic Marine Living Resources Convention Act of ment Commission under section 204; As in executive session the Presiding (4) ‘‘industrial or commercial area’’ means 1984; to the Committee on Commerce, any part of a census tract zoned for indus- Officer laid before the Senate messages Science, and Transportation. trial or commercial use which is adjacent to from the President of the United EC–1189. A communication from the Acting a census tract which is a distressed area pur- States submitting sundry nominations Assistant Secretary of the Interior, Terri- suant to section 205(b); and which were referred to the appropriate torial and International Affairs, transmit- (5) ‘‘poverty line’’ has the same meaning as committees and a withdrawal. ting a draft of proposed legislation to amend such term is defined under section 673(2) of (The nominations received today are the Magnuson Fishery and Conservation the Community Services Block Grant Act (42 Management Act; to the Committee on Com- printed at the end of the Senate pro- merce, Science, and Transportation. U.S.C. 9902(2)).’’. ceedings.) UNANIMOUS-CONSENT AGREEMENT f f Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I ask INTRODUCTION OF BILLS AND unanimous consent that the vote occur EXECUTIVE AND OTHER JOINT RESOLUTIONS on the Glenn amendment at 2:15 p.m. COMMUNICATIONS The following bills and joint resolu- on Tuesday, July 18, and immediately The following communications were following that vote, the Senate proceed tions were introduced, read the first laid before the Senate, together with and second time by unanimous con- to vote on the motion to invoke clo- accompanying papers, reports, and doc- ture on the Dole-Johnston substitute, sent, and referred as indicated: uments, which were referred as indi- By Mr. ABRAHAM (for himself, Mr. with mandatory quorum under rule cated: XXII being waived. DOLE, Mr. BROWN, Mr. HATCH, Mr. EC–1179. A communication from the Sec- DEWINE, Mr. KYL, and Mr. KEMP- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without retary of Agriculture, transmitting, pursu- THORNE): objection, it is so ordered. ant to law, the annual animal welfare en- S. 1039. A bill to require Congress to speci- Mr. HATCH. I further ask unanimous forcement report for fiscal year 1994; to the fy the source of authority under the U.S. consent that if the Glenn substitute is Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Constitution for the enactment of laws, and agreed to, it be considered original text Forestry. for other purposes; to the Committee on the for the purpose of further amendment. EC–1180. A communication from the Sec- Judiciary. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without retary of Agriculture, transmitting a draft of By Mr. GORTON: objection, it is so ordered. proposed legislation to authorize the Sec- S. 1040. A bill to authorize the Secretary of retary of Agriculture to expand and stream- Transportation to issue a certificate of docu- Mr. HATCH. Finally, I ask unani- line a Distance Learning and Telemedicine mentation with appropriate endorsement for mous consent that the first vote at 2:15 Program by providing for loans and grants employment in the coastwise trade for the p.m. be the standard 15-minute vote, and to authorize appropriations for business vessel Onrust; to the Committee on Com- and the second vote in the voting se- telecommunication partnerships; to the merce, Science, and Transportation.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10147 S. 1041. A bill to authorize the Secretary of LEGISLATION REQUIRING SPECIFICATION OF That principle was made clear in the Transportation to issue a certificate of docu- CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY original Constitution, which gave Con- mentation with appropriate endorsement for Mr. ABRAHAM. Mr. President, I rise gress not general legislative authority employment in the coastwise trade for the today to introduce two pieces of legis- but only ‘‘all legislative powers herein vessel Explorer; to the Committee on Com- lation. One is a bill and the other is a granted.’’ And it was emphasized by merce, Science, and Transportation. resolution. The effect of each is to re- By Mr. MACK: the adoption of the 10th amendment in S. 1042. A bill to designate a route as the quire that every law that passes the Bill of Rights, which states that ‘‘POW/MIA Memorial Highway,’’ and for through this Chamber explicitly state ‘‘The powers not delegated to the other purposes; to the Committee on Envi- the constitutional authority pursuant United States by the Constitution, nor ronment and Public Works. to which it is being enacted. prohibited by it to the States, are re- By Mr. STEVENS (for himself, Mr. I believe this requirement will help served to the States respectively, or to INOUYE, Mr. MURKOWSKI, Mr. SIMON, this body by giving us occasion to the people.’’ Mr. INHOFE, Mr. DODD, Mr. SIMPSON, pause and reflect on whether the legis- Mr. AKAKA, Mr. SANTORUM, and Mrs. lation we are considering is in fact Until this last term the Supreme FEINSTEIN): within the province of the national Court for decades had not struck down S. 1043. A bill to amend the Earthquake government. a law as outside Congress’s powers. As Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 to provide for a result many people claimed that the an expanded Federal program of hazard miti- It will also help the American people evaluate our work, keeping in mind the principle that Congress has only lim- gation, relief, and insurance against the risk ited enumerated powers is a dead let- of catastrophic natural disasters, such as question of constitutionality as well as hurricanes, earthquakes, and volcanic erup- the immediate policy questions pre- ter. But our everyday experience shows tions, and for other purposes; to the Com- sented by the bill. otherwise. Everybody knows that we mittee on Commerce, Science, and Transpor- And it may discourage us, at least at do not turn to the National Govern- tation. the margin, from adopting legislation ment for help with most problems in By Mrs. KASSEBAUM (for herself, Mr. outside our proper sphere of authority our everyday lives. We turn to family KENNEDY, Mr. JEFFORDS, Mr. PELL, and responsibility. members, friends, doctors, community and Mr. SIMON): All these factors would enhance our or volunteer organizations, and church- S. 1044. A bill to amend title III of the Pub- lic Health Service Act to consolidate and re- citizenry’s freedom and make it easier es; or to local government officials, authorize provisions relating to health cen- for them to exercise their self-gov- such as school teachers, police men and ters, and for other purposes; to the Com- erning authority at the State and local women, and others. mittee on Labor and Human Resources. level—the level closest to the people. The 1994 congressional elections were By Mr. ABRAHAM (for himself and Mr. Mr. President, it has become com- in large measure about the size of gov- COATS): monplace to observe that the elections ernment. And in my view, Mr. Presi- S. 1045. A bill to amend the National Foun- of 1994 showed the voters’ frustration dent, those elections made one thing dation on the Arts and the Humanities Act with big government. It seems clear to of 1965, the Museum Services Act, and the very clear: The belief that our National me that the American people feel that Government should have only limited Arts and Artifacts Indemnity Act to pri- the Federal Government is interfering vatize the National Foundation on the Arts powers remains alive in the hearts of and the Humanities and to transfer certain too much in their lives. the people. related functions, and for other purposes; to Whether through costly and ineffec- tive Federal programs fraught with The most important efforts of this the Committee on Labor and Human Re- Congress have been undertaken to re- sources. micro-managing mandates, business spond to the people’s demand for f regulations that increase prices and cost jobs, environmental controls that prompt and serious action to return SUBMISSION OF CONCURRENT AND forbid farmers to use their own land in the National Government to its proper SENATE RESOLUTIONS a reasonable fashion, or workplace functions. The following concurrent resolutions rules that forbid workers from saving The budget that we have been debat- and Senate resolutions were read, and fellow workers from danger, the people ing for the past few days is the first in referred (or acted upon), as indicated: have had enough of Washington-knows- many years to take that responsibility By Mr. MACK (for himself and Mr. best programs. very seriously. LIEBERMAN): And I believe the people are right to The regulatory reform legislation S. Res. 151. A resolution to designate May be concerned about a government that currently on the floor is similarly an 14, 1996, and May 14, 1997, as ‘‘National Speak considers everything in life to be a effort to impose reasonable and mean- No Evil Day’’, and for other purposes; to the proper subject for Federal legislation. ingful restrictions on the interventions Committee on the Judiciary. We are in danger in this country of in- of regulatory bureaucracies in our By Mr. ABRAHAM (for himself, Mr. stituting a kind of soft despotism that DOLE, Mr. BROWN, Mr. HATCH, Mr. lives. will crush our democratic liberty under DEWINE, Mr. KYL, and Mr. KEMP- The proposals to abolish Cabinet De- the weight of well-intentioned but THORNE): partments will likewise get the Na- overzealous regulations and programs. S. Res. 152. A resolution to amend the tional Government out of areas where Standing Rules of the Senate to require a Intended to serve the people, these it does not belong. clause in each bill and resolution to specify laws may enslave them by taking away the constitutional authority of the Congress too much of their natural freedom of It is in this context that we should for enactment, and for other purposes; to the action. consider the Supreme Court’s decision Committee on Rules and Administration. That is not the National Government a few months ago in United States By Mr. DOLE (for himself and Mr. that our Framers envisioned. Clearly versus Lopez and the rather modest DASCHLE): there are areas where the Federal Gov- legislative proposals I am introducing S. Res. 153. A resolution to make certain today. In Lopez, the Supreme Court for technical corrections to Senate Resolution ernment should intervene to protect 120; considered and agreed to. people’s health, safety and rights. But the first time in 60 years struck down an act of Congress as exceeding the f there must likewise be areas in which the Federal Government cannot inter- powers granted it in the Constitution. STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED vene in regulating the peoples’ lives. The Court ruled that a Federal law BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS The Framers of our Constitution be- about guns in schools was beyond Con- By Mr. ABRAHAM (for himself, lieved they had devised a system that gress’ powers because its connection to Mr. DOLE, Mr. BROWN, Mr. would separate these areas from each commerce was too remote. HATCH, Mr. DEWINE, Mr. KYL, other. They thought that one of the Now I think there are few higher pri- and Mr. KEMPTHORNE): powerful limitations on the National orities than reversing the accelerating S. 1039. A bill to require Congress to Government would be the principle decline of our schools into armed specify the source of authority under that the Congress could exercise only camps. But, not surprisingly, so do the the U.S. Constitution for the enact- the limited, enumerated powers grant- States, which is why almost all of ment of laws, and for other purposes; ed it by the people and set out in the them already have laws addressing this to the Committee on the Judiciary. Constitution. problem.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10148 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 Thus this important case is not about First, it will encourage us to pause each following title, section, subsection or whether we should have guns in and reflect about where the law we are paragraph to the extent the later title, sec- schools, but about whether policing the considering enacting fits within the tion, subsection or paragraph relies on a dif- schools is principally the responsibility constitutional allocation of powers be- ferent article, section, or clause of the Con- stitution from the one pursuant to which the of parents, local governments and tween the Federal Government and the first title, section, subsection or paragraph States, or the responsibility of Con- States. is enacted.’’. gress. The Court correctly found that As Justices Kennedy and O’Connor (c) TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMEND- the Framers did not assign us that re- noted in their concurrence in Lopez, MENT.—The table of sections for chapter 2 of sponsibility—which is just as well, that is one of our important respon- title 1, United States Code, is amended by in- since I have no idea how we could pos- sibilities: serting after the item relating to section 102 sibly be in a position to figure out It would be mistaken and mischievous for the following: what is needed in every locality in the the political branches to forget that the ‘‘102a. Constitutional authority clause.’’. sworn obligation to preserve and protect the country. By Mr. STEVENS (for himself, The Court’s opinion does signal Constitution in maintaining the federal bal- ance is their own in the first and primary in- Mr. INOUYE, Mr. MURKOWSKI, something of a change in approach by stance. Mr. SIMON, Mr. INHOFE, Mr. the Court to issues of this type. But it A statement of constitutional au- DODD, Mr. SIMPSON, Mr. AKAKA, is always dangerous to read too much thority also will put Congress’ view of Mr. SANTORUM, and Mrs. FEIN- into an individual Supreme Court deci- its constitutional authority on the STEIN): sion. Moreover, the Court did not give record for the people to judge. This will S. 1043. A bill to amend the Earth- much indication, other than something spur further useful reflection on our quake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 to of a change in attitude, about how it part and open up the possibility of con- provide for an expanded Federal pro- would be approaching future cases. versation with the people on the sub- gram of hazard mitigation, relief, and I do not think we should be dis- ject of Federal powers. insurance against the risk of cata- appointed about this. After all, we in Finally, such a statement also will strophic natural disasters, such as hur- Congress’s new majority should not help the courts evaluate the legisla- ricanes, earthquakes, and volcanic leave it to the Supreme Court to do all tion’s constitutionality. Legislation eruptions, and for other purposes; to of the thinking on this subject. The that falls within our enumerated pow- the Committee on Commerce, Science, courts, Congress, and the President ers will more likely be upheld if it con- and Transportation. working together expanded govern- tains an explicit statement of its con- NATURAL DISASTER PROTECTION ACT ment to its present dimensions. A simi- stitutional authority. As important, Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, Alaska lar cooperative effort by all three we will be less likely to allow laws or has three times more earthquakes than branches will likely be needed to re-es- regulations that overstep proper con- California. Since 1938, Alaska has had tablish our central government’s sta- stitutional bounds to pass out of this at least nine quakes of 7.4 magnitude tus as a government of limited powers. Chamber. or more on the Richter scale. Alaska’s This will be no easy task. But it is In this way we will protect the lib- 1965 Good Friday earthquake was one our duty to make limited government erties of our people, the prerogatives of of the world’s most powerful, at the as much of a reality in the lives of our States and local communities, and magnitude of 9.2 on the Richter scale. Americans and American culture 30 the structure of limited government Senator INOUYE and I have been years from now as the notion of inex- bequeathed to us by our Founders. We studying this matter. We find that over orable expansion was until Ronald Rea- will, then, defend that constitutional the last two decades Federal taxpayers gan’s election as President and the structure designed to foster virtue in have paid out over $140 billion in aid election of the current Congress. the people, discipline in the govern- following earthquakes. We have begun the difficult task of ment and peace and prosperity in the Before 1989, the United States had restoring ordered liberty in a number nation. never experienced a disaster costing of ways in this Congress. Our efforts I urge your support of this legisla- more than $1 billion in insured losses. toward a balanced budget promise to tion. Since then, we have had nine disasters return our Government to fiscal re- Mr. President, I ask unanimous con- that have cost more than $1 billion. sponsibility; to make us recognize our sent that the text of the bill be printed Today, Senator INOUYE and I intro- duty to pay our bills and refrain from in the RECORD. duced a bill to try and reduce the cost burdening our children with massive There being no objection, the bill was to the Federal Government of earth- debts. ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as quakes, hurricanes, and floods. Our regulatory reform measures follows: First, the bill will reduce Federal promise to rein in government agencies S. 1039 costs by expanding the use and avail- by forcing them to conduct real cost- Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Rep- ability of private insurance. The bill benefit analyses, based on sound resentatives of the United States of America in also disqualifies those who do not buy science. In this way regulation will be Congress assembled, private insurance from long-term Fed- reduced and limited to those that actu- SECTION 1. SPECIFICATION OF CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY FOR ENACTMENT OF eral disaster assistance. ally will promote the public good. LAW. Second, the bill will provide incen- Our steps toward elimination of un- (a) CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY.—This Act tives to improve the ability of build- necessary Cabinet Departments prom- is enacted pursuant to the power granted ings to withstand disasters and, in ise to reduce government’s interference Congress under Article I, section 8, clause 18, doing so, will reduce the risk of injury with our daily lives. By eliminating of the United States Constitution. to people. As one expert put it: ‘‘It is unneeded Departments we will elimi- (b) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 2 of title 1, buildings, not earthquakes, that kill nate bureaucrats’ drive to justify their United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 102 the following new section: people.’’ jobs by finding new areas to regulate. And, third, the bill will create a na- ‘‘§ 102a. Constitutional authority clause I do not for a minute equate the pro- tional, privately funded catastrophic posals I am introducing today with ‘‘(a) A constitutional authority clause shall follow the enacting clause of any Act of insurance pool to shoulder the risk of these other efforts. I do believe how- Congress or the resolving clause of any joint very large disasters. ever, that a requirement that we in- resolution. The constitutional authority Mr. President, the more private in- clude a statement of what power, clause shall be in the following form (with surance individuals buy, the less dis- granted it by the Constitution, Con- appropriate modifications and appropriate aster relief Federal taxpayers must gress is using in enacting every piece of matter inserted in the blanks): pay. For instance, if this bill had been legislation, will play a modest role in ‘‘ ‘This Act (or resolution) is enacted pur- in place before Hurricane Andrew and assisting our ongoing reexamination of suant to the power(s) granted to the Con- California’s Northridge earthquake, it gress under Article(s) section(s) , the role and limits of the National clause(s) of the United States Constitu- would have reduced Federal costs by at Government. tion.’’’ least $5 billion. This requirement will perform three ‘‘(b) A similar clause shall precede the first Not only will the bill help reduce the important functions. title, section, subsection or paragraph, and costs to the Federal taxpayer, it will

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10149 make insurance more available for damage from these hazards before they disaster and promotes better building those in States with higher risk of dis- occur. practices and increased planning for aster. I hope we can move quickly on this catastrophes. This legislation would Alaska has three times more quakes bill this year. encourage States and local govern- than California. Since 1938, Alaska has Thank you, Mr. President. ments to adopt building codes and the had at least nine quakes of 7.4 mag- Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I am type of mitigation strategies I men- nitude or more on the Richter scale. pleased to announce the reintroduction tioned, and it would provide them with Alaska’s 1964 Good Friday quake was of the Natural Disaster Protection Act funds derived from private industry, one of the world’s most powerful at a [NDPA] in an effort to create a com- not the Federal Government, to imple- magnitude of 9.2. I lived through that prehensive Federal strategy for dis- ment those measures. The bill would quake. The earth shook for 7 minutes. aster preparation and planning. I hope substantially increase participation in Most quakes last under 2 minutes. For that many of my colleagues will join insurance programs for the perils example, California’s Northridge quake Senator STEVENS and me as cosponsors, homeowners face and provide for a Fed- lasted about 30 seconds. so that we can ensure that this bill is eral backstop of the private insurance The Alaska quake destroyed the eco- considered by the full Senate at the market in the event of a mega-catas- nomic bases of entire communities. earliest possible opportunity. Time, trophe which could result in extreme Whole fishing fleets, harbors, and can- however, is working against us. devastation and economic disruption. neries were lost. The shaking gen- Since our original legislation was in- The new bill improves upon last erated catastrophic tidal waves. Petro- troduced in the last Congress, we have year’s legislation by relying primarily leum storage tanks ruptured and the experienced time and time again why on the private sector to address insur- contents caught fire. Burning oil ran the bill is so urgently needed. The ance availability issues and by modi- into the bay and was carried to the wa- earthquake which struck Los Angeles fying Federal disaster assistance pro- terfront by the large waves. These in January 1994 is now rated the second grams to reduce the share of disaster waves of fire destroyed docks, piers, most costly disaster in United States relief borne by U.S. taxpayers. and small-boat harbors. The effects of history, adding more than $11 billion to The NDPA enjoys the support of nu- the 1964 quake were felt as far away as the Federal debt and saddling its vic- merous State and local government of- San Diego and Hawaii. Total property tims, most of whom were uninsured, ficials, and organizations representing damage was $311 million in 1964 dollars. with even greater losses. The tragic homeowners, consumers, emergency Experts predict that a quake this size earthquake in Kobe, Japan, and the re- management and response personnel, in the lower 48 would kill thousands cent California and Midwest floods are realtors, lenders, and the insurance in- and cost up to $100 billion. just two further examples of nature’s dustry. It is clear that Members of About 100 miles off Alaska’s coast unpredictability. Congress are beginning to recognize and 10,000 feet below the sea, the ocean This issue is very important to me the problem we face in dealing with floor is moving eastward. This drifting particularly since Hurricane Iniki these catastrophic events and want to floor meets the North American seabed struck my State in 1992, causing sev- do something about it. at what is called the Yakataga seismic eral billion dollars in damage and wide- Must we wait until another disaster gap. Scientists predict that during our spread economic disruption. Unfortu- on the scale of the Japanese earth- lifetimes, it is likely the seabed will nately, there are millions of Americans quake strikes here in America before move, generating a major quake and a who know firsthand about the destruc- we do something? We are committed to huge tsunami. tion and suffering caused by these ter- bringing this important matter before Today, seismic instruments detect rible events. the entire Senate at the earliest pos- between 90 and 120 earthquakes per What troubles me most is that the sible opportunity. We need to act now, week in Alaska. Of these, 1 to 3 quakes worst could still be ahead of us. The before it is too late. Accordingly, I per week can be felt by people. In May, U.S. Weather Service predicts that this urge my colleagues to join Senator the citizens of Anchorage awoke in the year’s hurricane season, which began a STEVENS and me in cosponsoring this middle of the night to an earthquake few weeks ago, could be worse than bill. that measured 5.5 on the Richter scale. 1992, the year of Hurricanes Andrew It is a mistake, however, to believe and Iniki. I am deeply concerned that By Mrs. KASSEBAUM (for her- that the threat of a major quake is we are not prepared for another major self, Mr. KENNEDY, Mr. JEF- confined to California or Alaska. natural disaster. That is why we are re- FORDS, Mr. PELL, and Mr. Some of America’s largest earth- newing our effort to enact major dis- SIMON): quakes have occurred in Tennessee and aster policy reform. S. 1044. A bill to amend title III of Missouri along the New Madrid fault. We simply must insist that all seg- the Public Health Service Act to con- In the last century, four quakes, meas- ments of Government, not to mention solidate and reauthorize provisions re- uring up to 8.6 on the Richter Scale, insurers and homeowners, are doing all lating to health centers, and for other struck that area. The shaking rang that is prudently possible to prevent purposes; to the Committee on Labor church bells in Boston 1,000 miles losses before they occur and to reduce and Human Resources. away. the long term costs of disasters to Fed- THE HEALTH CENTERS CONSOLIDATION ACT OF Should a quake of that size hit this eral taxpayers. We need better enforce- 1995 area today, FEMA estimates the dam- ment of building codes, more thorough Mrs. KASSEBAUM. Mr. President, I age at $52 billion. One expert noted mitigation plans, and a funding mecha- am pleased to introduce with Senators that the impact of a major quake in nism that is both predictable and ade- KENNEDY, JEFFORDS, PELL, and SIMON, the central United States. today would quate. We must make sure our citizens the Health Centers Consolidation Act only be exceeded in devastation by a are protected with adequate insurance of 1995. This legislation consolidates general nuclear attack on the Central so that those at greatest risk from hur- and reauthorizes the community and Mississippi Valley. ricanes, earthquakes, and floods do not migrant health center programs, the This bill is also important for areas end up totally dependent on disaster health care for the homeless program prone to hurricanes and floods. relief. We must also be certain that and the health services for residents of Only 20 percent of the homes in flood such an insurance system is capable of public housing program as one stream- plains today have the flood insurance withstanding the worst-possible catas- lined, flexible program authority. required by current law. trophes. The NDPA accomplishes these These programs play a vital role in Damage in Florida from Hurricane aims and does so with a program that ensuring access to health care services Andrew was 30 to 40 percent higher be- is totally self-funding. for millions of medically-underserved cause building codes were not properly This bill advocates private insurance Americans. Consolidating the current, enforced. The bill will increase the use as an alternative to costly Federal re- often duplicative authorities will sim- of private insurance coverage for hurri- lief. It also creates a national disaster plify grant application and record- canes and floods. It will also improve fund to assure the availability of pri- keeping requirements, freeing up time the structures we live in to reduce vate insurance before and after a major and money better spent on expanding

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10150 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 access to care. The legislation provides project so objectionable that the Amer- If you would like to cosponsor this legisla- the enhanced program flexibility nec- ican people are going to take the mat- tion, please contact Ann Coulter at 4–3807. essary to respond to the unique chal- ter out of our hands. And then the en- Sincerely, lenges of providing health care services dowments are going to be re-created SPENCER ABRAHAM. right out of existence. to medically underserved populations. I. THE NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS This legislation also substantially My bill provides for the gradual pri- AND THE NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE strengthens the ability of health cen- vatization of the endowments over a 5- HUMANITIES: CURRENT PROBLEMS ters to respond to our nation’s chang- year period. It will reduce the budgets A. THE NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS ing health care environment through of the Endowments by 20 percent each AND THE NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE HU- the development of provider networks year during that period, and also spe- MANITIES ARE ORGANIZATIONS IN TROUBLE and health plans to improve access to cifically allows the Endowments to use It is clear that the NEA and NEH are in better-coordinated, more cost-effective a portion of their budgets for the ex- trouble. They are in trouble because many services. The ability to form networks press purpose of promoting private people question the need to spend the tax- and health plans, including managed fundraising activities during the phase- payers’ money on such non-vital programs. care plans, is particularly important as out period. At the end of the 5 years, Further, in this era of budget austerity states are increasingly moving their the Endowment’s charter with the Fed- where funding for many social programs is eral Government will end. Finally, as a being significantly reduced, it is difficult to Medicaid beneficiaries into managed rationalize full funding for the NEA and care plans. further inducement to private-fund- NEH. Finally, the activities of the NEA and Finally, the Health Centers Consoli- raising, my bill includes a sense-of-the- NEH run against the sensitivities of many dation Act responds to the unique chal- Senate resolution endorsing changes in American taxpayers who are opposed to see- lenges of delivering health care serv- the Tax Code to spur charitable giving ing their dollars fund projects that they find ices in rural areas. The legislation au- to the arts and humanities. objectionable. It is this latter concern that thorizes and focuses the current rural The ‘‘Endowments’’—or, as I envi- has come into focus in recent weeks. health outreach grant program on the sion, the ‘‘American Endowment for Shortly before the first scheduled Labor the Arts and Humanities’’—will then Committee mark-up of the NEA and NEH, formation of provider networks, includ- there were several critical news accounts of ing telemedicine networks, to be free of Government control either as censors or as tax collectors for con- the summer schedule at ‘‘Highways,’’ an strengthen the rural health care deliv- NEA-funded performance art center in Cali- ery system, encourage the consolida- troversial artists. fornia. The theater’s brochure listed acts in- tion and coordination of services on a I am confident that private national tended ‘‘to push the right wing into spiritual foundations in support of the arts and local and regional basis, and bring ac- contortions.’’ Performances included ‘‘Dyke humanities can succeed. The people we cess to specialized services to remote Night,’’ described as ‘‘our series of hot nights have heard from in support of the NEA with hot dykes,’’ and ‘‘Boys ‘R’ Us,’’ simi- rural areas. and NEH—art enthusiasts, philan- larly billed as ‘‘our continuing series of hot By Mr. ABRAHAM (for himself thropists, actors, and singers—will summer nights with hot fags.’’ Another num- ber, titled ‘‘Not For Republicans,’’ included a and Mr. COATS): want to contribute to private arts and humanities foundations. Assuming comedienne’s discourse on ‘‘sex with Newt S. 1045. A bill to amend the National Gingrich’s mother.’’ Foundation on the Arts and the Hu- their belief in a national organization The NEA’s response to public criticism of manities Act of 1965, the Museum Serv- supporting the arts and humanities is this NEA grant? ‘‘[Highways] is consistent ices Act, and the Arts and Artifacts In- as ardent as they claim when they with the Endowment’s Congressionally-man- demnity Act to privatize the National lobby Congress, there will be a dated mission of fostering ‘mutual respect Foundation on the Arts and the Hu- wellspring of support for private en- for the diverse beliefs and values of all per- manities and to transfer certain re- dowments. sons and groups,’’’ wrote the current NEA Chairperson, Jane Alexander, in a letter to lated functions, and for other purposes; I ask unanimous consent that my ‘‘Dear Colleague’’ be printed in the various Senators dated June 26, 1995. Alex- to the Committee on Labor and Human ander went on to describe her alarm, not at Resources. RECORD. Highways’ ‘‘Ecco Lesbo-Ecco Homo’’ summer There being no objection, the mate- THE NEA AND NEH PRIVATIZATION ACT program, but at criticisms leveled at these rial was ordered to be printed in the Mr. ABRAHAM. Mr. President, today NEA-funded performances: ‘‘I am concerned RECORD, as follows: I introduce my bill to privatize the Na- that once again the Endowment is being tional Foundation for the Arts and the U.S. SENATE, criticized for supporting an institution that serves its community well—this time, one Humanities. I have sent a detailed Washington, DC, July 14, 1995. Re Privatizing the NEA and NEH: The right that supports the work of homosexual and memo to all my colleagues regarding way to get government out of arts. minority artists ....’’ She dismissed criti- this bill, which I would like to enter DEAR COLLEAGUE: I invite you to cosponsor cisms of the ‘‘sex with Newt Gingrich’s into the RECORD. The memo sets forth my legislation to privatize the National En- mother’’ routine as being politically moti- my reasons for designing a privatiza- dowment for the Arts and the National En- vated: ‘‘I am also concerned that we are tion plan, how it will work, and why I dowment for the Humanities. being criticized for Highways having pre- believe it will work. It is beyond dispute that the arts and hu- sented comedienne Marga Gomez because her Here’s a quick summary: Controversy manities are of unparalleled importance to a stand-up routine pokes fun at the current civilized nation. Unfortunately, the federal Congressional leadership.’’ and anger have swirled around the En- While much of the public objects to tax- dowments virtually since their cre- government’s current method of ‘‘sup- porting’’ the arts is neither substantial nor payer-supported performances like these, ation. On one side we have constituents fair. Amid all the critical accounts on both that is not the only quarter from which op- who are upset that their tax dollars are sides of the debate over the Endowments, it position to federal funding of the NEA has subsidizing work that they find aggres- seems to have been lost that these agencies come. The Progressive Policy Institute, for sively offensive. This includes the work actually contributed surprisingly little to example, (an offshoot of the Democratic of Mapplethorpe, funded by the NEA, the arts or the humanities in this country. Leadership Council) stated in its 1993 ‘‘Man- as well as the National History Stand- However sincere is Mary Chapin Car- date for Change’’ that there should be ‘‘no federal role’’ in the arts. In a Lou Harris poll ards, funded by the NEH. On the other penter’s suggestion that the ‘‘Arts are as im- portant as school lunches . . .,’’ a majority taken in January, 1995, the NEA was at the side we have artists and writers who of citizens simply do not agree with this top of the list of federal programs Americans believe the Government is engaging in view. In a time of extreme pressures on the would like abolished—ahead of the Depart- censorship when their grant proposals federal budget, the NEA and NEH’s appro- ment of Housing and Urban Development, are denied or their projects are edited. priations simply cannot be a priority expend- Public Broadcasting Service, and the Energy The Endowments’ troubles are not iture. For this reason alone (putting the Department. (43% of respondents wanted the recent phenomena and they show no Mapplethorpe and the national history Endowment eliminated.) sign of dissipating anytime soon. standards controversies et. al. aside) there Long before the ‘‘Ecco Lesbo-Ecco Homo’’ If we cannot re-create the NEA and needs to be a plan to reduce the taxpayer’s summer program at Highways, there was role in these national endowments. Mapplethorpe and ‘‘Piss Christ’’ and the per- NEH in a way that gets the Govern- This attached memorandum outlines the formance art of Karen Finley and Ron ment out of the vortex of this mael- Abraham legislation to privatize the na- Athey, to name just a few of the more noto- strom, at some point, the NEA or the tional endowments for the arts and human- rious NEA-funded projects. Provocations NEH are going to fund one more ities. like these may be a small percentage overall,

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10151 but each such sensational affront adds to the lems. Across the board and without question, cratic necessities of governments are anti- growing list of people irrevocably opposed to these are doomed to failure. thetical to the creative processes of art. the Endowment. Citizens who are offended 1. Eliminating Individual Grants, For Ex- 5. The More The Congress Tries To Re- by having their tax revenues supporting the ample, Will Not Stem Offensive Projects. A spond To Taxpayer Complaints About Their likes of Mapplethorpe do not forget that of- number of the more notorious Endowment- Money Funding Obscene Art—By Imposing A fense just because the Endowment manages supported projects have, in fact, been made Variety Of Restrictions On Endowment to avoid funding another offensive project possible by Endowment grants to museums Grants—The More Artists Will Have Legiti- for a short while. And Chairman Alexander’s and other institutions, rather than directly mate Grounds To Complain About Federal reaction to this latest public outcry dem- to the offending artists themselves. These in- Government Censorship. Rules such as re- onstrates pretty clearly that the NEA is out clude NEA grants to the Walker Art Center quiring theaters to submit a complete and of touch with the public’s concerns. in Minneapolis and to P.S. 122, a theater in immutable schedule of the entire season’s The NEH is no less out of touch with the New York City, both of which used NEA events are unworkable, excessive and intru- public whose tax dollars it consumes. grant money to fund Ron Athey’s perform- sive. Another proposal has been to jettison ance. In addition, the Whitney Museum of Through less outrageous—and less suitable seasonal grants altogether. While that meas- Art in New York used a portion of its $200,000 for sound-bites—the NEH’s projects may well ure would provide the federal government NEA grant to sponsor ‘‘Abject Art: Repulsion have a longer lasting impact than the NEA’s, with a needed measure of control over gov- and Desire in Art,’’ which exhibited excre- because they infect American education ernment grant money, it would also deprive ment, dead animals, and similar objects to rather than only its art museums and thea- an important segment of the arts commu- make the artistic statement of: degrading ters. The national history standards released nity of any grant money whatsoever. It is the purity of an art museum. These exhibits last January by a group at UCLA were the simply impossible for the federal govern- and others will not be affected by a ban on product of an NEH grant. Though intended ment to design an organization to fund the individual grants. to improve the education of all United arts staffed with federal bureaucrats that 2. Block Granting Endowment Money To does not in some sense engage in censorship States students, so objectionable were the The States Also Fails To Prevent The Use Of standards that, before the ink was dry, 99 through its regulation. It doesn’t help that Federal Dollars On Dubious Or Potentially the NEA has a tin ear with respect to the Senators voted in favor of a Sense of the Objectionable Art. Indeed, many of the insti- Senate resolution denouncing the standards. public’s concerns with projects such as High- tutions which have taken part in controver- ways’ ‘‘Ecco Lesbo-Ecco Homo’’ summer pro- Perhaps there are still enough votes in the sial projects are also recipients of monies al- gram. Furthermore, the much vaunted power Congress to save the NEA and the NEH in located by state arts councils. Thus, for ex- of an NEA grant places the federal govern- their present form for a few more years. But ample, both the Walker and Whitney Muse- ment in a highly questionable role: Why that will not end the disquietude and rancor ums have been the beneficiaries of state and should the federal government be the arbiter surrounding the agencies. And that will do municipal arts funding, the latter receiving of what is and is not art and which artists nothing to prevent any new NEA or NEH- $134,952 from the New York State govern- will be famously successful and which will funded affronts, each one adding to the grow- ment and $5,000 from the city government in wait tables? ing list of citizens opposed to the Endow- 1994. Since New York will undoubtedly con- ments. Sooner or later the Endowments are tinue to receive a disproportionate amount C. THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT’S DIRECT FUND- going to fund one more project so offensive of Endowment money, taxpayers in Ten- ING OF THE NEA AND NEH ALSO SUBJECTS IT that the public will rise up and demand their nessee, Ohio, and Illinois will essentially be TO CLAIMS OF DISCRIMINATION BY CERTAIN elimination. And then, there will be no time subsidizing art in New York. There is no rea- STATES AND AREAS OF THE COUNTRY to assemble an alternative mechanism to son to think New York State arts panels will Some states’ citizens are clearly short- fund the arts and humanities on a national suddenly begin to use Endowment money changed by the federal government’s current level. Many of our States have arts and hu- only to fund that which will play in Peoria. distribution of NEA and NEH grant money. manities institutions that are not going to 3. An Across-The-Board Reduction In The In 1994, for example, New York City alone re- be able to survive a withdrawal of federal NEA and NEH’s Budgets Doesn’t Make ceived about 15% of the NEA’s total budget, funds cold turkey. Sense. Some have suggested punishing the about 10–20 times the amount the NEA gave We shirk our obligation to the arts and hu- NEA and NEH for their irresponsible funding certain states. Further, many believe that manities as well as our obligation to the peo- projects by cutting the Endowments’ budgets rural areas are short changed by the Endow- ple if we refuse to acknowledge that these by some arbitrary percentage. But the NEA ments. Privately-funded Endowments re- are federal programs teetering toward aboli- and NEH are either beneficial in their cur- move the government as the decision- tion. Now is the time to reconfigure the rent structures or they aren’t. The better so- maker—and the federal taxpayer as the fund- agencies in a way that is built to last. The lution is to attempt to preserve both a na- ing source—from a selection process that in- following proposal does just that. The pro- tional arts foundation and a national hu- evitably strikes some as unfair. posed bill combines a gradual phase-out of manities foundation at appropriate funding II. HOW THE ABRAHAM BILL WOULD WORK direct federal funding with inducements to levels, but without requiring the taxpayers’ A. MOVING TOWARD PRIVATELY FUNDED privatization, such as earmarking a portion involuntary contributions. ENDOWMENTS FOR THE ARTS of the funds for private fundraising and pro- 4. Direct Federal Funding Of The Arts Forces The Federal Government Into The Private Endowments awarding grantees posing additional tax incentives for chari- money from private donors will preserve the table gifts to the arts and humanities. Thankless Role Of Playing Either Censor On One Hand Or Obscenity-Promoter On The good things about the Endowment such as B. HALFWAY MEASURES WON’T WORK Other. Since the actual monetary value of the imprimatur of a national organization and the financial support for the arts and hu- One thing that the history of the endow- NEA funding is virtually negligible com- manities. Meanwhile, though, the govern- ments proves is that no matter who runs the pared to private giving to the arts, the prin- ment will be out of the business of using tax- organizations, maddening government grants cipal argument for Endowment grants is payer money either to support obscenity or to the arts will continue to be made. Vir- their tremendous influence. This, however, is a risky role. On one side we have constitu- to censor artists. tually since the Endowment’s first grant in The Abraham bill would reduce the budg- ents who are upset that its tax dollars are 1965, the organization has inspired opposi- ets of the Endowments gradually over a five subsidizing work that they find aggressively tion. In 1967, Congressional hearings were year period and also would allow the Endow- offensive. And it bears repeating that since held in response to public outcry over NEA- ments to use a portion of their budgets for 1967—two years after the NEA’s creation—its funded projects. More recently, controversies the express purpose of promoting private grants have been inciting controversy. in the late eighties begot not quietude, but fundraising activities during the phase-out 1 On the other side we have artists who be- the Ron Athey performance in 1994—long period. after ‘‘Piss Christ.’’ Endowment supporters lieve the government is engaging in censor- ship. One recipient of NEA grants, Leonard At the end of five years, the Endowments’ are whistling past the Endowments’ grave- charter with the federal government would yards if they operate on the assumption that Koscianski, has written that the NEA ‘‘ex- cludes whole categories of art . . . from seri- end. The ‘‘Endowments’’—or as we suggest, the affronts can be entirely eliminated with ‘‘the American Arts and Humanities Endow- a series of statutory restrictions. There will ous consideration,’’ citing watercolors as one of the categories that has received very few ment’’—would then be free of government be more controversies. Those interested in bureaucrats either as censors or as tax col- the NEA have considered a variety of modi- NEA grants. Moreover, the NEA was recently forced to settle a case for $252,000 brought by lectors for the arts. The newly free arts and fications to the Endowment’s granting au- humanities organizations could reconfigure thority intended to circumvent the prob- four performance artists—Karen Finley, John Fleck, Holly Hughes, and Tim Miller— themselves as a single tax deductible organi- who claimed they had been denied Endow- zation, as two separate organizations, or in 1 Athey’s performance consisted of slicing the back ment grants on political grounds. Many any manner their private boards of directors of another man with razors, blotting the blood, and other artists will not even apply for an NEA deem desirable. sending the bloodied towels over audience members’ B. A PROGRESSIVE DECREASE IN THE NEA AND heads. This caused some consternation among the grant because of the paperwork involved. NEH’S FEDERAL BUDGETS audience members, many of whom fled the room. Reed Zitting, an instructor of theater arts Athey and, it was assumed, his artistic companion, and design at the Interlochen School at Using the 1995 fiscal year appropriations as are HIV-positive. Michigan, has observed that the bureau- the base line, the Endowment’s budgets

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10152 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 would be reduced by twenty percent each grant from the Endowment is often critical ship boxing matches bring in receipts of over year over a five year period. This approach in leveraging legislatures to provide addi- $50 million. permits a gradual, orderly transition from tional funding.’’ The prestige associated with (b.) Special Event Revenues.—Each year, government-sponsored organs to private en- a grant from a national arts organization during various televised award ceremonies tities. will not be lost under a privately-funded En- celebrating the arts such as the Oscars, 1. A Specific Set-Aside For Fundraising. In dowment. Indeed, the glamour of an NEA Emmys, Tonys, and so on, one hears a great addition to these absolute decreases, the En- grant will most likely expand because of the deal of support expressed for the NEA and dowments will be authorized to use an private interests involved: Corporate spon- NEH. These programs, which are built amount of their appropriations equal to 10% sors will want to publicize the results of around the appearance of entertainers who of the cut amount for fundraising purposes their philanthropy—as will the privately- frequently use these opportunities on camera alone. This amounts to 2% of each Endow- funded Endowment itself, in order to attract to promote funding for the endowments, are ment’s 1995 appropriation the first year, 4% more private dollars. hugely profitable and generate sizeable reve- the second year, and so on. Thus, for exam- C. WAYS TO PRIVATELY FUND A NATIONAL nues for the networks that broadcast them. ple, in the first year the NEH will be per- ENDOWMENT ... In light of this—the question is, why not let mitted over $3.5 million (2% of $175 million) 1. The Federal Government Can Still Play the Endowments receive some of the profits federal dollars for the sole purpose of encour- An Important Role. There are several ways from these shows? If the artists and entities aging private fundraising on behalf of the the federal government can help private en- who make these shows feasible want to help humanities endowment. dowments succeed without direct contribu- the endowments, these shows constitute a 2. Tax Incentives For Donations To The tions. These include: great vehicle. Arts and Humanities. Finally, the bill would (a.) Tax Code Revisions Designed To Gen- As an alternative to the endowments re- include a Sense-of-the-Senate resolution pro- erally Stimulate Charitable Giving Or Spe- ceiving a share of the profits from these pro- posing a return to tax deductions for non- cifically Aid The New Foundations. A vari- grams, the artists who appear on them and itemizers, elimination of the cap on deduc- ety of possible tax code changes could great- the academies who support such events could tions for charitable contributions, and other ly enhance private giving to the new founda- simply turn the shows into pay-per-view pro- tax benefits for charitable donations. Since tions. Possible approaches are: grams from which the endowments could re- amending the Tax Code to encourage chari- Reinstituting tax deductions for non- ceive virtually all of the net profits. This table giving is not within the purview of the itemizers, as was permitted until the Tax year, for example, the Academy Awards show Labor Committee, the Sense-of-the-Senate Reform Act of 1986; drew a world-wide audience of over 500 mil- resolution appended to the Endowment Pri- Elimination of the caps on charitable de- lion. If only 5% of that audience was still vatization bill would simply make the point ductions; and willing to pay to watch the Oscars in the that the Committee favors creating addi- Instituting a tax credit of $50—$100 for amount that households across America pay tional tax incentives for charitable giving to charitable donations to the newly-created to watch a second-run movie on pay-per-view the arts and humanities (and all 501(c)(3)s), private endowments. ($4.95 in the Washington metro area) the En- in lieu of direct government funding of the (b.) Government Leaders’ Involvement In dowments could generate gross revenue of NEA and NEH. National Fundraising Efforts. Even if the over $100 million from the Oscars show alone! III. THE ABRAHAM PROPOSAL CAN WORK government is not directly funding the NEA Add to that similar revenues from such shows as the Emmy Awards, the Tony A. ALTHOUGH RAISING MONEY IS ALWAYS HARD, and NEH, government officials can play a Awards, the Country and Western Music THE NEA AND NEH BUDGETS ARE A VERY role in helping the new endowments succeed. Awards and the Grammys and we’re talking SMALL PART OF THE NATION’S TOTAL ARTS For example, a series of Washington fund- about total revenue greater than the current AND HUMANITIES BUDGET raising events featuring the President or funding for the NEA or the NEH. Some have expressed doubt that private other highranking government officials can (c.) Other Collaborative Efforts.—In addi- donations can take up the slack in govern- serve as a spur to donations by major donors. tion to benefit concerts and awards pro- ment funding. It bears mentioning at the Another option would be fundraising appeal grams, there are other collaborative efforts outset then, that the NEA and NEH do not, letters from prominent arts supporters in through which those who care deeply about in fact, constitute a significant proportion of government. Finally, government leaders the arts—the artists themselves—can make funding for the arts and humanities in this who back the arts can play a very helpful privately funded endowments work. The ‘‘We country. It is difficult to isolate ‘‘the hu- role recruiting major benefactors for the En- Are The World’’ recording is a good example manities’’ for calculating private donations dowments. 2. Other Private Fundraising Efforts Have of the collaborative good that charitable because it encompasses such a wide range of Unlimited Potential. Besides the things the causes can engender. That recording brought prospective philanthropies—museums, col- government can do to support private En- together 45 music superstars to record a sin- leges and universities, music academics, dowments, there is a role for private organi- gle song; the resulting single, album, video, writing workshops, to name a few. Private zations, individuals and corporations as well. television and radio specials, merchandise donations to the arts, however, are easily Many organizations will be able to raise and associated enterprises raised over $60 quantifiable. money for a private NEA and NEH through a million for ‘‘U.S.A. For Africa.’’ In that so In 1993, private giving to the arts totalled wide array of activities. It also includes sev- many recording artists are supporters of the $9.57 billion. Meanwhile, the NEA’s total eral innovative ideas devised as potential National Arts and Humanities Endowments, budget for 1995 is $167.4 million. Thus, pri- unique sources of funding for the endow- private entities supporting the arts and hu- vate giving to the arts in this country dwarfs ments by those seeking a solution to this sit- manities would seem to be a natural bene- the NEA’s contribution 50 times over. Not uation. ficiary of such collective philanthropy. Cer- only does the NEA’s total annual funding of Below are some ideas to be explored. This tainly, if the musicians who have appeared the arts amount to less than 1.7% of private list is by no means exclusive but it nonethe- before Congress to promote the Endowments donations to the arts, but it is also less than less illustrates the private fundraising op- (the aforementioned Garth Brooks, Kenny G. the states’ contributions to the arts. In 1994, portunities that have been used by other Michael Bolton etc.) were themselves to col- state legislatures gave $265 million to the charitable causes and which could be em- laborate and recruit others for a single re- arts. Perhaps the more striking comparison ployed effectively for the benefit of a private cording each year or two, the private Endow- is to the annual operating budget of the Lin- arts and humanities national endowment. ments’ fundraising events would be hugely coln Center for the Performing Arts in New (a.) Fundraising Events.—The actors, art- successful. York City. Its budget for 1995 is almost twice ists and musicians who have publicly de- (d.) Paybacks for Commercially Successful that of the NEA’s: $316 million. Moreover, clared their avid commitment to the NEA Grants/Events.—On occasion, the NEA and looked at from the perspective of the recipi- and NEH could conduct special concerts or NEH have funded projects that become great ent arts organization, the NEA’s contribu- benefits to support the private endowments. commercial successes, earning the grantee tions are still relatively insignificant. Thus, Individual entertainers as well as groups of far more than the amount of the original for example, the sources of income for all the entertainers routinely hold such benefits for grant. When this happens, the grantee could country’s nonprofit theaters breaks down as various charities and causes. Such star-sup- be required to reinvest some portion of the follows: ported events certainly seem plausible when proceeds back in the Endowment in return B. LEAVING THE TAXPAYER OUT OF THE EQUA- the beneficiaries are the arts and human- for the original grant money. NEH-sponsored TION DOES NOT REDUCE A NATIONAL ENDOW- ities. Moreover, now that cable television tourism events, for example, have allowed MENT’S PRESTIGE. and pay-per-view has penetrated such a sub- grant recipients to reap financial benefits. Since the actual monetary value of arts stantial percentage of America’s households, According to the NEH’s own review, an en- and humanities funding provided by the NEA the potential income from a televised pay- dowment-sponsored exhibit called ‘‘The Age and NEH is very small compared to private per-view benefit concert featuring some of of Rubens’’ at the Toledo Museum of Art giving to the arts, the principal argument the greats who have campaigned on behalf of brought in approximately 226,000 visitors for NEA and NEH grants is their glamour— the NEA (Garth Brooks, Kenny G., Michael benefiting the whole geographic region. the imprimatur of excellence an Endowment Bolton, etc.) is phenomenal. Consider this: Similarly, individual NEA and NEH grantee grant provides. According to NEA Chairman pay-per-view sports events such as who are able to bring their creative works to Jane Alexander, ‘‘[T]he prestige of getting a Wrestlemania and heavyweight champion- lucrative markets like Broadway have some

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10153 moral debt to make the catalyst of their suc- portation fuels tax applicable to com- creased portability of health care bene- cess—NEA and NEH support—more widely mercial aviation. fits, to provide increased security of available to other artists. S. 457 health care benefits, to increase the (e.) Traditional Major Donor Fund Rais- purchasing power of individuals and ing.—In addition to the ideas listed above, At the request of Mr. DASCHLE, his the new private endowments would also be name was added as a cosponsor of S. small employers, and for other pur- the beneficiaries of traditional philanthropic 457, a bill to amend the Immigration poses. efforts that other major institutions receive. and Nationality Act to update ref- AMENDMENT NO. 1533 Certainly, a national organization charged erences in the classification of children At the request of Mr. D’AMATO his with supporting the nation’s arts and hu- for purposes of United States immigra- name was added as a cosponsor of manities would attract large corporate and tion laws. amendment No. 1533 proposed to S. 343, individual donors who will want to be part of such prestigious organizations. Since private At the request of Mr. SIMON, the a bill to reform the regulatory process, giving to the arts in this country already ex- name of the Senator from Utah [Mr. and for other purposes. ceeds $9 billion a year, an increase of just 1% BENNETT] was added as a cosponsor of f in this base of support would establish a S. 457, supra. SENATE RESOLUTION 152—STATE- strong funding foundation for the private en- S. 789 dowments. MENT OF CONSTITUTIONALITY At the request of Mr. CHAFEE, the REQUIREMENT IV. CONCLUSION name of the Senator from Utah [Mr. Through a five-year privatization of the HATCH] was added as a cosponsor of S. Mr. ABRAHAM submitted the fol- NEA and NEH, the Abraham bill permits the 789, a bill to amend the Internal Rev- lowing resolution; which was referred growth of private giving to the arts (with enue Code of 1986 to make permanent to the Committee on Rules and Admin- government-supported fundraising during istration: the transition). The Abraham approach also the section 170(e)(5) rules pertaining to proposes tax incentives for charitable dona- gifts of publicly-traded stock to cer- S. RES. 152 tions to create broad-based opportunity for tain private foundations, and for other Resolved, private giving; reinstatement of tax deduc- purposes. SECTION. 1. CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY. tions for non-itemizers may very well engen- S. 920 This resolution is approved pursuant to the der increased funding of the arts. At the request of Mr. PRESSLER, the powers granted to the Senate under Article More importantly though, privatization name of the Senator from Iowa [Mr. I, section 5, clause 2 of the United States has the distinct advantage of allowing the Constitution. HARKIN] was added as a cosponsor of S. citizenry to direct those funds more effi- SEC. 2. CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY CLAUSE IN ciently and without controversy. Simply de- 920, a bill to assist the preservation of LEGISLATION. creasing federal funding of the Endowments rail infrastructure, and for other pur- The Standing Rules of the Senate are or providing for increased block grants to poses. amended by adding at the end thereof the the states fails to resolve the fundamental S. 959 following: problem associated with today’s NEA and ‘‘RULE XLIV NEH. By contrast, privatization removes the At the request of Mr. HATCH, the government from the unwinnable task of bal- name of the Senator from Minnesota ‘‘CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY CLAUSE IN ancing censorship and obscenity, once and [Mr. GRAMS] was added as a cosponsor LEGISLATION for all. of S. 959, a bill to amend the Internal ‘‘1. (a) A constitutional authority clause Federal bureaucracies on every level are Revenue Code of 1986 to encourage cap- shall follow the enacting clause of any bill or being scaled back or eliminated entirely. ital formation through reductions in the resolving clause of any joint resolution. Government programs, particularly non-es- taxes on capital gains, and for other The constitutional authority clause shall be sential ones like the NEA and NEH, that can purposes. in the following form (with appropriate be replaced with privately-run entities, must modifications and appropriate matter in- be. The manifest support from an array of S. 968 serted in the blanks): celebrities and arts patrons for the arts and At the request of Mr. MCCONNELL, ‘‘ ‘This Act (or resolution) is enacted pur- humanities makes clear that a reconstituted the names of the Senator from New suant to the power(s) granted to the Con- NEA and NEH will thrive. In short, a pri- Hampshire [Mr. SMITH], the Senator gress under Article(s) section(s) , vately-funded ‘‘American Endowment for the from Arizona [Mr. MCCAIN], and the clause(s) of the United States Constitu- Arts’’ and an ‘‘American Endowment for the tion.’’’. Senator from Vermont [Mr. JEFFORDS] Humanities’’ can provide as much support ‘‘(b) A similar clause shall precede the first for artists and writers without the attend- were added as cosponsors of S. 968, a title, section, subsection, or paragraph and ant, ongoing disputes faced by a government- bill to require the Secretary of the In- each following title, section, subsection, or managed entity. terior to prohibit the import, export, paragraph relies on a different article, sec- The people we have heard from in support sale, purchase, and possession of bear tion, or clause of the Constitution from the of the NEA and NEH—art enthusiasts, phi- viscera or products that contain or one pursuant to which the first title, section, lanthropists, actors, and singers—will want claim to contain bear viscera, and for subsection or paragraph is enacted. to contribute to private arts and humanities other purposes. ‘‘2. It shall not be in order for the Senate foundations. Assuming their belief in a na- to consider any bill, joint resolution, amend- tional organization supporting the arts and S. 1009 ment, motion, or conference report that does humanities is an ardent as they claim when At the request of Mr. D’AMATO, the not comply with the provisions of paragraph they lobby Congress, there will be a name of the Senator from Iowa [Mr. (1), on the objection of any Senator.’’. wellspring of support for private endow- GRASSLEY] was added as a cosponsor of f ments. S. 1009, a bill to prohibit the fraudulent f production, sale, transportation, or SENATE RESOLUTION 153—MAKING possession of fictitious items pur- TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO ADDITIONAL COSPONSORS porting to be valid financial instru- SENATE RESOLUTION 120 S. 295 ments of the United States, foreign Mr. DOLE (for himself and Mr. At the request of Mrs. KASSEBAUM, governments, States, political subdivi- DASCHLE) submitted the following reso- the name of the Senator from Colorado sions, or private organizations, to in- lution; which was considered and [Mr. BROWN] was added as a cosponsor crease the penalties for counterfeiting agreed to: of S. 295, a bill to permit labor manage- violations, and for other purposes. S. RES. 153 ment cooperative efforts that improve S. 1028 Resolved, That Senate Resolution 120, America’s economic competitiveness to At the request of Mrs. KASSEBAUM, agreed to May 17, 1995 (104th Congress, 1st continue to thrive, and for other pur- the names of the Senator from Maine Session), is amended— poses. [Mr. COHEN], the Senator from Wyo- (1) in section 2(a)(1)(A) by inserting ‘‘, ex- S. 304 ming [Mr. SIMPSON], the Senator from cept that Senator Frank H. Murkowski shall substitute for Senator Phil Gramm’’ before At the request of Mr. SANTORUM, the West Virginia [Mr. ROCKEFELLER], and the semicolon; name of the Senator from Hawaii [Mr. the Senator from Nebraska [Mr. (2) in section 5(b)— INOUYE] was added as a cosponsor of S. KERREY] were added as cosponsors of S. (A) in paragraph (11) by inserting ‘‘with 304, a bill to amend the Internal Rev- 1028, a bill to provide increased access the approval of the Committee on Rules and enue Code of 1986 to repeal the trans- to health care benefits, to provide in- Administration’’ before the period; and

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10154 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 (B) in paragraph (12) by inserting ‘‘and the to amendment No. 1487, supra; as fol- ‘‘(2) CRITERIA.—An agency may determine Committee on Rules and Administration’’ lows: not to conduct negotiations for a regulatory after ‘‘concerned’’; and agreement under this section— AMENDMENT NO. 1728 (3) in section 8 by adding at the end the fol- ‘‘(A) if the agency finds that the number of lowing. ‘‘There are authorized such sums as At the end of Section 622(e)(1) add the fol- persons that have expressed willingness to may be necessary for agency contributions lowing new paragraph: participate in negotiations, as a proportion ‘‘(G) In conducting a cost-benefit analysis, related to the compensation of employees of of the number of persons whose activity the agency shall include an analysis of how the Special Committee from May 17, 1995 would be governed by the rule, is not suffi- the proposed rule or subject of the analysis through February 29, 1996, to be paid from cient to justify negotiation of a regulatory will affect vulnerable subpopulations includ- the appropriations account for ‘Expenses of agreement; or ing: infants, children, pregnant women, the Inquiries and Investigations’ of the Senate.’’. ‘‘(B) for any other reason, within the sole frail elderly, immunocompromised and other f discretion of the agency. vulnerable groups; and shall consider, ad- ‘‘(3) NO JUDICIAL REVIEW.—A determination AMENDMENTS SUBMITTED dress and describe the persons or classes of under paragraph (1) shall not be subject to persons likely to receive benefits under judicial review by any court. (c)(2)(A) of this section or likely to bear ‘‘(e) TERMS AND CONDITIONS.—A regulatory THE COMPREHENSIVE REGU- costs under (c)(2)(B) of this section.’’ agreement shall contain terms and condi- LATORY REFORM ACT OF 1995 tions that— AMENDMENT NO. 1729 ‘‘(1) in the judgment of the agency, accom- (Amendment No. 1719 is reproduced At the end of Section 633(f) add the fol- plish a degree of control, protection, and reg- for the RECORD of July 14, 1995.) lowing new paragraph: ulation of the activity to be regulated that is ‘‘(4) The head of an agency in presenting equivalent to the degree that would be ac- PACKWOOD AMENDMENT NO. 1719 risk assessment conclusions shall describe complished under a rule issued under the how the agency will address the risk to rulemaking procedure that would otherwise (Ordered to lie on the table.) health or safety which is the subject of the apply; Mr. PACKWOOD submitted an rule, on vulnerable subpopulations including: ‘‘(2) provide for the addition as parties to amendment intended to be proposed by infants, children, pregnant women, the frail the regulatory agreement, with or without a him to the bill (S. 343) to reform the elderly, immunocompromised and other vul- reopening of negotiations, of persons that regulatory process, and for other pur- nerable groups.’’ did not participate in the negotiations; poses; as follows: ‘‘(3) provide for renegotiation of the regu- latory agreement, at a stated date or from Strike page 2, line 15 through page 3, line CRAIG (AND HEFLIN) AMENDMENT time to time, as renegotiation may become 7 and add at page 2, line 15, the following: NO. 1730 appropriate in view of changed cir- ‘‘(a) APPLICABILITY.— (Ordered to lie on the table.) cumstances or for any other reason; and ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—This section applies to Mr. CRAIG (for himself and Mr. HEF- every rulemaking, according to the provi- ‘‘(4) specify the provisions of law for the LIN) submitted an amendment intended sions thereof, except to the extent there is purposes of which the regulatory agreement involved— to be proposed by them to amendment shall, or shall not, be treated as a rule issued ‘‘(i) a matter pertaining to a military or No. 1487 proposed by Mr. DOLE to the under section 553 or sections 556 and 557, as foreign affairs function of the United States; bill S. 343, supra; as follows: the case may be. ‘‘(f) ENFORCEMENT.—A regulatory agree- ‘‘(ii) a matter relating to the management On page 96, between lines 20 and 21, insert ment shall provide for injunctive relief and or personnel practices of the agency; the following: ‘‘(iii) an interpretive rule, general state- penalties for noncompliance that, in the SEC. . REGULATORY AGREEMENTS. judgment of the agency, are adequate to ment of policy, guidance, or rule of agency (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 5 organization, procedure or practice, unless deter parties from noncompliance. of title 5, United States Code, is amended by ‘‘(g) CONSIDERATION OF COMMENT BY THE such rule, statement, or guidance has gen- adding at the end the following: eral applicability and substantially alters or GENERAL PUBLIC.— ‘‘§ 557a. Regulatory agreements creates rights or obligations of persons out- ‘‘(1) NOTICE.—Before executing a regu- side the agency; ‘‘(a) DEFINITION.—In this section, the term latory agreement, an agency shall publish a ‘‘(iv) a rule relating to the acquisition, ‘regulatory agreement’ means an agreement notice of the terms of the agreement in the management, or disposal by an agency of entered into under this section. Federal Register and solicit comments on real or personal property, or of services, that ‘‘(b) GENERAL AUTHORITY.—An agency that the regulatory agreement for a period of not is promulgated in compliance with otherwise is authorized or directed by law to issue a less than 60 days. applicable criteria and procedures. rule (with or without a hearing on the ‘‘(2) DECISION.—Not later than 120 days after the close of the comment period, an ‘‘(2) APPLICATION TO THE DEPARTMENT OF record) that would govern an activity of any agency shall publish in the Federal Register THE TREASURY.—In the case of rulemaking of person, may, prior to commencing a pro- the Department of the Treasury, this section ceeding to issue such a rule or an amend- a decision that includes— applies to Treasury Regulations. ment to such a rule under the rulemaking ‘‘(1) a response to all comments received; procedure that would otherwise apply under and that law or this subchapter— ‘‘(2) an explanation of the agency’s deci- HARKIN AMENDMENTS NOS. 1726– ‘‘(1) enter into a regulatory agreement sion to— 1727 with a person or group of persons engaged in ‘‘(A) enter into the regulatory agreement (Ordered to lie on the table.) those activities; or as agreed on in negotiations or as modified Mr. HARKIN submitted two amend- ‘‘(2) enter into separate regulatory agree- in response to public comment; or ments with different persons or groups of ‘‘(B) decline to enter into the regulatory ments intended to be proposed by him persons engaged in the activity if the agency agreement. to amendment No. 1487 proposed by Mr. determines that separate agreements are ap- ‘‘(h) CONTINUING AGENCY AUTHORITY AND DOLE to the bill (S. 343) to reform the propriate in view of different circumstances RESPONSIBILITY.—The making by an agency regulatory process, and for other pur- that apply to different persons or groups of of a determination not to proceed with nego- poses; as follows: persons. tiations or the entry by an agency into a reg- ulatory agreement with fewer than all of the AMENDMENT NO. 1726 ‘‘(c) REQUEST FOR NEGOTIATIONS.—Negotia- tions for a regulatory agreement may be persons that are engaged in the activity reg- On page 36, line 3, insert after ‘‘environ- commenced at the instance of a person or ulated by the agreement shall not relieve the ment’’ the following: ‘‘or to the achievement group of persons engaged in the activity to agency of its statutory authority or respon- of statutory rights that prohibit discrimina- be regulated, by the submission to the agen- sibility with respect to the activity or per- tion’’. cy by such a person or group of persons of a sons engaged in the activity. request for negotiations, which may be ac- ‘‘(i) JURISDICTION.—The United States dis- AMENDMENT NO. 1727 companied by a proposed form of regulatory trict courts shall have jurisdiction to enforce On page 37, line 11, insert after ‘‘environ- agreement or by a general description of the a regulatory agreement in accordance with ment’’ the following: ‘‘or to the achievement proposed terms of a regulatory agreement. the terms of the regulatory agreement.’’. of statutory rights that prohibit discrimina- ‘‘(d) DETERMINATION WHETHER TO PROCEED (b) TECHNICAL AMENDMENT.—The chapter tion’’. WITH NEGOTIATIONS.— analysis for chapter 5 of title 5, United ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 60 days States Code, is amended by inserting after BOXER AMENDMENTS NOS. 1728– after receiving a request for negotiations the item for section 557 the following: 1729 under subsection (c)(1), an agency shall pub- ‘‘Sec. 557a. Regulatory agreements.’’. lish in the Federal Register a determination (Ordered to lie on the table.) whether to conduct negotiations for a regu- REID AMENDMENT NO. 1731 Mrs. BOXER submitted two amend- latory agreement, accompanied by a state- ments intended to be proposed by her ment of reasons for the determination. (Ordered to lie on the table.)

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10155 Mr. REID submitted an amendment (ii) occurring 30 session days after the date lished in the Federal Register (as a rule that intended to be proposed by him to on which the Congress received the veto and shall take effect as a final rule) during the amendment No. 1487, supra; as follows: objections of the President; or period beginning on November 20, 1994, (C) the date the rule would have otherwise through the date on which this Act takes ef- In lieu of the matter proposed to be in- taken effect, if not for this section (unless a fect. serted, insert the following: joint resolution of disapproval under section (2) TREATMENT UNDER SECTION 104.—In ap- TITLE I—REGULATORY TRANSITION 104 is enacted). plying section 104 for purposes of Congres- (4) EFFECTIVE DATE FOR OTHER RULES.—Ex- sional review, a rule described under para- SEC. 101. SHORT TITLE. cept for a significant rule, a rule shall take graph (1) shall be treated as though— This title may be cited as the ‘‘Regulatory effect as otherwise provided by law after sub- (A) such rule were published in the Federal Transition Act of 1995’’. mission to Congress under paragraph (1). Register (as a rule that shall take effect as SEC. 102. FINDING. (5) FAILURE OF JOINT RESOLUTION OF DIS- a final rule) on the date of the enactment of The Congress finds that effective steps for APPROVAL.—Notwithstanding the provisions this Act; and improving the efficiency and proper manage- of paragraph (3), the effective date of a rule (B) a report on such rule were submitted to ment of Government operations will be pro- shall not be delayed by operation of this title Congress under subsection (a)(1) on such moted if a moratorium on the effectiveness beyond the date on which either House of date. of certain significant final rules is imposed Congress votes to reject a joint resolution of (3) ACTUAL EFFECTIVE DATE NOT AF- in order to provide Congress an opportunity disapproval under section 104. FECTED.—The effectiveness of a rule de- for review. (b) TERMINATION OF DISAPPROVED RULE- scribed under paragraph (1) shall be as other- MAKING.—A rule shall not take effect (or con- wise provided by law, unless the rule is made SEC. 103. MORATORIUM ON REGULATIONS; CON- tinue) as a final rule, if the Congress passes GRESSIONAL REVIEW. of no force or effect under section 104. a joint resolution of disapproval described (a) REPORTING AND REVIEW OF REGULA- (f) NULLIFICATION OF RULES DISAPPROVED under section 104. BY ONGRESS TIONS.— C .—Any rule that takes effect (c) PRESIDENTIAL WAIVER AUTHORITY.— and later is made of no force or effect by the (1) REPORTING TO CONGRESS AND THE COMP- (1) PRESIDENTIAL DETERMINATIONS.—Not- enactment of a joint resolution under sec- TROLLER GENERAL.— withstanding any other provision of this sec- tion 104 shall be treated as though such rule (A) Before a rule can take effect as a final tion (except subject to paragraph (3)), a rule rule, the Federal agency promulgating such had never taken effect. that would not take effect by reason of this (g) NO INFERENCE TO BE DRAWN WHERE rule shall submit to each House of the Con- title may take effect, if the President makes RULES NOT DISAPPROVED.—If the Congress gress and to the Comptroller General a re- a determination under paragraph (2) and sub- does not enact a joint resolution of dis- port containing— mits written notice of such determination to approval under section 104, no court or agen- (i) a copy of the rule; the Congress. cy may infer any intent of the Congress from (ii) a concise general statement relating to (2) GROUNDS FOR DETERMINATIONS.—Para- any action or inaction of the Congress with the rule; and graph (1) applies to a determination made by regard to such rule, related statute, or joint (iii) the proposed effective date of the rule. the President by Executive order that the resolution of disapproval. (B) The Federal agency promulgating the rule should take effect because such rule is— SEC. 104. CONGRESSIONAL DISAPPROVAL PROCE- rule shall make available to each House of (A) necessary because of an imminent DURE. Congress and the Comptroller General, upon threat to health or safety or other emer- (a) JOINT RESOLUTION DEFINED.—For pur- request— gency; poses of this section, the term ‘‘joint resolu- (i) a complete copy of the cost-benefit (B) necessary for the enforcement of crimi- tion’’ means only a joint resolution intro- analysis of the rule, if any; nal laws; or duced during the period beginning on the (ii) the agency’s actions relevant to section (C) necessary for national security. date on which the report referred to in sec- 603, section 604, section 605, section 607, and (3) WAIVER NOT TO AFFECT CONGRESSIONAL tion 103(a) is received by Congress and end- section 609 of Public Law 96–354; DISAPPROVALS.—An exercise by the President ing 45 days thereafter, the matter after the (iii) the agency’s actions relevant to title of the authority under this subsection shall resolving clause of which is as follows: ‘‘That II, section 202, section 203, section 204, and have no effect on the procedures under sec- Congress disapproves the rule submitted by section 205 of Public Law 104–4; and tion 104 or the effect of a joint resolution of the ll relating to ll, and such rule shall (iv) any other relevant information or re- disapproval under this section. have no force or effect.’’. (The blank spaces quirements under any other Act and any rel- (d) TREATMENT OF RULES ISSUED AT END OF being appropriately filled in.) evant Executive Orders, such as Executive CONGRESS.— (b) REFERRAL.— Order 12866. (1) ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITY FOR REVIEW.— (1) IN GENERAL.—A resolution described in (C) Upon receipt, each House shall provide In addition to the opportunity for review paragraph (1) shall be referred to the com- copies to the Chairman and Ranking Member otherwise provided under this title, in the mittees in each House of Congress with juris- of each committee with jurisdiction. case of any rule that is published in the Fed- diction. Such a resolution may not be re- (2) REPORTING BY THE COMPTROLLER GEN- eral Register (as a rule that shall take effect ported before the eighth day after its sub- ERAL.— as a final rule) during the period beginning mission or publication date. (A) The Comptroller General shall provide on the date occurring 60 days before the date (2) SUBMISSION DATE.—For purposes of this a report on each significant rule to the com- the Congress adjourns sine die through the subsection the term ‘‘submission or publica- mittees of jurisdiction to each House of the date on which the succeeding Congress first tion date’’ means the later of the date on Congress by the end of 12 calendar days after convenes, section 104 shall apply to such rule which— the submission or publication date as pro- in the succeeding Congress. (A) the Congress receives the report sub- vided in section 104(b)(2). The report of the (2) TREATMENT UNDER SECTION 104.— mitted under section 103(a)(1); or Comptroller General shall include an assess- (A) In applying section 104 for purposes of (B) the rule is published in the Federal ment of the agency’s compliance with proce- such additional review, a rule described Register. dural steps required by subparagraph (B) (i) under paragraph (1) shall be treated as (c) DISCHARGE.—If the committee to which through (iv). though— is referred a resolution described in sub- (B) Federal agencies shall cooperate with (i) such rule were published in the Federal section (a) has not reported such resolution the Comptroller General by providing infor- Register (as a rule that shall take effect as (or an identical resolution) at the end of 20 mation relevant to the Comptroller Gen- a final rule) on the 15th session day after the calendar days after the submission or publi- eral’s report under paragraph (2)(A) of this succeeding Congress first convenes; and cation date defined under subsection (b)(2), section. (ii) a report on such rule were submitted to such committee may be discharged from fur- (3) EFFECTIVE DATE OF SIGNIFICANT RULES.— Congress under subsection (a)(1) on such ther consideration of such resolution in the A significant rule relating to a report sub- date. Senate upon a petition supported in writing mitted under paragraph (1) shall take effect (B) Nothing in this paragraph shall be con- by 30 Members of the Senate and in the as a final rule, the latest of— strued to affect the requirement under sub- House upon a petition supported in writing (A) the later of the date occurring 45 days section (a)(1) that a report must be sub- by one-fourth of the Members duly sworn after the date on which— mitted to Congress before a final rule can and chosen or by motion of the Speaker sup- (i) the Congress receives the report sub- take effect. ported by the Minority Leader, and such res- mitted under paragraph (1); or (3) ACTUAL EFFECTIVE DATE NOT AF- olution shall be placed on the appropriate (ii) the rule is published in the Federal FECTED.—A rule described under paragraph calendar of the House involved. Register; (1) shall take effect as a final rule as other- (d) FLOOR CONSIDERATION.— (B) if the Congress passes a joint resolution wise provided by law (including other sub- (1) IN GENERAL.—When the committee to of disapproval described under section 104 re- sections of this section). which a resolution is referred has reported, lating to the rule, and the President signs a (e) TREATMENT OF RULES ISSUED BEFORE or when a committee is discharged (under veto of such resolution, the earlier date— THIS ACT.— subsection (c)) from further consideration of, (i) on which either House of Congress votes (1) OPPORTUNITY FOR CONGRESSIONAL RE- a resolution described in subsection (a), it is and fails to override the veto of the Presi- VIEW.—The provisions of section 104 shall at any time thereafter in order (even though dent; or apply to any significant rule that is pub- a previous motion to the same effect has

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10156 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995

been disagreed to) for a motion to proceed to (b) DEADLINE DEFINED.—The term ‘‘dead- (1) the Secretary of Agriculture (referred the consideration of the resolution, and all line’’ means any date certain for fulfilling to in this title as the ‘‘Secretary’’) admin- points of order against the resolution (and any obligation or exercising any authority isters the 191,000,000-acre National Forest against consideration of resolution) are established by or under any Federal statute System for multiple uses in accordance with waived. The motion is not subject to amend- or regulation, or by or under any court order Federal law; ment, or to a motion to postpone, or to a implementing any Federal statute or regula- (2) where suitable, one of the recognized motion to proceed to the consideration of tion. multiple uses for National Forest System other business. A motion to reconsider the SEC. 106. DEFINITIONS. land is grazing by livestock; vote by which the motion is agreed to or dis- For purposes of this title— (3) the Secretary authorizes grazing agreed to shall not be in order. If a motion (1) FEDERAL AGENCY.—The term ‘‘Federal through the issuance of term grazing permits to proceed to the consideration of the resolu- agency’’ means any ‘‘agency’’ as that term is that have terms of not to exceed 10 years and tion is agreed to, the resolution shall remain defined in section 551(1) of title 5, United that include terms and conditions necessary the unfinished business of the respective States Code (relating to administrative pro- for the proper administration of National House until disposed of. cedure). Forest System land and resources; (2) DEBATE.—Debate on the resolution, and (2) SIGNIFICANT RULE.—The term ‘‘signifi- (4) as of the date of enactment of this Act, on all debatable motions and appeals in con- cant rule’’— the Secretary has issued approximately 9,000 nection therewith, shall be limited to not (A) means any final rule that the Adminis- term grazing permits authorizing grazing on more than 10 hours, which shall be divided trator of the Office of Information and Regu- approximately 90,000,000 acres of National equally between those favoring and those op- latory Affairs within the Office of Manage- Forest System land; posing the resolution. A motion further to ment and Budget finds— (5) of the approximately 9,000 term grazing limit debate is in order and not debatable. (i) has an annual effect on the economy of permits issued by the Secretary, approxi- An amendment to, or a motion to postpone, $100,000,000 or more or adversely affects in a mately one-half have expired or will expire or a motion to proceed to the consideration material way the economy, a sector of the by the end of 1996; of other business, or a motion to recommit economy, productivity, competition, jobs, (6) if the holder of an expiring term grazing the resolution is not in order. the environment, public health or safety, or permit has complied with the terms and con- (3) FINAL PASSAGE.—Immediately following State, local, or tribal governments or com- ditions of the permit and remains eligible the conclusion of the debate on a resolution munities; and qualified, that individual is considered described in subsection (a), and a single (ii) creates a serious inconsistency or oth- to be a preferred applicant for a new term quorum call at the conclusion of the debate erwise interferes with an action taken or grazing permit in the event that the Sec- if requested in accordance with the rules of planned by another agency; retary determines that grazing remains an the appropriate House, the vote on final pas- (iii) materially alters the budgetary im- appropriate use of the affected National For- sage of the resolution shall occur. pact of entitlement, grants, user fees, or loan est System land; (4) APPEALS.—Appeals from the decisions programs or the rights and obligations of re- (7) in addition to the approximately 9,000 of the Chair relating to the application of cipients thereof; or term grazing permits issued by the Sec- the rules of the Senate or the House of Rep- (iv) raises novel legal or policy issues aris- retary, it is estimated that as many as 1,600 resentatives, as the case may be, to the pro- ing out of legal mandates, the President’s term grazing permits may be waived by per- cedure relating to a resolution described in priorities, or the principles set forth in Exec- mit holders to the Secretary in favor of a subsection (a) shall be decided without de- utive Order 12866; purchaser of the permit holder’s permitted bate. (B) does not include any agency action livestock or base property by the end of 1996; (e) TREATMENT IF OTHER HOUSE HAS that establishes, modifies, opens, closes, or (8) to issue new term grazing permits, the ACTED.—If, before the passage by one House conducts a regulatory program for a com- Secretary must comply with the National of a resolution of that House described in mercial, recreational, or subsistence activity Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. subsection (a), that House receives from the relating to hunting, fishing, or camping. 4321 et seq.) and other laws; other House a resolution described in sub- (3) FINAL RULE.—The term ‘‘final rule’’ (9) for a large percentage of the grazing section (a), then the following procedures means any final rule or interim final rule. As permits that will expire or be waived to the shall apply: used in this paragraph, ‘‘rule’’ has the mean- Secretary by the end of 1996, the Secretary (1) NONREFERRAL.—The resolution of the ing given such term by section 551 of title 5, has devised a strategy that will result in other House shall not be referred to a com- United States Code, except that such term compliance with the National Environ- mittee. does not include any rule of particular appli- mental Policy Act of 1969 and other applica- (2) FINAL PASSAGE.—With respect to a reso- cability including a rule that approves or ble laws (including regulations) in a timely lution described in subsection (a) of the prescribes for the future rates, wages, prices, and efficient manner and enable the Sec- House receiving the resolution— services, or allowances therefor, corporate or retary to issue new term grazing permits, (A) the procedure in that House shall be financial structures, reorganizations, merg- where appropriate; the same as if no resolution had been re- ers, or acquisitions thereof, or accounting (10) for a small percentage of the grazing ceived from the other House; but practices or disclosures bearing on any of the permits that will expire or be waived to the (B) the vote on final passage shall be on foregoing or any rule of agency organization, Secretary by the end of 1996, the strategy the resolution of the other House. personnel, procedure, practice or any routine will not provide for the timely issuance of (f) CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY.—This sec- matter. new term grazing permits; and tion is enacted by Congress— SEC. 107. JUDICIAL REVIEW. (11) in cases in which ranching operations (1) as an exercise of the rulemaking power No determination, finding, action, or omis- involve the use of a term grazing permit of the Senate and House of Representatives, sion under this title shall be subject to judi- issued by the Secretary, it is essential for respectively, and as such it is deemed a part cial review. new term grazing permits to be issued in a timely manner for financial and other rea- of the rules of each House, respectively, but SEC. 108. APPLICABILITY; SEVERABILITY. applicable only with respect to the procedure sons. (a) APPLICABILITY.—This title shall apply to be followed in that House in the case of a notwithstanding any other provision of law. (b) PURPOSE.—The purpose of this title is resolution described in subsection (a), and it (b) SEVERABILITY.—If any provision of this to ensure that grazing continues without supersedes other rules only to the extent title, or the application of any provision of interruption on National Forest System land that it is inconsistent with such rules; and this title to any person or circumstance, is in a manner that provides long-term protec- (2) with full recognition of the constitu- held invalid, the application of such provi- tion of the environment and improvement of tional right of either House to change the sion to other persons or circumstances, and National Forest System rangeland resources rules (so far as relating to the procedure of the remainder of this title, shall not be af- while also providing short-term certainty to that House) at any time, in the same man- fected thereby. holders of expiring term grazing permits and ner, and to the same extent as in the case of SEC. 109. EXEMPTION FOR MONETARY POLICY. purchasers of a permit holder’s permitted any other rule of that House. Nothing in this title shall apply to rules livestock or base property. SEC. 105. SPECIAL RULE ON STATUTORY, REGU- that concern monetary policy proposed or SEC. 202. DEFINITIONS. LATORY AND JUDICIAL DEADLINES. implemented by the Board of Governors of (a) IN GENERAL.—In the case of any dead- the Federal Reserve System or the Federal In this title: line for, relating to, or involving any rule Open Market Committee. (1) EXPIRING TERM GRAZING PERMIT.—The which does not take effect (or the effective- term ‘‘expiring term grazing permit’’ means SEC. 110. EFFECTIVE DATE. ness of which is terminated) because of the a term grazing permit— This title shall take effect on the date of enactment of a joint resolution under sec- (A) that expires in 1995 or 1996; or the enactment of this Act and shall apply to tion 104, that deadline is extended until the (B) that expired in 1994 and was not re- any rule that takes effect as a final rule on date 12 months after the date of the joint placed with a new term grazing permit solely or after such effective date. resolution. Nothing in this subsection shall because the analysis required by the Na- be construed to affect a deadline merely by TITLE II—TERM GRAZING PERMITS tional Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 reason of the postponement of a rule’s effec- SEC. 201. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE. U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and other applicable laws tive date under section 103(a). (a) FINDINGS.—Congress finds that— has not been completed.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10157

(2) FINAL AGENCY ACTION.—The term ‘‘final issue a new term grazing permit under sub- plying the proviso in section 409(c)(3)(A), or agency action’’ means agency action with re- section (a)(1) on expiration of the expiring in applying section 512(d)(1) or 721(b)(5)(B), of spect to which all available administrative term grazing permit. the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic’’. remedies have been exhausted. (3) WAIVED PERMITS.—In the case of a term (3) TERM GRAZING PERMIT.—The term ‘‘term grazing permit waived to the Secretary pur- AMENDMENT NO. 1735 grazing permit means a term grazing permit suant to section 222.3(c)(1)(iv) of title 36, On page 71, strike out lines 15 through 17, or grazing agreement issued by the Sec- Code of Federal Regulations, between Janu- and insert the following: ‘‘TESTING.—In ap- retary under section 402 of the Federal Land ary 1, 1995, and December 31, 1996, the Sec- plying section 409(c)(3)(A) or 512(d)(1) of the Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 retary shall issue a new term grazing permit Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 1752), section 19 of the Act entitled under subsection (a)(2) not later than 60 days U.S.C. 348(c)(3)(A) and 360b(d)(1)),’’. ‘‘An Act to facilitate and simplify the work after the date on which the holder waives a of the Forest Service, and for other pur- term grazing permit to the Secretary. AMENDMENT NO. 1736 poses’’, approved April 24, 1950 (commonly SEC. 204. ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL AND JUDI- known as the ‘‘Granger-Thye Act’’) (16 U.S.C. CIAL REVIEW. On page 71, strike out lines 15 through 17, 580l), or other law. The issuance of a new term grazing permit and insert the following: ‘‘TESTING.—In ap- SEC. 203. ISSUANCE OF NEW TERM GRAZING PER- under section 203(a) shall not be subject to plying the proviso in section 409(c)(3)(A) of MITS. administrative appeal or judicial review. the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 348(c)(3)(A)),’’. (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any SEC. 205. REPEAL. other provision of law, regulation, policy, This title is repealed effective as of Janu- court order, or court sanctioned settlement ary 1, 2001. AMENDMENT NO. 1737 agreement, the Secretary shall issue a new On page 71, strike out lines 15 through 17, term grazing permit without regard to KENNEDY AMENDMENTS NOS. 1732– and insert the following: ‘‘TESTING.—In ap- whether the analysis required by the Na- plying the proviso in section 409(c)(3)(A) of tional Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 1741 the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and other applicable laws (Ordered to lie on the table.) (21 U.S.C. 348(c)(3)(A)) with respect to pes- has been completed, or final agency action Mr. KENNEDY submitted 10 amend- ticides,’’. respecting the analysis has been taken— ments intended to be proposed by him (1) to the holder of an expiring term graz- AMENDMENT NO. 1738 ing permit; or to amendment No. 1487 proposed by Mr. (2) to the purchaser of a term grazing per- DOLE to the bill S. 343, supra; as fol- On page 71, line 23, insert before the period mit holder’s permitted livestock or base lows: the following: ‘‘: Provided, That this sub- section shall not take effect until the Sec- property if— AMENDMENT NO. 1732 (A) between January 1, 1995, and December retary of Health and Human Services and the On page 71, strike out lines 13 through 23 Administrator of the Environmental Protec- 1, 1996, the holder has waived the term graz- and insert in lieu thereof the following new ing permit to the Secretary pursuant to sec- tion Agency have certified that the imple- subsection: mentation of this subsection will not place tion 222.3(c)(1)(iv) of title 36, Code of Federal (c) SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING RE- at risk the long-term health of infants and Regulations; and FORM OF THE DELANEY CLAUSE.—It is the children’’. (B) the purchaser of the term grazing per- sense of the Senate that— mit holder’s permitted livestock or base (1) the Delaney Clause in the Federal Food, property is eligible and qualified to hold a Drug, and Cosmetic Act governing carcino- AMENDMENT NO. 1739 term grazing permit. gens in foods must be reformed; On page 71, line 23, insert before the period (b) TERMS AND CONDITIONS.—Except as pro- (2) any such reform of the Delaney the following: ‘‘: Provided, That this sub- vided in subsection (c)— Clause— section shall not take effect until the Sec- (1) a new term grazing permit under sub- (A) should reflect the care and delibera- retary of Health and Human Services and the section (a)(1) shall contain the same terms tiveness due to a subject as important as Administrator of the Environmental Protec- and conditions as the expired term grazing whether and to what extent infants and chil- tion Agency have certified that the imple- permit; and dren shall be exposed to carcinogens through mentation of this subsection will not in- (2) a new term grazing permit under sub- the food they consume; and crease the incidence of cancer in the United section (a)(2) shall contain the same terms (B) should not undermine other safety States’’. and conditions as the waived permit. standards. (c) DURATION.— (3) advances in science and technology AMENDMENT NO. 1740 (1) IN GENERAL.—A new term grazing per- since the Delaney Clause was originally en- On page 71, line 23, insert before the period mit under subsection (a) shall expire on the acted in 1958 have prompted the need to re- the following: ‘‘: Provided, That this sub- earlier of— fine the standards in current law with re- section shall not take effect until the Sec- (A) the date that is 3 years after the date spect to pesticide residues, and may have retary of Health and Human Services and the on which it is issued; or limited the appropriateness of such stand- Administrator of the Environmental Protec- (B) the date on which final agency action ards with respect to food additives and ani- tion Agency have certified that the imple- is taken with respect to the analysis re- mal drugs; mentation of this subsection will not expose quired by the National Environmental Pol- (4) the Delaney Clause should be replaced infants and children to cancer-causing icy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and by a contemporary health-based standard chemicals through the food such infants and other applicable laws. that takes into account— children consume’’. (2) FINAL ACTION IN LESS THAN 3 YEARS.—If (A) the right of the American people to final agency action is taken with respect to safe food; AMENDMENT NO. 1741 the analysis required by the National Envi- (B) the conclusions of the National Acad- ronmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 emy of Sciences concerning the special sus- On page 71, line 23, insert before the period et seq.) and other applicable laws before the ceptibility of infants and children to the ef- the following: ‘‘: Provided, That this sub- date that is 3 years after the date on which fects of pesticide chemicals and the cumu- section shall not take effect until the Sec- a new term grazing permit is issued under lative effect of the residues of such pesticide retary of Health and Human Services and the subsection (a), the Secretary shall— chemicals on human health; Administrator of the Environmental Protec- (A) cancel the new term grazing permit; (C) the importance of a stable food supply tion Agency have certified that the imple- and and a sound agricultural economy; and mentation of this subsection will not place (B) if appropriate, issue a term grazing per- (D) the interests of consumers, farmers, at risk the long-term health of infants and mit for a term not to exceed 10 years under food manufacturers, and other interested children as a result of exposure to cancer- terms and conditions as are necessary for the parties; and causing chemicals added to the food such in- proper administration of National Forest (5) prior to the end of the first session of fants and children consume’’. System rangeland resources. the 104th Congress, after appropriate consid- (d) DATE OF ISSUANCE.— eration by the committees of jurisdiction, (1) EXPIRATION ON OR BEFORE DATE OF EN- the Senate should enact legislation to re- LIEBERMAN AMENDMENT NO. 1742 ACTMENT.—In the case of an expiring term form the Delaney Clause. (Ordered to lie on the table.) grazing permit that has expired on or before Mr. LIEBERMAN submitted an AMENDMENT NO. 1733 the date of enactment of this Act, the Sec- amendment intended to be proposed by On page 71, strike out lines 13 through 23, retary shall issue a new term grazing permit him to amendment No. 1487 proposed under subsection (a)(1) not later than 15 days and redesignate the remaining subsections after the date of enactment of this Act. and cross references thereto accordingly. by Mr. DOLE to the bill S. 343, supra; as (2) EXPIRATION AFTER DATE OF ENACT- follows: MENT.—In the case of an expiring term graz- AMENDMENT NO. 1734 On page 44, beginning with line 14, strike ing permit that expires after the date of en- On page 71, strike out lines 15 through 16, out all through line 4 on page 46 and insert actment of this Act, the Secretary shall and insert the following: ‘‘TESTING.—In ap- in lieu thereof the following:

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10158 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 ‘‘§ 629. Petition for alternative method of com- ‘‘(g) Any alternative compliance strategy Economic Development Commission to carry pliance for which a petition is granted under this out the purposes of section 205 if the city has ‘‘(a) Except as provided in subsection (j) or section shall be enforceable as if it were a a population greater than 200,000 according unless prohibited by the statute authorizing provision of the rule being modified or to: a rule, any person subject to a rule may peti- waived. (1) the U.S. Census Bureau’s 1992 estimate tion the relevant agency implementing the ‘‘(h) The grant of a petition under this sec- for city populations; or rule to modify or waive the specific require- tion shall be judicially reviewable as if it (2) beginning six months after the enact- ments of a rule and to authorize an alter- were the issuance of an amendment to the ment of this title, the U.S. Census Bureau’s native compliance strategy satisfying the rule being modified or waived. The denial of latest estimate for city populations. criteria of subsection (b). a petition shall not be subject to judicial re- (b) DISTRESSED AREA.—Any census tract ‘‘(b) Any petition submitted under sub- view. within a city shall qualify as a distressed section (a) shall— ‘‘(i) No agency may grant more than 30 pe- area if— ‘‘(1) identify with reasonable specificity titions per year under this section. (1) 33 percent or more of the resident popu- the requirements for which the modification ‘‘(j) If the statute authorizing the rule that lation in the census tract is below the pov- or waiver is sought and the alternative com- is the subject of the petition provides proce- erty line; or pliance strategy being proposed; dures or standards for an alternative method (2) 45 percent or more of out-of-school ‘‘(2) identify the facility to which the of compliance, the petition shall be reviewed males aged 16 and over in the census tract modification or waiver would pertain; solely under the terms of the statute. worked less than 26 weeks in the preceding ‘‘(3) considering all the significant applica- year; or (3) 36 percent of more families with chil- ble human health, safety, and environmental ASHCROFT AMENDMENT NO. 1743 benefits intended to be achieved by the rule, dren under age 18 in the census tract have an demonstrate that the alternative compliance (Ordered to lie on the table.) unmarried parent as head of the household; strategy, from the standpoint of the applica- Mr. ASHCROFT submitted an amend- or ble human health, safety, and environmental ment intended to be proposed by him (4) 17 percent or more of the resident fami- benefits, taking into account all cross-media to the bill S. 343; as follows: lies in the census tract received public as- sistance income in the preceding year. impacts, will achieve— At the end, add the following new title: ‘‘(A) a significantly better result than SEC. 205. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMIS- would be achieved through compliance with ‘‘TITLE II—URBAN REGULATORY RELIEF SIONS. the rule; or ZONES (a) PURPOSE.—The major of chief executive ‘‘(B) an equivalent result at significantly SECTION 201. SHORT TITLE. officer of a qualifying city under section 204 lower compliance costs than would be This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Urban Regu- may appoint an Economic Development achieved through compliance with the rule; latory Relief Zone Act of 1995’’. Commission for the purpose of— and SEC. 202. FINDINGS. (1) designating distressed areas, or a com- bination of distressed areas with one another ‘‘(4) demonstrate that the proposed alter- The Congress finds that— native compliance strategy provides a degree (1) the likelihood that a proposed business or with adjacent industrial or commercial of accountability, enforceability, and public site will comply with many government reg- areas, within the city as Urban Regulatory and agency access to information at least ulations is inversely related to the length of Relief Zones; and (2) making application through the Office equal to that of the rule. time over which a site has been utilized for of Management and Budget to waive the ap- ‘‘(c) No later than the date on which the commercial and/or industrial purposes in the plication of specific Federal regulations petitioner submits the petition to the agen- past, thus rendering older sites in urban within such Urban Regulatory Relief Zones. cy, the petitioner shall inform the public of areas the sites most unlikely to be chosen (b) COMPOSITION.—To the greatest extent the submission of such petition (including a for a new development and thereby forcing practicable, an Economic Development Com- brief description of the petition) through new development away from the areas most mission shall include— publication of a notice in newspapers of gen- in need of economic growth and job creation; eral circulation in the area in which the fa- (1) residents representing a demographic and cross section of the city population; and cility is located. The agency may authorize (2) broad Federal regulations often have or require petitioners to use additional or al- (2) members of the business community, unintended social and economic con- private civic organizations, employers, em- ternative means of informing the public of sequences in urban areas where such regula- the submission of such petitions. If the agen- ployees, elected officials, and State and local tions, among other things— regulatory authorities. cy proposes to grant the petition, the agency (A) offend basic notions of common sense, shall provide public notice and opportunity (c) LIMITATION.—No more than one Eco- particularly when applied to individual sites; nomic Development Commission shall be es- to comment. (B) adversely impact economic stability; ‘‘(d) The agency may approve the petition tablished or designated within a qualifying (C) result in the unnecessary loss of exist- city. upon determining that the proposed alter- ing jobs and businesses; native compliance strategy— (D) undermine new economic development, SEC. 206. LOCAL PARTICIPATION. ‘‘(1) considering all the significant applica- especially in previously used sites; (a) PUBLIC HEARINGS.—Before designating ble human health, safety, and environmental (E) create undue economic hardships while an area as an Urban Regulatory Relief Zone, benefits intended to be achieved by the rule, failing significantly to protect human an Economic Development Commission es- from the standpoint of the applicable human health, particularly in areas where economic tablished pursuant to section 205 shall hold a health, safety, and environmental benefits, development is urgently needed in order to public hearing, after giving adequate public taking into account all cross-media impacts, improve the health and welfare of residents notice, for the purpose of soliciting the opin- will achieve— over the long term; and ions and suggestions of those persons who ‘‘(A) a significantly better result than (F) contribute to social deterioration to a will be affected by such designation. would be achieved through compliance with such degree that high unemployment, crime, (b) INDIVIDUAL REQUESTS.—The Economic the rule; or and other economic and social problems cre- Development Commission shall establish a ‘‘(B) an equivalent result at significantly ate the greatest risk to the health and well- process by which individuals may submit re- lower compliance costs than would be being of urban residents. quests to the Economic Development Com- achieved through compliance with the rule; mission to include specific Federal regula- ‘‘(2) will provide a degree of account- SEC. 203. PURPOSES. tions in the Commission’s application to the ability, enforceability, and public and agen- The purposes of this title are to— Office of Management and Budget seeking cy access to information at least equal to (1) empower qualifying cities to obtain se- waivers of Federal regulations. that provided by the rule; lective relief from Federal regulations that (c) AVAILABILITY OF COMMISSION DECI- ‘‘(3) will not impose an undue burden on undermine economic stability and develop- SIONS.—After holding a hearing under para- the agency that would be responsible for ad- ment in distressed areas within the city; and graph (a) and before submitting any waiver ministering and enforcing such alternative (2) authorize Federal agencies to waive the applications to the Office of Management compliance strategy; and application of specific Federal regulations in and Budget pursuant to section 207, the Eco- ‘‘(4) satisfies any other relevant factors. distressed urban areas— nomic Development Commission shall make ‘‘(e) Where relevant, the agency shall give (A) upon application through the Office of publicly available— priority to petitions with alternative com- Management and Budget by an Economic De- (1) a list of all areas within the city to be pliance strategies using pollution prevention velopment Commission established by a designated as Urban Regulatory Relief approaches. qualifying city pursuant to section 205; and Zones, if any; ‘‘(f) In making determinations under sub- (B) upon a determination by the appro- (2) a list of all regulations for which the section (d), the agency shall take into ac- priate Federal agency that granting such a Economic Development Commission will re- count whether the proposed alternative com- waiver will not substantially endanger quest a waiver from a Federal agency; and pliance strategy would transfer any signifi- health or safety. (3) an explanation of the reasons that the cant health, safety, or environmental effects SEC. 204. ELIGIBILITY FOR WAIVERS. waiver of a regulation would economically to other geographic locations, future genera- (a) ELIGIBLE CITIES.—The mayor or chief benefit the city and the data supporting such tions, or classes of people. executive officer of a city may establish an a determination.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10159 SEC. 207. WAIVER OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS. (B) provides a scientific basis in writing for real or personal property, or of services, that (a) SELECTION OF REGULATIONS.—An Eco- such determination. is promulgated in compliance with otherwise nomic Development Commission may select (f) AUTOMATIC WAIVER.—If a Federal agen- applicable criteria and procedures. for waiver, within an Urban Regulatory Re- cy does not provide the written notice re- ‘‘(2) In the case of rulemaking involving lief Zone, Federal regulations that— quired under subsection (e) within the 120- the internal revenue laws of the United (1)(A) are unduly burdensome to business day period as required under such sub- States, this section applies only to rules sub- concerns located within an area designated section, the waiver shall be deemed to be ject to section 7805(f) of the Internal Revenue as an Urban Regulatory Relief Zone; or granted by the Federal agency. Code of 1986 of general applicability that sub- (B) discourages new economic development (g) LIMITATION.—No provision of this Act stantially alter or create rights or obliga- within the zone; or shall be construed to authorize any Federal tions of persons outside the agency. (C) creates undue economic hardships in agency to waive any regulation or Executive the zone; or order that prohibits, or the purpose of which AMENDMENT NO. 1745 (D) contributes to the social deterioration is to protect persons against, discrimination of the zone; and On page 9, line 5, strike ‘‘rule.’’ and insert on the basis of race, color, religion, gender, ‘‘rule. This subsection shall not apply to (2) if waived, will not substantially endan- or national origin. ger health or safety. rules subject to section 7805(f) of the Internal (h) APPLICABLE PROCEDURES.—A waiver of Revenue Code of 1986.’’ (b) REQUEST FOR WAIVER.—(1) An Economic a regulation under subsection (e) shall not be Development Commission shall submit a re- considered to be a rule, rulemaking, or regu- AMENDMENT NO. 1746 quest for the waiver of Federal regulations lation under chapter 5 of title 5, United to the Office of Management and Budget. States Code. The Federal agency shall pub- On page 12, line 10, insert ‘‘(other than a (2) Such request shall— lish a notice in the Federal Register stating decision relating to a rule subject to section (A) identify the area designated as an any waiver of a regulation under this sec- 7805(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986)’’ Urban Regulatory Relief Zone by the Eco- tion. after ‘‘(l)’’. nomic Development Commission; (i) EFFECT OF SUBSEQUENT AMENDMENT OF (B) identify all regulations for which the AMENDMENT NO. 1747 REGULATIONS.—If a Federal agency amends a Economic Development Commission seeks a regulation for which a waiver under this sec- On page 69, line 10, strike ‘‘petition.’’ and waiver; and tion is in effect, the agency shall not change insert ‘‘petition. In the case of a certifi- (C) explain the reasons that waiver of the the waiver to impose additional require- cation, analysis, or failure to prepare an regulations would economically benefit the ments. analysis of a rule involving the internal rev- Urban Regulatory Relief Zone and the data (j) EXPIRATION OF WAIVERS.—No waiver of a enue laws of the United States, a petition for supporting such determination. regulation under this section shall expire un- judicial review shall be submitted to the Ad- (c) REVIEW OF WAIVER REQUEST.—No later ministrator of the Small Business Adminis- than 60 days after receiving the request for less the Federal agency determines that a tration and shall not be in order if the Ad- waiver, the Office of Management and Budg- continuation of the waiver substantially en- ministrator certifies within 30 days that et shall— dangers health or safety. such petition— (1) review the request for waiver; SEC. 208. DEFINITIONS. (2) determine whether the request for waiv- For purposes of this Act, the term— ‘‘(I) involves a certification, analysis, or er is complete and in compliance with this (1) ‘‘regulation’’ means— failure to prepare an analysis that does not title, using the most recent census data (A) any rule as defined under section 551(4) involve a material issue warranting judicial available at the time each application is sub- of title 5, United States Code; or review, or ‘‘(II) is made for a purpose described in sec- mitted; and (B) any rulemaking conducted on the (3) after making a determination under record after opportunity for an agency hear- tion 6702(a)(2)(B) of the Internal Revenue paragraph (2)— ing under sections 556 and 557 of such title; Code of 1986 (without regard to the filing of (A) submit the request for waiver to the (2) ‘‘Urban Regulatory Relief Zone’’ means a return). Federal agency that promulgated the regula- an area designated under section 205; tion and notify the requesting Economic De- (3) ‘‘qualifying city’’ means a city which is LEVIN AMENDMENTS NOS. 1748–1769 eligible to establish an Economic Develop- velopment Commission of the date on which (Ordered to lie on the table.) the request was submitted to such agency; or ment Commission under section 204; (B) notify the requesting Economic Devel- (4) ‘‘industrial or commercial area’’ means Mr. LEVIN submitted 22 amendments opment Commission that the request is not any part of a census tract zoned for indus- intended to be proposed by him to in compliance with this Act with an expla- trial or commercial use which is adjacent to amendment No. 1487 proposed by Mr. nation of the basis for such determination. a census tract which is a distressed area pur- DOLE to the bill, S. 343, supra; as fol- (d) MODIFICATION OF WAIVER REQUESTS.— suant to section 205(b); and lows: An Economic Development Commission may (5) ‘‘poverty line’’ has the same meaning as AMENDMENT NO. 1748 submit modifications to a waiver request. such term is defined under section 673(2) of The provisions of subsection (c) shall apply the Community Services Block Grant Act (42 On page 22, line 24, after ‘‘scientific evalua- to a modified waiver as of the date such U.S.C. 9902(2)).’’. tion,’’ insert ‘‘cost estimates,’’. modification is received by the Office of Management and Budget. PACKWOOD AMENDMENTS NOS. AMENDMENT NO. 1749 (e) WAIVER DETERMINATION.—(1) No later 1744–1747 On page 22, line 19, after ‘‘scientific evalua- than 120 days after receiving a request for tions,’’ insert ‘‘cost estimates,’’. waiver under subsection (c) from the Office (Ordered to lie on the table.) of Management and Budget, a Federal agen- Mr. PACKWOOD submitted four AMENDMENT NO. 1750 cy shall— amendments intended to be proposed On page 3, line 7, strike the period and in- (A) make a determination of whether to by him to amendment No. 1487 pro- sert the following: ‘‘; or waive a regulation in whole or in part; and posed by Mr. DOLE to the bill S. 343, ‘‘(5) a rule relating to government loans, (B) provide written notice to the request- supra; as follows: grants or benefits.’’ ing Economic Development Commission of AMENDMENT NO. 1744 such determination. AMENDMENT NO. 1751 (2) Subject to subsection (g), a Federal Beginning on page 2, line 15, strike all agency shall deny a request for a waiver only through page 3, line 7, and insert the fol- On page 11, strike line 5 through line 19. if the waiver substantially endangers health lowing: or safety. ‘‘(a) APPLICABILITY.—(1) This section ap- AMENDMENT NO. 1752 (3) If a Federal agency grants a waiver plies to every rulemaking, according to the On page 12, strike line 9 through line 12. under this subsection, the agency shall pro- provisions thereof, except to the extent that vide a written statement to the requesting there is involved— AMENDMENT NO. 1753 Economic Development Commission that— ‘‘(A) a matter pertaining to a military or On page 59, strike line 10 and all that fol- (A) describes the extent of the waiver in foreign affairs function of the United States; lows through page 60, line 23. whole or in part; and ‘‘(B) a matter relating to the management (B) explains the application of the waiver, or personnel practices of an agency; AMENDMENT NO. 1754 including guidance for the use of the waiver ‘‘(C) an interpretive rule, general state- by business concerns, within the Urban Reg- ment of policy, guidance, or rule of agency On page 44, strike line 14 and all that fol- ulatory Relief Zone. organization, procedure, or practice, unless lows through page 46, line 4. (4) If a Federal agency denies a waiver such rule, statement, or guidance has gen- under this subsection, the agency shall pro- eral applicability and substantially alters or AMENDMENT NO. 1755 vide a written statement to the requesting creates rights or obligations of persons out- On page 16, lines 15 and 16, strike ‘‘a rule or Economic Development Commission that— side the agency; or agency action that authorizes the introduc- (A) explains the reasons that the waiver ‘‘(D) a rule relating to the acquisition, tion into’’ and substitute ‘‘the introduction substantially endangers health or safety; and management, or disposal by an agency of into or removal from.’’

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10160 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995

AMENDMENT NO. 1756 proved model sensitivity), and to validate egy consisting of such elements as the provi- On page 16, line 25, strike ‘‘or that provides default options, particularly those common sion of information, consultation, technical relief, in whole or in part, from a statutory to multiple risk assessments. assistance, and educational guidance. The prohibition,’’ and all that follows through ‘‘(2) Research leading to improvement of strategy shall be well publicized and dissemi- page 17, line 4. methods to quantify and communicate un- nated to small businesses. certainty and variability among individuals, ‘‘§ 597b. Penalty waivers for small businesses AMENDMENT NO. 1757 species, populations, and, in the case of eco- ‘‘(a) Except as provided in section 597c, logical risk assessment, ecological commu- On page 49, line 11, strike ‘‘a rule or agency each agency shall ensure that its regulatory nities. action that authorizes the introduction enforcement program includes— ‘‘(3) Emerging and future areas of research, ‘‘(1) a full waiver of administrative or civil into’’ and substitute ‘‘the introduction into including research on comparative risk anal- or removal from’’. judicial penalties against a small business ysis, exposure to multiple chemicals and for violations that are disclosed to the agen- other stressors, noncancer endpoints, bio- cy for the first time through compliance as- AMENDMENT NO. 1758 logical markers of exposure and effect, sistance or other self-disclosure mechanism On page 37, line 19, strike paragraph (3). mechanisms of action in both mammalian established by the agency if— and nonmammalian species, dynamics and ‘‘(A) the small business has made a good AMENDMENT NO. 1759 probabilities of physiological and ecosystem faith attempt to comply with the law; On page 33, at the end of line 13, insert ‘‘or exposures, and prediction of ecosystem-level ‘‘(B) the small business is not in violation repeal’’. responses. of a regulatory requirement for which the ‘‘(4) Long-term needs to adequately train small business has received a warning letter, AMENDMENT NO. 1760 individuals in risk assessment and risk as- notice of violation, field citation, enforce- sessment application. Evaluations under this ment action, or other notification from the On page 37, line 18, strike ‘‘; and’’ and in- paragraph shall include an estimate of the agency within the 5 years preceding the re- sert ‘‘.’’. resources needed to provide necessary train- quest for compliance assistance; ing. ‘‘(C) the small business has not been sub- AMENDMENT NO. 1761 ‘‘(b) The head of each covered agency shall ject to 2 or more Federal or State enforce- On page 37, at the end of line 5, insert develop a strategy and schedule for carrying ment actions for violations of the same stat- ‘‘and’’. out research and training to meet the needs ute in the 5 years preceding the request for identified in subsection (a). compliance assistance; AMENDMENT NO. 1762 ‘‘(D) the small business corrects the viola- tions within 60 days or within an alternative On page 37, line 10, strike ‘‘nonquantifi- GRAHAM AMENDMENT NO. 1771 able’’. compliance period not to exceed 180 days (Ordered to lie on the table.) specified by the agency under which the small business compliance assistance pro- AMENDMENT NO. 1763 Mr. GRAHAM submitted an amend- ment intended to be proposed by him gram operates, subject to the condition that On page 36, line 11, strike paragraph (4). to amendment No. 1487 proposed by Mr. any agreement between the agency and the small business to establish a compliance pe- AMENDMENT NO. 1764 DOLE to the bill S. 343, supra; as fol- riod of more than 60 days shall be in writing On page 36, line 10, strike ‘‘; and’’ and sub- lows: and shall set forth the steps to be under- stitute ‘‘.’’. On page 94, insert after line 11, ‘‘(C) an taken by the small business to achieve com- analysis of the potential of flexible regu- pliance; and AMENDMENT NO. 1765 latory options, including performance-based ‘‘(E) the small business meets all other standards, to provide greater efficiency in conditions for waiver of penalties established On page 36, line 2, strike ‘‘nonquantifi- the use of national economic resources for under this paragraph; and able’’. regulation.’’ ‘‘(2) a partial waiver of administrative or civil judicial penalties against a small busi- AMENDMENT NO. 1766 GRAHAM AMENDMENT NO. 1772 ness for violations that are disclosed to the On page 34, line 24, strike ‘‘the head of the agency for the first time through a compli- agency’’ and all that follows through the end (Ordered to lie on the table.) ance assistance program or other self-disclo- of the sentence and insert in lieu thereof the Mr. GRAHAM submitted an amend- sure mechanism established by the agency following: ‘‘the rule shall be subject to the ment intended to be proposed by him when a small business has made a good faith congressional disapproval procedure under to amendment No. 1487 proposed by Mr. effort to comply with all applicable regu- section 802 as of the date of the deadline, and DOLE to the bill S. 343, supra; as fol- latory requirements. shall terminate by operation of law upon the lows: ‘‘(b) Nothing contained in this section enactment of a joint resolution of dis- shall be construed to— approval pursuant to such section.’’ On page 4, line 18, insert before the semi- ‘‘(1) require or prohibit imposition of a colon the following: ‘‘, including, where prac- penalty for a violation where a penalty may AMENDMENT NO. 1767 ticable, performance-based standards’’. not be waived for a violator under subsection On page 34, line 17, after ‘‘modify’’ insert (a) (1) or (2); or ‘‘(2) discourage the development of other ‘‘or repeal’’. LEVIN AMENDMENT NO. 1773 agency programs to assist small businesses (Ordered to lie on the table.) to achieve regulatory compliance. AMENDMENT NO. 1768 Mr. LEVIN submitted an amendment ‘‘§ 597c. Exceptions and limitation On page 34, line 11, after ‘‘to amend’’, in- intended to be proposed by him to an ‘‘(a) The penalty waivers in section 597b sert ‘‘or repeal’’. amendment to the bill, S. 343, supra; as shall not apply to— follows: ‘‘(1) violations— AMENDMENT NO. 1769 In lieu of the matter proposed to be in- ‘‘(A) that involve criminal conduct or the On page 33, line 17, strike ‘‘or repeal’’. serted, insert the following: detection thereof; ‘‘(B) that have caused actual harm, or a SEC. . SMALL BUSINESS COMPLIANCE INCEN- ROTH AMENDMENT NO. 1770 TIVES. significant threat of future harm, to public (A) SHORT TITLE.—This section may be health or safety, private property, or the en- (Ordered to lie on the table.) cited as the ‘‘Small Business Compliance In- vironment; Mr. ROTH submitted an amendment centive Act’’. ‘‘(C) of a rule that involves the internal revenue laws of the United States, or the as- intended to be proposed by him to (b) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 5 of title 5, amendment No. 1487 proposed by Mr. United States Code, is amended by adding at sessment or collection of taxes, duties, or the end the following new subchapter: other revenues or receipts; DOLE to the bill S. 343, supra; as fol- ‘‘(D) of a rule that implements an inter- lows: ‘‘SUBCHAPTER VI—SMALL BUSINESS national agreement, including trade agree- Insert after section 637 the following: COMPLIANCE INCENTIVES ments, to which the United States is a party; ‘‘§ 638. Research and training in risk assess- ‘‘§ 597. Definition ‘‘(E) of the Federal acquisition regulations; ‘‘(F) that involve national security or for- ment ‘‘For purposes of this subchapter, the term ‘small business’ means a person, corporation, eign affairs functions; ‘‘(a) The head of each covered agency shall ‘‘(G) that are first disclosed through Fed- regularly and systematically evaluate risk partnership, or other entity that employs 100 or fewer individuals on a company-wide eral, State, or local enforcement inspections; assessment research and training needs of ‘‘(H) that are first disclosed to Federal, basis. the agency, including, where relevant and State, or local officials by third parties; appropriate, the following: ‘‘§ 597a. Small business compliance assistance ‘‘(I) that are reported to Federal, State, or ‘‘(1) Research to reduce generic data gaps, ‘‘Each regulatory agency shall establish a local officials as required by applicable regu- to address modelling needs (including im- comprehensive compliance assistance strat- lations or permits; or

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10161 ‘‘(J) that are not within the scope of eligi- amendment No. 1513 proposed by Mr. the expiration of such 18-month period if the ble violations for these incentives under reg- BUMPERS to the bill S. 343, supra; as covered agency determines that significant ulations promulgated pursuant to section follows: new information or methodologies are avail- 597b; and able that could significantly alter the results ‘‘(2) any injunctive, remedial, corrective, In lieu of the matter proposed to be in- of the prior risk assessment. or forfeiture action, or criminal enforcement serted, insert the following: (b) A plan under subsection (a) shall— authorities of any Federal agency to which ‘‘(c) In reviewing an agency construction of (1) provide procedures for receiving and this subchapter applies. a statute made in a rulemaking or an adju- considering new information and risk assess- ‘‘(b) A small business shall not be entitled dication, the court shall independently re- ments from the public; and to a penalty waiver under section 597b re- view the interpretation without giving the (2) set priorities and criteria for review and garding a particular enforcement issue for 60 agency any deference and shall— revision of risk assessments based on such days after the entity has had an agency-ini- ‘‘(1) hold erroneous and unlawful an agency factors as the agency head considers appro- tiated contact regarding such issue.’’. interpretation that fails to give effect to the priate. intent of Congress; or (c) TECHNICAL AMENDMENT.—The analysis (3) provide a schedule for the review of risk for chapter 5 of title 5, United States Code, ‘‘(2) if the statute is silent or ambiguous assessments. This schedule shall be revised is amended by adding at the end the fol- with respect to a specific issue, hold arbi- as appropriate based on new information re- lowing: trary and capricious or an abuse of discre- ceived under (b)(1) and reviewed under cri- tion an agency action for which the agency teria developed in accordance with para- ‘‘SUBCHAPTER VI—SMALL BUSINESS has refused to consider a permissible con- COMPLIANCE INCENTIVES graph (b)(2). struction of the statute or has failed to ex- (c) The head of each covered agency shall ‘‘Sec. plain in a reasoned analysis why the agency review risk assessments according to the ‘‘597. Definition. selected the interpretation it chose and why schedule published by the agency under para- ‘‘597a. Small business compliance assistance. it rejected other permissible interpretations graph (a). ‘‘597b. Penalty waivers for small businesses. of the statute. ‘‘597c. Exceptions and limitation.’’. ‘‘(d) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the provisions of subsection (c) shall STEVENS AMENDMENTS NOS. 1780– LIEBERMAN AMENDMENT NO. 1774 apply to, and supplement, the requirements 1783 contained in any statute for the review of (Ordered to lie on the table.) (Ordered to lie on the table.) final agency action that is not otherwise Mr. STEVENS submitted four Mr. LIEBERMAN submitted an subject to this section. amendment intended to be proposed by amendments intended to be proposed him to amendment No. 1523 proposed by him to an amendment to the bill S. MOYNIHAN AMENDMENTS NOS. 343, supra; as follows: by Mr. CAMPBELL to the bill S. 343, 1778–1779 supra; as follows: AMENDMENT NO. 1780 (Ordered to lie on the table.) In lieu of the matter proposed to be in- In lieu of the matter proposed to be in- serted, insert the following: Mr. MOYNIHAN submitted two serted, insert the following: ‘‘(6) the term ‘major rule’ does not include amendments intended to be proposed 78aaa et seq.); a rule that approves, in whole or in part, a by him to an amendment to the bill, S. ‘‘(xii) a rule that involves the inter- plan or program adopted by a State that pro- 343, supra; as follows: national trade laws of the United States; vides for the implementation, maintenance, AMENDMENT NO. 1778 ‘‘(xiii) a rule intended to implement sec- or enforcement of Federal standards or re- tion 354 of the Public Health Service Act (42 At the end of the pending amendment in- quirements. This paragraph shall take effect U.S.C. 263b) (as added by section 2 of the sert the following: one day after the date of the enactment of Mammography Quality Standards Act of Notwithstanding any other provision of this subchapter; 1992); or this act the procedure for reviewing existing ‘‘(xiv) a rule that involves hunting under risk assessments will be as follows: the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703 LIEBERMAN AMENDMENT NO. 1774 PLAN FOR THE REVIEW OF RISK ASSESS- et seq.) or fishing under the Magnuson Fish- MENTS.— (Ordered to lie on the table.) ery Conservation and Management Act (16 (a) No later than 18 months after the effec- Mr. LIEBERMAN submitted an U.S.C. 1801 et seq.). tive date of this section, the head of each amendment intended to be proposed by covered agency shall publish, after notice AMENDMENT NO. 1781 him to amendment No. 1530 proposed and public comment, a plan to review and re- In lieu of the matter proposed to be in- by Mr. CAMPBELL to the bill S. 343, vise any risk assessment published before serted, insert the following: supra; as follows: the expiration of such 18-month period if the ‘‘(1) whether the rule is or is not a major In lieu of the matter proposed to be in- covered agency determines that significant rule within the meaning of section 621(5)(A) serted, insert the following: new information of methodologies are avail- or 621(5)(C), or has been designated a major ‘‘(6) the term ‘major rule’ does not include able that could significantly alter the results rule under subsection (b); and a rule that approves, in whole or in part, a of the prior risk assessment. ‘‘(2) if the agency determines that the rule plan or program adopted by a State that pro- (b) A plan under subsection (a) shall— is a major rule, whether the rule requires or vides for the implementation, maintenance, (1) provide procedures for receiving and does not require the preparation of a risk as- or enforcement of Federal standards or re- considering new information and risk assess- sessment under section 632(a). quirements; ments from the public; and ‘‘(b) DESIGNATION.—(1) If an agency has de- (2) set priorities and criteria for review and termined that a rule is not a major rule revision of risk assessments based on such LIEBERMAN AMENDMENT NO. 1776 within the meaning of section 621(5)(A) or factors as the agency head considers appro- 621(5)(C), the President or a person to whom (Ordered to lie on the table.) priate. the President has delegated authority under Mr. LIEBERMAN submitted an (3) provide a schedule for the review of risk section 642 (hereinafter the ‘President’s des- amendment intended to be proposed by assessments. This schedule shall be revised ignee’) may determine that the rule is a him to amendment No. 1544 proposed as appropriate based on new information re- major rule or designate’’. ceived under (b)(1) and reviewed under cri- AMENDMENT NO. 1782 by Mr. CAMPBELL to the bill S. 343, teria developed in accordance with para- In lieu of the matter proposed to be in- supra; as follows: graph (b)(2). In lieu of the matter proposed to be in- (c) The head of each covered agency shall serted, insert the following: ‘‘(B)(i) When the President or the Presi- serted, insert the following: review risk assessments according to the dent’s designee has published a determina- schedule published by the agency under para- ‘‘or tion or designation under subsection (b) that graph (a). ‘‘(xiii) a rule that approves, in whole or in a rule is a major rule after the publication of part, a plan or program adopted by a State the notice of proposed rulemaking for the AMENDMENT NO. 1779 that provides for the implementation, main- rule, the agency shall promptly issue and tenance, or enforcement of Federal standards Notwithstanding any other provision of place in the rulemaking file an initial cost- or requirements. This clause shall take ef- this act the procedure for reviewing existing benefit analysis for the rule and shall pub- fect 1 day after the date of the enactment of risk assessment well be as follows: lish in the Federal Register a summary of this subchapter. PLAN FOR THE REVIEW OF RISK ASSESS- such analysis.’’ MENTS.— AMENDMENT NO. 1783 KYL AMENDMENT NO. 1777 (a) No later than 18 months after the effec- tive date of this section, the head of each In lieu of the matter proposed to be in- (Ordered to lie on the table.) covered agency shall publish, after notice serted, insert the following: Mr. KYL submitted an amendment and public comment, a plan to review and re- plexity of the decision and any need for expe- intended to be proposed by him to vise any risk assessment published before dition;

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10162 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995

‘‘(5) the term ‘major rule’ means— (7) REVIEW PANEL.—The term ‘‘review Panel and to carry out the purposes of this ‘‘(A) a rule or set of closely related rules panel’’ means— subtitle with respect to the Occupational that the agency proposing the rule or the (A) with respect to a significant rule of the Safety and Health Administration. President determines is likely to have a Environmental Protection Agency, an Envi- (2) DISABILITY OR ABSENCE.—If the em- gross annual effect on the economy of ronmental Small Business Advocacy Review ployee designated to serve as chairperson $100,000,000 or more in reasonably quantifi- Panel established under section 202(e)(1); and under paragraph (1) is unable to serve as able increased costs (and this limit may be (B) with respect to a significant rule of the chairperson because of disability or absence, adjusted periodically by the Director, at the Occupational Safety and Health Administra- the Assistant Secretary for Occupational Director’s sole discretion, to account for in- tion of the Department of Labor, an Occupa- Safety and Health of the Department of flation); tional Safety and Health Small Business Ad- Labor shall designate another employee who ‘‘(B) a rule that is otherwise designated a vocacy Review Panel established under sec- meets the qualifications of paragraph (1) to major rule by the President or the Presi- tion 202(e)(1). serve as chairperson. dent’s designee under section 622(b) (and des- (8) DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVES.—The (c) INITIAL DETERMINATION AND NOTIFICA- ignation or failure to designate under this term ‘‘designated representatives’’ means in- TION.— clause shall not be subject to judicial re- dividuals selected by the Chief Counsel for (1) TIMING.—The chairperson shall take the view); or Advocacy to make presentations to, and to actions described in paragraph (2) not later ‘‘(C) any rule or set of closely related rules, engage in discussions with, a review panel on than 45 days before the date of publication in not determined to be a major rule pursuant behalf of small entities with a common in- the Federal Register by an agency of a gen- to subparagraph (A) or (B), that the agency terest in the subject rulemaking, including eral notice of proposed rulemaking under proposing the rule determines will have a entities that are— section 553(b) of title 5, United States Code, significant economic impact on a substantial (A) small businesses that would be im- or any other provision of law. number of small businesses, pursuant to sub- pacted by the significant rule; (2) ACTIONS.—With respect to a proposed chapter I; (B) small business sectors or industries rule that is the subject of a publication de- ‘‘(6) the term ‘market-based mechanism’ that would be especially impacted by the sig- scribed in subparagraph (A) or (B) of para- means— nificant rule; or graph (1), the chairperson shall— (C) organizations whose memberships are (A) determine whether the subject pro- posed rule constitutes a significant rule, as DOMENICI (AND OTHERS) comprised of a cross-section of small busi- nesses. defined in section 201(10); and AMENDMENT NO. 1784 (9) RULE.—The term ‘‘rule’’— (B) if the proposed rule is determined to Mr. DOMENICI (for himself, Mr. (A) means an agency statement of general constitute a significant rule, notify the Ad- ministrator of the Office of Information and BOND, Mr. BINGAMAN, Mr. COHEN, Mrs. applicability and future effect, which the agency intends to have the force and effect Regulatory Affairs within the Office of Man- HUTCHISON, and Mr. ROTH) proposed an of law, that is designed to implement, inter- agement and Budget and the Chief Counsel amendment to amendment No. 1533 pret, or prescribe law or policy or to describe for Advocacy to appoint review panel mem- proposed by Mr. DOMENICI to the bill, S. the procedure or practice requirements of bers for evaluation of the subject significant 343, supra; as follows: the agency; and rule, and for the Chief Counsel for Advocacy In lieu of the matter proposed to be in- (B) does not include any rule that is lim- to identify and select designated representa- serted, insert the following: ited to agency organization, management, or tives. personnel matters. (C) provide the Chief Counsel for Advocacy TITLE II—AGENCY RESPONSIVENESS TO with materials related to the subject pro- SMALL BUSINESSES (10) SIGNIFICANT RULE.—The term ‘‘signifi- cant rule’’ has the same meaning as the term posed rule. Information made available to SUBTITLE A—SMALL BUSINESS ADVOCACY ‘‘major rule’’ as defined in sec. 621(5) of title the designated representatives shall be made REVIEW 5. available to the public upon request and at SEC. 201. DEFINITIONS. (11) SMALL BUSINESS.—The term ‘‘small the cost of reproduction. For purposes of this subtitle, the following business’’ has the same meaning as the term (d) DUTIES OF THE CHIEF COUNSEL FOR AD- definitions shall apply: ‘‘small business concern’’ in section 3 of the VOCACY.— (1) Not later than 15 days after receiving (1) AGENCY.—The term ‘‘agency’’ means— Small Business Act. (A) with respect to the Environmental notice under subsection (c)(2)(B), or such SEC. 202. SMALL BUSINESS ADVOCACY CHAIR- longer period as the chairperson may allow, Small Business Advocacy Review Panel, the PERSONS AND ESTABLISHMENT OF Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); REVIEW PANELS. the Chief Counsel for Advocacy shall identify and (c) CHAIRPERSON OF ENVIRONMENTAL RE- and select not less than 2 and not more than (B) with respect to the Occupational Safe- VIEW PANELS.— 6 designated representatives for review of the ty and Health Small Business Advocacy Re- (1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 30 days subject significant rule. view Panel, the Occupational Safety and after the date of enactment of this Act, the (2) Not later than 45 days before the Health Administration of the Department of Administrator of the Environmental Protec- issuance of a significant final rule, the Chief Labor (OSHA). tion Agency shall designate an employee of Counsel for Advocacy shall identify and se- lect not less than 2 and not more than 6 pre- (2) AGENCY HEAD.—The term ‘‘agency head’’ the Environmental Protection Agency, who means— is a member of the Senior Executive Service viously selected, or new, designated rep- (A) with respect to the Environmental (as that term is defined in section 2101a of resentatives for review of the subject signifi- Small Business Advocacy Review Panel, the title 5, United States Code) and whose imme- cant final rule. (e) ESTABLISHMENT OF REVIEW PANELS.— Administrator of the Environmental Protec- diate supervisor is appointed by the Presi- (1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 15 days tion Agency; and dent, to serve as the chairperson of each En- after receiving notice under subsection (B) with respect to the Occupational Safe- vironmental Small Business Advocacy Re- (c)(2)(B), or such longer period as the chair- ty and Health Small Business Advocacy Re- view Panel and to carry out this subtitle person may allow, review panel members view Panel, the Assistant Secretary for Oc- with respect to the Environmental Protec- shall be appointed by the Administrator of cupational Safety and Health of the Depart- tion Agency. the Office of Information and Regulatory Af- ment of Labor. (2) DISABILITY OR ABSENCE.—If the em- fairs within the Office of Management and HAIRPERSON.—The term ‘‘chairperson’’ (3) C ployee designated to serve as chairperson Budget, the Chief Counsel for Advocacy, and means— under paragraph (1) is unable to serve as the chairperson in accordance with section (A) with respect to the Environmental chairperson because of disability or absence, 203(b). Small Business Advocacy Review Panel, the the Administrator of the Environmental (2) EXCEPTIONS.—A review panel shall be chairperson of such review panel designated Protection Agency shall designate another established in accordance with paragraph (1) under section 202(a); and employee who meets the qualifications of unless the chairperson, in consultation with (B) with respect to the Occupational Safe- paragraph (1) to serve as chairperson. the Chief Counsel for Advocacy, determines ty and Health Small Business Advocacy Re- (b) CHAIRPERSON OF OSHA REVIEW PANEL.— (and notifies the agency in writing of such view Panel, the chairperson of such review (1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 30 days determination) that panel designated under section 202(b). after the date of enactment of this Act, the (A) a good faith effort to identify and se- (4) CHIEF COUNSEL FOR ADVOCACY.—The Assistant Secretary for Occupational Safety lect designated representatives with respect term ‘‘Chief Counsel for Advocacy’’ means and Health of the Department of Labor shall to the subject significant rule was unsuccess- the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small designate an employee of the Occupational ful; and Business Administration. Safety and Health Administration of the De- (B) compliance with this subtitle is not re- (5) FINAL RULE.—The term ‘‘final rule’’ partment of Labor, who is a member of the quired with respect to the subject significant means any final rule or interim final rule Senior Executive Service (as that term is de- rule due to a lack of availability of des- issued by an agency for which a review panel fined in section 2101a of title 5, United States ignated representatives. has been established under section 202(e)(1). Code) and whose immediate supervisor is ap- (f) DUTIES REGARDING FINAL RULE.— (6) OFFICE.—The term ‘‘Office’’ means the pointed by the President, to serve as the (1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 45 days be- Office of Advocacy of the Small Business Ad- chairperson of each Occupational Safety and fore the issuance of a significant final rule, ministration. Health Small Business Advocacy Review the chairperson shall—

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00084 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10163

(A) notify panel members of the intent of (1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to paragraph (2), (2) submit a copy of such written record to the agency to issue a final rule; the meetings of the review panel shall be at the head of the agency and to the appro- (B) provide panel members with a dated the call of the chairperson. priate committees of the Congress. draft of the final rule to be issued; (2) INITIAL MEETING.—Not later than 15 SEC. 205. SURVEY. (C) solicit comments from panel members days after all review panel members nec- (a) IN GENERAL.—If a review panel makes a in connection with the issues described in essary to constitute a quorum have been ap- recommendation in any report submitted section 203(a); pointed under section (b), the chairperson under section 204(a) that a survey should be (D) provide the Chief Counsel for Advocacy shall conduct the initial meeting of the re- conducted with respect to a significant rule, with materials related to the subject final view panel. the agency shall contract for an independent rule. Information made available to the des- (f) POWERS OF REVIEW PANEL.— private sector survey of a cross-section of ignated representatives shall be made avail- (1) INFORMATION FROM FEDERAL AGENCIES.— the small businesses affected by the rule. able to the public upon request and at the A review panel may secure, directly from (b) CONTENTS OF SURVEY.—Each survey cost of reproduction. any Federal department or agency, such in- conducted under this section shall address (E) solicit comments from designated rep- formation as the review panel considers nec- the impact of the significant rule on small resentatives in connection with the issues essary to carry out this subtitle, other than businesses, including— described in section 203(a); and any material described in section 552(b) of (1) the applicability of the rule to various (F) if the chairperson determines that such title 5. Upon request of the chairperson, the small businesses; action is necessary, call one or more meet- head of such department or agency shall fur- (2) the degree to which the rule is easy to ings of the review panel and, if a quorum is nish such information to the review panel. read and comprehend; present, direct the review panel to review, (2) POSTAL SERVICES.—A review panel may (3) the costs to implement the rule; discuss, or clarify any issue related to the use the United States mails in the same (4) any recordkeeping requirements im- subject final rule or the preparation of the manner and under the same conditions as posed by the rule; and report under paragraph (2). other departments and agencies of the Fed- (5) any other technical or general issues re- (2) REPORT.—Except as provided in section eral Government. lated to the rule. 204(b), not later than 5 days before the (g) NONCOMPENSATION OF MEMBERS.—Mem- (c) AVAILABILITY OF SURVEY RESULTS.—The issuance of a final rule, the chairperson shall bers of the review panel shall serve without results and costs of each survey conducted submit a report in accordance with section compensation in addition to that received under this section shall be made available— 204(a). for their services as officers or employees of (1) to each interested Federal agency; and SEC. 203. SMALL BUSINESS ADVOCACY REVIEW the Federal Government. (2) upon request, to any other interested PANELS. (h) DETAIL OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES.— party, including organizations, individuals, (a) GENERAL DUTIES.—Before any publica- Any Federal Government employee may be State and local governments, and the Con- tion described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of detailed to a review panel without reim- gress. section 202(c)(1) of a proposed significant bursement, and such detail shall be without SEC. 206. JUDICIAL REVIEW. rule, and again before the issuance of such interruption or loss of civil service status or No action or inaction of a review panel, in- rule as a final rule, the review panel shall, in privilege. cluding any recommendations or advice of a (i) CONSULTATION WITH OTHER ENTITIES.— accordance with this subtitle provide tech- review panel or any procedure or process of In carrying out this subtitle, the chairperson nical guidance to the agency, including guid- a review panel may be subject to judicial re- shall consult and coordinate, to the max- ance relating to the following issues— view by a court of the United States under imum extent practicable, the activities of (1) the applicability of the proposed rule to chapter 7 of title 5, United States Code, or the review panel with each office of the agen- small businesses; any other provision of law. (2) compliance with the rule by small busi- cy that is responsible for the provision of nesses; data or technical advice concerning a signifi- SUBTITLE B—REGULATORY OMBUDSMEN (3) the consistency or redundancy of the cant rule. SEC. 211. SMALL BUSINESS AND AGRICULTURE proposed rule with respect to other Federal, SEC. 204. REPORT. OMBUDSMEN. State, and local laws or regulations and rec- (a) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in The Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 631 et ordkeeping requirement imposed on small subsection (b), the chairperson shall, in ac- seq.) is amended— businesses; and cordance with section 202(f)(2), submit to the (1) by redesignating section 30 as section (4) any other concerns posed by the pro- appropriate employees of the agency who 31; and posed rule that may impact significantly would be responsible for carrying out the (2) by inserting after section 29 the fol- upon small businesses. subject significant rule and to the appro- lowing new section: (b) MEMBERSHIP.—Each review panel shall priate committees of the Senate and the ‘‘SEC. 30. OVERSIGHT OF REGULATORY ENFORCE- be composed wholly of full-time officers or House of Representatives a report, which MENT. employees of the Federal Government, and shall include— ‘‘(a) DEFINITIONS.—For purposes of this sec- shall include— (1) the findings and recommendations of tion, the following definitions shall apply: (1) the chairperson; the review panel with respect to the signifi- ‘‘(1) BOARD.—The term ‘Board’ means a (2) not less than 1 nor more than 3 mem- cant rule, including both the majority and Small Business Regulatory Fairness Board bers appointed by the chairperson from minority views of the review panel members, established under subsection (c). among employees of the agency who would regardless of the consensus of opinions that ‘‘(2) OMBUDSMAN.—The term ‘ombudsman’ be responsible for carrying out the subject may derive from the meetings of the review means a Regional Small Business and Agri- significant rule; panel; culture Ombudsman designated under sub- (3) 1 member appointed by the Adminis- (2) a summary of the views and rec- section (b). trator of the Office of Information and Regu- ommendations of each individual designated ‘‘(3) REGION.—The term ‘region’ means any latory Affairs within the Office of Manage- representative with respect to the signifi- area for which the Administrator has estab- ment and Budget from among the employees cant rule, including each individual des- lished a regional office of the Administration of that office who have specific knowledge of ignated representative’s recommendation pursuant to section 4(a). or responsibilities of the agency that would with respect to whether a survey should be ‘‘(4) RULE.—The term ‘rule’ has the same be responsible for carrying out the subject conducted under section 205; and meaning as in section 601(2) of title 5, United significant rule; and (3) recommendations of the review panel States Code. (4) 1 member appointed by the Chief Coun- regarding whether a survey with respect to ‘‘(b) OMBUDSMAN.— sel for Advocacy from among the employees the subject significant rule should be con- ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days of the Office. ducted under section 205, and— after the date of enactment of the Com- (c) PERIOD OF APPOINTMENT; VACANCIES.— (A) If so— prehensive Regulatory Reform Act of 1995, (1) PERIOD OF APPOINTMENT.—Each review (i) a timeframe during which the survey the Administrator shall designate Regional panel member, other than the chairperson, should be conducted, taking into account the Small Business and Agriculture Ombudsmen shall be appointed for a term beginning on time required to implement the rule and to in accordance with this subsection. the date on which the appointment is made gather appropriate data; and ‘‘(2) DUTIES.—Each ombudsman designated and ending on the date on which the report (ii) any recommendations of the review under paragraph (1) shall— or written record is submitted under section panel regarding the contents of the survey; ‘‘(A) solicit and receive comments from 204. and small business concerns regarding the en- (2) VACANCIES.—Any vacancy on a review (B) if not, the reasons why the survey is forcement activities of federal agencies and panel shall not affect the powers of the re- not recommended. maintain such comments on a confidential view panel, but shall be filled in the same (b) FAILURE TO SUBMIT REPORT.—If the basis; manner as the original appointment. chairperson fails to submit a report under ‘‘(B) based on comments received under (d) QUORUM.—A quorum for the conduct of subsection (a), not later than the date on subparagraph (A), annually assign and pub- business by a review panel shall consist of 1 which the final rule is issued, the chair- lish a small business responsiveness rating member appointed from each of paragraphs person shall— to each federal agency as appropriate; (2) through (4) of subsection (b). (1) prepare a written record of such failure ‘‘(C) publish periodic reports compiling the (e) MEETINGS.— detailing the reasons therefore; and comments received under subparagraph (A);

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10164 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995

‘‘(D) coordinate the activities of the Small ‘‘(E) DONATIONS.—The Board may accept, days after the date of the enactment of this Business Regulatory Fairness Board estab- use, and dispose of donations of services or Act. lished under subsection (c); and property. ‘‘(E) establish a toll-free telephone number ‘‘(9) BOARD PERSONNEL MATTERS.— ASHCROFT AMENDMENT NO. 1786 to receive comments from small business ‘‘(A) COMPENSATION.—Members of the concerns under subparagraph (A).’’. Board shall serve without compensation. Mr. ASHCROFT proposed an amend- SEC. 212. SMALL BUSINESS REGULATORY FAIR- ‘‘(B) TRAVEL EXPENSES.—Members of the ment to amendment No. 1487 proposed NESS BOARDS. Board shall be allowed travel expenses, in- by Mr. DOLE to the bill, S. 343, supra; Section 30 of the Small Business Act (as cluding per diem in lieu of subsistence, at as follows: added by section 211 of this Act) is amended rates authorized for employees of agencies At the end, add the following new title: by adding at the end the following new sub- under subchapter I of chapter 57 of title 5, ‘‘TITLE II—URBAN REGULATORY RELIEF section: United States Code, while away from their ZONES ‘‘(c) SMALL BUSINESS REGULATORY FAIR- homes or regular places of business in the NESS BOARDS.— performance of services for the Board.’’. SECTION 201. SHORT TITLE. ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Urban Regu- SEC. 213. JUDICIAL REVIEW. after the date of enactment of the Com- latory Relief Zone Act of 1995’’. (a) PROHIBITION.—No action or inaction of prehensive Regulatory Reform Act of 1995, a Regional Small Business and Agriculture SEC. 202. FINDINGS. the Administrator shall establish in each re- Ombudsman or a Small Business Regulatory The Congress finds that— gion a Small Business Regulatory Fairness (1) the likelihood that a proposed business Fairness Board, including any recommenda- Board in accordance with this subsection. site will comply with many government reg- tion or advice of a Regional Small Business ‘‘(2) DUTIES.—Each Board established under ulations is inversely related to the length of and Agriculture Ombudsman or a Small paragraph (1) shall— time over which a site has been utilized for Business Regulatory Fairness Board or any ‘‘(A) advise the ombudsman on matters of commercial and/or industrial purposes in the procedure or process of a Regional Small concern to small business concerns relating past, thus rendering older sites in urban Business and Agriculture Ombudsman or a to the enforcement activities of covered areas the sites most unlikely to be chosen Small Business Regulatory Fairness Board, agencies; for new development and thereby forcing may be subject to judicial review by a court ‘‘(B) issue advisory findings and rec- new development away from the areas most of the United States under chapter 7 of title ommendations with respect to small busi- in need of economic growth and job creation; 5, United States Code, or any other provision ness concerns; and of law. ‘‘(C) review and comment on, prior to pub- (2) broad Federal regulations often have (b) DEFINITION.—For purposes of this sec- lication— unintended social and economic con- tion— ‘‘(i) each small business responsiveness rat- sequences in urban areas where such regula- (1) the term ‘‘Regional Small Business and ing assigned under subsection (b)(2)(B); and tions, among other thing— ‘‘(ii) each periodic report prepared under Agriculture Ombudsman’’ means any om- (A) offend basic notions of common sense, subsection (b)(2)(C); and budsman designated under section 30(b) of particularly when applied to individual sites; ‘‘(D) prepare written opinions regarding the Small Business Act, as added by section (B) adversely impact economic stability; the reasonableness and understandability of 211 of this Act. (C) result in the unnecessary loss of exist- rules issued by covered agencies. (2) the term ‘‘Small Business Regulatory ing jobs and businesses; ‘‘(3) MEMBERSHIP.—Each Board shall con- Fairness Board’’ means any board estab- (D) undermine new economic development, sist of five members appointed by the Ad- lished under section 30(c) of the Small Busi- especially in previously used sites; ministrator for terms of three years. ness Act, as added by section 212 of this Act. (E) create undue economic hardships while ‘‘(4) VACANCIES.—Any vacancy on the failing significantly to protect human Board— health, particularly in areas where economic ‘‘(i) shall not affect the powers of the MCCAIN (AND LIEBERMAN) AMENDMENT NO. 1785 development is urgently needed in order to Board; and improve the health and welfare of residents ‘‘(ii) shall be filled in the same manner and Mr. HATCH (for Mr. MCCAIN, for him- over the long term; and under the same terms and conditions as the self and Mr. LIEBERMAN) proposed an (F) contribute to social deterioration to original appointment. such a degree that high unemployment, ‘‘(5) CHAIRPERSON.—The Board shall select amendment to amendment No. 1487, crime, and other economic and social prob- a Chairperson from among the members of proposed by Mr. DOLE, the bill. S. 343, lems create the greatest risk to the health the Board. supra; as follows: and well-being of urban residents. ‘‘(6) MEETINGS.— At the end of the amendment and insert SEC. 203. PURPOSES. ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The Board shall meet at the following new section: the call of the Chairperson. The purposes of this title are to— ‘‘(B) INITIAL MEETING.—Not later than 90 SEC. . REPEAL OF MEDICARE AND MEDICAID (1) enable qualifying cities to provide for days after the date on which all members of COVERAGE DATA BANK. the general well-being, health, safety and se- the Board have been appointed, the Board (A) REPEAL.— curity for their residents living in distressed shall hold its first meeting. (1) IN GENERAL.—Section 13581 of the Omni- areas by empowering such cities to obtain ‘‘(7) QUORUM.—A majority of the members bus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 is selective relief from Federal regulations that of the Board shall constitute a quorum for hereby repealed. undermine economic stability and develop- the conduct of business, but a lesser number (2) APPLICATION OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY ment in distressed areas within the city; and may hold hearings. ACT.—The Social Security Act shall be ap- (2) authorize Federal agencies to waive the ‘‘(8) POWERS OF THE BOARD.— plied and administered as if section 13581 of application of specific Federal regulations in ‘‘(A) HEARINGS.—The Board may, for the the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of distressed urban areas designated as Urban purpose of carrying out the provisions of this 1993 (and the amendments made by such sec- Regulatory Relief Zones by an Economic De- section, hold such hearings, sit and act at tion) had not been enacted. velopment Commission— such times and places, take such testimony, (b) STUDY AND REPORT.— (A) upon application through the Office of and receive such evidence as the Board deter- (1) STUDY.—The Secretary of Health and Management and Budget by an Economic De- mines to be appropriate. Human Services (hereafter in this subsection velopment Commission established by a ‘‘(B) WITNESS ALLOWANCES AND FEES.—Sec- referred to as the ‘‘Secretary’’) shall conduct qualifying city pursuant to section 205; and tion 1821 of title 28, United States Code, shall a study on how to achieve the objectives of (B) Upon a determination by the appro- apply to witnesses requested to appear at the data bank described in section 1144 of the priate Federal agency that granting such a any hearing of the Board. The per diem and Social Security Act (as in effect on the day waiver will not substantially endanger mileage allowances for any witness shall be before the date of the enactment of this Act) health or safety. paid from funds available to pay the ex- in the most cost-effective manner, taking SEC. 204. ELIGIBILITY FOR WAIVERS. penses of the Board. into account— (a) ELIGIBLE CITIES.—The mayor or chief ‘‘(C) INFORMATION FROM FEDERAL AGEN- (A) the administrative burden of such data executive officer of a city may establish an CIES.—Upon the request of the Chairperson, bank on private sector entities and govern- Economic Development Commission to carry the Board may secure directly from the head ments, out the purposes of section 205 if the city has of any Federal department or agency such (B) the possible duplicative reporting re- a population greater than 200,000 according information as the Board considers nec- quirements of the Health Care Financing Ad- to: essary to carry out this section, other than ministration in effect on such date of enact- (1) the U.S. Census Bureau’s 1992 estimate any material described in section 552(b) of ment, and for city populations; or title 5, United States Code. (C) the legal ability of such entities and (2) beginning six months after the enact- ‘‘(D) POSTAL SERVICES.—The Board may governments to acquire the required infor- ment of this title, the U.S. Census Bureau’s use the United States mails in the same mation. latest estimate for city populations. manner and under the same conditions as (2) REPORT.—The Secretary shall report to (b) DISTRESSED AREA.—Any census tract other departments and agencies of the Fed- the Congress on the results of the study de- within a city shall qualify as a distressed eral Government. scribed in paragraph (1) by not later than 180 area if—

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10165 (1) 33 percent or more of the resident popu- (C) creates undue economic hardships in agency to waive any regulation or Executive lation in the census tract is below the pov- the zone; or order that prohibits, or the purpose of which erty line; or (D) contributes to the social deterioration is to protect persons against, discrimination (2) 45 percent or more of out-of-school of the zone; and on the basis of race, color, religion, gender, males aged 16 and over in the census tract (2) if waived, will not substantially endan- or national origin. worked less than 26 weeks in the preceding ger health or safety. (h) APPLICABLE PROCEDURES.—A waiver of year; or (b) REQUEST FOR WAIVER.—(1) An Economic a regulation under subsection (e) shall not be (3) 36 percent or more families with chil- Development Commission shall submit a re- considered to be a rule, rulemaking, or regu- dren under age 18 in the census tract have an quest for the waiver of Federal regulations lation under chapter 5 of title 5, United unmarried parent as head of the household; to the Office of Management and Budget. States Code. The Federal agency shall pub- (2) Such request shall— or lish a notice in the Federal Register stating (A) identify the area designated as an (4) 17 percent or more of the resident fami- any waiver of a regulation under this sec- Urban Regulatory Relief Zone by the Eco- lies in the census tract received public as- tion. sistance income in the preceding year. nomic Development Commission; (B) identify all regulations for which the (i) EFFECT OF SUBSEQUENT AMENDMENT OF SEC. 205. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMIS- REGULATIONS.—If a Federal agency amends a SIONS. Economic Development Commission seeks a waiver; and regulation for which a waiver under this sec- (a) PURPOSE.—The mayor or chief execu- (C) explain the reasons that waiver of the tion is in effect, the agency shall not change tive officer of a qualifying city under section regulations would economically benefit the the waiver to impose additional require- 204 may appoint an Economic Development Urban Regulatory Relief Zone and the data ments. Commission for the purpose of— supporting such determination; (j) EXPIRATION OF WAIVERS.—No waiver of a (1) designating distressed areas, or a com- (c) REVIEW OF WAIVER REQUEST.—No later regulation under this section shall expire un- bination of distressed areas with one another than 60 days after receiving the request for less the Federal agency determines that a or with adjacent industrial or commercial waiver, the Officer of Management and budg- continuation of the waiver substantially en- areas, within the city as Urban Regulatory et shall— dangers health or safety. Relief Zones; and (1) review the request for waiver; (2) making application through the Office (2) determine whether the request for waiv- SEC. 208. DEFINITIONS. of Management and Budget to waive the ap- er is complete and in compliance with this For purposes of this Act, the term— plication of specific Federal regulations title, using the most recent census data (1) ‘‘regulation’’ means— within such Urban Regulatory Relief Zones. available at the time each application is sub- (A) any rule as defined under section 551(4) (b) COMPOSITION.—To the greatest extent mitted; and of title 5, United States Code; or practicable, an Economic Development Com- (3) after making a determination under (B) any rulemaking conducted on the mission shall include— paragraph (2)— record after opportunity for an agency hear- (1) residents representing a demographic (A) submit the request for waiver to the ing under sections 556 and 557 of such title; cross section of the city population; and Federal agency that promulgated the regula- (2) members of the business community, tion and notify the requesting Economic De- (2) ‘‘Urban Regulatory Relief Zone’’ means private civic organizations, employers, em- velopment Commission of the date on which an area designated under section 205; ployees, elected officials, and State and local the request was submitted to such agency; or (3) ‘‘qualifying city’’ means a city which is regulatory authorities. (B) notify the requesting Economic Devel- eligible to establish an Economic Develop- (c) LIMITATION.—No more than one Eco- opment Commission that the request is not ment Commission under section 204; nomic Development Commission shall be es- in compliance with this Act with an expla- (4) ‘‘industrial or commercial area’’ means tablished or designated within a qualifying nation of the basis for such determination. any part of a census tract zoned for indus- city. (d) MODIFICATION OF WAIVER REQUESTS.— trial or commercial use which is adjacent to SEC. 206. LOCAL PARTICIPATION. An Economic Development Commission may a census tract which is a distressed area pur- (a) PUBLIC HEARINGS.—Before designating submit modifications to a waiver request. suant to section 205(b); and an area as an Urban Regulatory Relief Zone, The provisions of subsection (c) shall apply (5) ‘‘poverty line’’ has the same meaning as an Economic Development Commission es- to a modified waiver as of the date such such term is defined under section 673(2) of tablished pursuant to section 205 shall hold a modification is received by the Office of the Community Services Block Grant Act (42 public hearing, after giving adequate public Management and Budget. U.S.C. 9902(2)).’’. notice, for the purpose of soliciting the opin- (e) WAIVER DETERMINATION.—(1) No later ions and suggestions of those persons who than 120 days after receiving a request for f will be affected by such designation. waiver under subsection (c) from the Office (b) INDIVIDUAL REQUESTS.—The Economic of Management and Budget, a Federal agen- Development Commission shall establish a cy shall— PORTRAIT MONUMENT process by which individuals may submit re- (A) make a determination of whether to RESTORATION ACT quests to the Economic Development Com- waive a regulation in whole or in part; and mission to include specific Federal regula- (B) provide written notice to the request- tions in the Commission’s application to the ing Economic Development Commission of such determination. Office of Management and Budget seeking STEVENS AMENDMENT NO. 1787 waivers of Federal regulations. (2) Subject to subsection (g), a Federal agency shall deny a request for a waiver only (c) AVAILABILITY OF COMMISSION DECI- Mr. HATCH (for Mr. STEVENS) pro- if the waiver substantially endangers health SION.—After holding a hearing under para- posed an amendment to the concurrent graph (a) and before submitting any waiver or safety. (3) If a Federal agency grants a waiver resolution (S. Con. Res. 21) directing applications to the Office of Management that the ‘‘Portrait Monument’’ carved and Budget pursuant to section 207, the Eco- under this subsection, the agency shall pro- nomic Development Commission shall make vide a written statement to the requesting in the likeness of Lucretia Mott, Susan publicly available— Economic Development Commission that— B. Anthony, and Elizabeth Cady Stan- (A) describes the extent of the waiver in (1) a list of all areas within the city to be ton, now in the Crypt of the Capitol, be whole or in part; and designated as Urban Regulatory Relief restored to its original state and be (B) explains the application of the waiver, Zones, if any; including guidance for the use of the waiver placed in the Capitol rotunda; as fol- (2) a list of all regulations for which the by business concerns, within the Urban Reg- lows: Economic Development Commission will re- ulatory Relief Zone. quest a waiver from a Federal agency; and Strike all after the resolving clause and in- (4) If a Federal agency denies a waiver (3) the basis for the city’s findings that the sert: ‘‘That the Architect of the Capitol under this subsection, the agency shall pro- waiver of a regulation would improve the shall— vide a written statement to the requesting health and safety and economic well-being of ‘‘(1) restore the ‘‘Portrait Monument’’ to Economic Development Commission that— its original state and place it in the Rotunda the city’s residents and the data supporting (A) explains the reasons that the waiver of the United States Capitol; and such a determination. substantially endangers health or safety; and SEC. 207. WAIVER OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS. (B) provides a scientific basis in writing for ‘‘(2) make all necessary arrangements for (A) SELECTION OF REGULATIONS.—An Eco- such determination. the rededication ceremony of such statue in nomic Development Commission may select (f) AUTOMATIC WAIVER.—If a Federal agen- the Capitol Rotunda and procession con- for waiver, within an Urban Regulatory Re- cy does not provide the written notice re- nected therewith, in cooperation with the lief Zone, Federal regulations that— quired under subsection (e) within the 120- 75th Anniversary of Woman Suffrage Task (1)(A) are unduly burdensome to business day period as required under such sub- Force. concerns located within an area designated section, the waiver shall be deemed to be ‘‘SEC. 2. The Rotunda of the Capitol is au- as an Urban Regulatory Relief Zone; or granted by the Federal agency. thorized to be used from 7 o’clock ante (B) discourages new economic development (g) LIMITATION.—No provision of this Act meridiem until 4 o’clock post meridiem on within the zone; or shall be construed to authorize any Federal August 26, 1995, for such ceremony.’’

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00087 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10166 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 FEDERAL REPORTS ELIMINATION (1) in subsection (a)— Floyd maintained a farm in Massac AND SUNSET ACT OF 1995 (A) in the first sentence— County, IL, and was a member of the (i) by striking ‘‘the Secretary of Housing Massac County Farm Bureau. His and Urban Development and’’; and strong sense of community pride and (ii) by striking ‘‘each’’, the first place it MCCAIN (AND LEVIN) AMENDMENT involvement was demonstrated by the NO. 1788 appears; and (B) in the second sentence, by striking ‘‘in- integral role he played in bringing both Mr. HATCH (for Mr. MCCAIN, for him- volved’’; and the EEI and the Allied Chemical plants self and Mr. LEVIN) proposed an amend- (2) in subsection (b)— to Massac County. He is also credited ment to the bill (S. 790) to provide for (A) by striking ‘‘The Secretary of Housing with helping solidify the Government the modification or elimination of Fed- and Urban Development and the’’ and insert- contract with F.H. McGraw and Co. for eral reporting requirements; as follows: ing ‘‘The’’; and the construction of the Atomic Energy (B) by striking ‘‘each’’. Commission project in McCracken 1. Section 1011(d): After the word ‘‘re- 11. Section 1091(a): Strike this section en- pealed,’’ insert the following: ‘‘and section tirely. County, KY. 1559 and 1560 of such Act are redesignated as 12. Section 1122(a): Strike this section en- Floyd Cougil had unquestionable per- sections 1558 and 1559, respectively.’’. tirely. sonal integrity with a genuine concern 2. Section 1011(h): After the word ‘‘re- 13. Sections 1141(a) and (d): Strike these for the well-being of his fellow man. pealed,’’ insert the following: ‘‘and sections sections entirely. His passing leaves a great void that 2518 and 2519 of such Act are redesignated as 14. Section 2121: Strike lines 6 through 12 will be felt not only by his family and sections 2517 and 2518, respectively.’’. and insert the following: 3. Section 1011(o): Strike this section en- his many friends and colleagues, but by ‘‘(g) NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE AD- tirely. the whole State of Illinois as well.∑ MINISTRATION AND REGIONAL TECHNOLOGY 4. Section 1011(r): After the word ‘‘re- TRANSFER CENTERS.—The National Aero- f pealed,’’ insert the following: ‘‘and sections nautics and Space Administration and re- 1507, 1508, 1509, and 1511 of such Act are redes- gional technology transfer centers supported DIRECTING THAT THE ‘‘PORTRAIT ignated as sections 1506, 1507, 1508, and 1509, by the National Aeronautics and Space Ad- MONUMENT’’ BE RESTORED AND respectively.’’. ministration are authorized and directed to PLACED IN THE CAPITOL RO- 5. Section 1012(e): Strike this section en- cooperate with small business development TUNDA tirely. centers participating in the program.’’. 6. Section 1012(i): Strike lines 5 through 14. Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I ask 15. Section 3001(f): Strike this section en- Insert the following: tirely. unanimous consent that the Senate ‘‘(b) An analysis and determination shall 16. Section 3003(a)(2)(A): Strike out the turn to the consideration of Senate be made, and a report on the Secretary’s phrase ‘‘Public Law 95–452.’’ Concurrent Resolution 21, now being findings and conclusions regarding such 17. Section 3003(c): Strike out the phrase held at the desk. analysis and determination under subsection ‘‘(Report No. 103–7)’’ and insert ‘‘(House Doc- (a) shall be transmitted within 90 days after The PRESIDING OFFICER. The ument No. 103–7).’’ the end of each of the following periods: clerk will report. 18. Title IV—Effective Date: Strike this ‘‘(1) The period beginning on the date of The legislative clerk read as follows: section entirely. the enactment of the Federal Reports Elimi- A concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 21) nation and Sunset Act of 1995 and ending on f directing that the ‘‘Portrait Monument’’ December 31, 1995. AUTHORITY FOR COMMITTEES TO carved in the likeness of Lucretia Mott, ‘‘(2) Each 10-year period thereafter.’’. MEET Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stan- 7. Section 1041(e): Strike out the phrase ton, now in the Crypt of the Capitol, be re- ‘‘(20 USC 2303(d)),’’ and replace it with the COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS stored to its original state and be placed in following: ‘‘(20 USC 28)’’. Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I ask unan- the Capitol Rotunda. 8. Section 1041: Insert the following: imous consent that the Committee on REPORT ON ANNUAL UPWARD MOBILITY PRO- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there GRAM ACTIVITY.—Section 2(a)(6)(A) of this Foreign Relations be authorized to objection to the immediate consider- Act of June 20, 1936 (20 U.S.C. 107a(a)(6)(A)), meet during the session of the Senate ation of the concurrent resolution? is amended by striking ‘‘and annually sub- on Monday, July 17, 1995, at 2 p.m. There being no objection, the Senate mit to the appropriate committees of Con- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without proceeded to consider the concurrent gress a report based on such evaluations,’’. objection, it is so ordered. resolution. 9. Section 1051: Insert the following: AMENDMENT NO. 1787 REPORT ON CURRENT STATUS OF COMPREHEN- f SIVE MANAGEMENT FOR NUCLEAR SAFETY RE- ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I send an SEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, AND DEMONSTRA- amendment to the desk and ask for its TION.—Section 8(c) of the Nuclear Safety Re- immediate consideration. search, Development, and Demonstration FLOYD CECEL COUGIL The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9707(c)) is repealed. clerk will report. ∑ Mr. SIMON. Mr. President, I rise REPORT ON ACTIVITIES OF THE GEOTHERMAL The legislative clerk read as follows: ENERGY COORDINATION AND MANAGEMENT today to commemorate Floyd Cecel PROJECT.—Section 302(a) of the Geothermal Cougil, a distinguished Illinoisan who The Senator from Utah [Mr. HATCH], for Energy Research, Development, and Dem- Mr. STEVENS, proposes an amendment num- passed away recently. Mr. Cougil’s bered 1787. onstration Act of 1974 (30 U.S.C. 1162(a)) is re- strong sense of community service, es- pealed.4Report on activities under the mag- pecially his involvement with local Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I ask netic fusion energy engineering act of 1980.— unanimous consent that reading of the Section 12 of the Magnetic Fusion Energy union activities was a great asset to labor relations in Illinois. amendment be dispensed with. Engineering Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9311) is re- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without pealed. At age 13, Floyd Cougil started work objection, it is so ordered. REPORT ON ACTIVITIES UNDER THE ELECTRIC at the Metropolis Box Factory in The amendment is as follows: AND HYBRID VEHICLE RESEARCH, DEVELOP- southern Illinois. In 1951, he became a MENT, AND DEMONSTRATION ACT OF 1976.—Sec- charter member of local 1301 of the La- Strike all after the resolving clause and in- tion 14 of the Electric and Hybrid Vehicle borers Union of North America and he sert: ‘‘That the Architect of the Capitol Research, Development, and Demonstration shall— Act of 1976 (15 U.S.C. 2513) is repealed. later founded the Construction and ‘‘(1) restore the ‘‘Portrait Monument’’ to REPORT ON ACTIVITIES UNDER THE METHANE General Laborers Local 1320 of the its original state and place it in the Rotunda TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, AFL. of the United States Capitol; and AND DEMONSTRATION ACT OF 1980.—Section 9 of Floyd served as trustee for the con- ‘‘(2) make all necessary arrangements for the Methane Transportation Research, De- struction area conference in Cairo, IL. the rededication ceremony of such statue in velopment, and Demonstration Act of 1980 He served with distinction on a panel the Capitol Rotunda and procession con- (15 U.S.C. 3808) is repealed. created by the Southern Illinois Uni- nected therewith, in cooperation with the 10. Section 1071(e): Strike this section en- versity to improve labor-management 75th Anniversary of Woman Suffrage Task tirely. Insert the following in its place: Force. COLLECTION OF AND ANNUAL REPORT ON RA- relations. Floyd was awarded his 50- ‘‘SEC. 2. The Rotunda of the Capitol is au- CIAL AND ETHNIC DATA.—Section 562 of the year gold pin and membership card in thorized to be used from 7 o’clock ante me- Housing and Community Development Act of 1989 for his continued service with local ridian until 4 o’clock post meridian on Au- 1987 (42 U.S.C. 3608a) is amended— 1320. gust 26, 1995, for such ceremony.’’

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00088 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10167 The PRESIDING OFFICER. The The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without (2) in subsection (b)— question is on agreeing to the amend- objection, it is so ordered. (A) by striking ‘‘The Secretary of Housing ment. The amendment is as follows: and Urban Development and the’’ and insert- The amendment (No. 1787) was agreed 1. Section 1011(d): After the word ‘‘re- ing ‘‘The’’; and (B) by striking ‘‘each’’. to. pealed,’’ insert the following: ‘‘and sections 1559 and 1560 of such Act are redesignated as 11. Section 1091(a): Strike this section en- Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I ask tirely. unanimous consent that the concur- sections 1558 and 1559, respectively.’’ 2. Section 1011(h): After the word ‘‘re- 12. Section 1122(a): Strike this section en- rent resolution be agreed to and the pealed,’’ insert the following: ‘‘and sections tirely. motion to reconsider be laid upon the 2518 and 2519 of such Act are redesignated as 13. Sections 1141 (a) and (d): Strike these table. sections 2517 and 2518, respectively.’’ sections entirely. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without 3. Section 1011(o): Strike this section en- 14. Section 2121: Strike lines 6 through 12 objection, it is so ordered. tirely. and insert the following: ‘‘(g) NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE AD- So the concurrent resolution (S. Con. 4. Section 1011(r): After the word ‘‘re- MINISTRATION AND REGIONAL TECHNOLOGY pealed,’’ insert the following: ‘‘and sections Res. 21), as amended, was agreed to. TRANSFER CENTERS.—The National Aero- 1507, 1508, 1509, and 1511 of such Act are redes- The preamble was agreed to. nautics and Space Administration and re- ignated as sections 1506, 1507, 1508, and 1509, The concurrent resolution, as amend- gional technology transfer centers supported respectively.’’ ed, with its preamble, is as follows: 5. Section 1012(e): Strike this section en- by the National Aeronautics and Space Ad- CON. RES. 21 tirely. ministration are authorized and directed to cooperate with small business development Whereas in 1995, women of America are 6. Section 1012(i): Strike lines 5 through 14. centers participating in the program.’’. celebrating the 75th anniversary of their Insert the following: 15. Section 3001(f): Strike this section en- right to participate in our government ‘‘(b) An analysis and determination shall tirely. through suffrage; be made, and a report on the Secretary’s Whereas Lucretia Mott, Elizabeth Cady findings and conclusions regarding such 16. Section 3003(a)(2)(A): Strike out the Stanton, and Susan B. Anthony were pio- analysis and determination under subsection phrase ‘‘Public Law 95–452.’’ 17. Section 3003(c): Strike out the phrase neers in the movement for women suffrage (a) shall be transmitted within 90 days after ‘‘(Report No. 103–7)’’ and insert ‘‘(House Doc- and the pursuit of equal rights; and the end of each of the following periods: Whereas, the relocation of the ‘‘Portrait ‘‘(1) The period beginning on the date of ument No. 103–7).’’ 18. Title IV—Effective Date: Strike this Monument’’ to a place of prominence and es- the enactment of the Federal Reports Elimi- section entirely. teem in the Capitol Rotunda would serve to nation and Sunset Act of 1995 and ending on honor and revere the contribution of thou- December 31, 1995. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The sands of women: Now, therefore, be it ‘‘(2) Each 10-year period thereafter.’’. question is on agreeing to the amend- Resolved by the Senate (the House of Rep- 7. Section 1041(e): Strike out the phrase ment. resentatives concurring) That the Architect of ‘‘(20 USC 2303(d)),’’ and replace it with the The amendment (No. 1788) was agreed the Capitol shall— following: ‘‘(20 USC 28)’’. to. (1) restore the ‘‘Portrait Monument’’ to its 8. Section 1041: Insert the following: Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, today, the original state and place it in the Rotunda of REPORT ON ANNUAL UPWARD MOBILITY PRO- the United States Capitol; and GRAM ACTIVITY.—Section 2(a)(6)(A) of this Senate will be voting on the passage of (2) make all necessary arrangements for Act of June 20, 1936 (20 U.S.C. 107a(a)(6)(A)), the Federal Reports Elimination and the rededication ceremony of such statue in is amended by striking ‘‘and annually sub- Sunset Act of 1995 which will eliminate the Capitol Rotunda and procession con- mit to the appropriate committees of Con- and modify over 200 outdated or unnec- nected therewith, in cooperation with the gress a report based on such evaluations,’’. essary congressionally mandated re- 75th Anniversary of Women Suffrage Task 9. Section 1051: Insert the following: porting requirements and will also Force. REPORT ON CURRENT STATUS OF COMPREHEN- place a sunset on those reports with an SEC. 2. The Rotunda of the Capitol is au- SIVE MANAGEMENT FOR NUCLEAR SAFETY RE- annual, semiannual, or other regular thorized to be used from 7 o’clock ante me- SEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, AND DEMONSTRA- ridian until 4 o’clock post meridian on Au- TION.—Section 8(c) of the Nuclear Safety Re- periodic reporting requirement 4 years gust 26, 1995, for such ceremony. search, Development, and Demonstration after the bill’s enactment. The passage f Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9707(c)) is repealed. of this piece of legislation will help to REPORT ON ACTIVITIES OF THE GEOTHERMAL improve the efficiency of agency oper- FEDERAL REPORTS ELIMINATION ENERGY COORDINATION AND MANAGEMENT ations by reducing staff time in and re- AND SUNSET ACT PROJECT.—Section 302(a) of the Geothermal sources spent on producing unneces- Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I ask Energy Research, Development, and Dem- sary reports to Congress. unanimous consent that the Senate onstration Act of 1974 (30 U.S.C. 1162(a)) is re- The Congressional Budget Office esti- proceed to the immediate consider- pealed. REPORT ON ACTIVITIES UNDER THE MAGNETIC mates that enactment of this legisla- ation of calendar No. 108, S. 790, the FUSION ENERGY ENGINEERING ACT OF 1980.—Sec- tion could result in savings of up to $5 Federal Reports Elimination and Sun- tion 12 of the Magnetic Fusion Energy Engi- to $10 million even without factoring in set Act. neering Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9311) is re- the savings from the sunset provision. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The pealed. The legislation that we will be voting clerk will report. REPORT ON ACTIVITIES UNDER THE ELECTRIC on today is similar to the bill Senator The bill clerk read as follows: AND HYBRID VEHICLE RESEARCH, DEVELOP- COHEN and I introduced last year, S. A bill (S. 790) to provide for modification MENT, AND DEMONSTRATION ACT OF 1976.—Sec- 2156. That bill contained nearly 300 rec- tion 14 of the Electric and Hybrid Vehicle or elimination of Federal reporting require- ommendations for eliminations or ments. Research, Development, and Demonstration Act of 1976 (15 U.S.C. 2513) is repealed. modifications, and was the product of The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there REPORT ON ACTIVITIES UNDER THE METHANE an extensive process that started with objection to the immediate consider- TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, recommendations from executive and ation of the bill? AND DEMONSTRATION ACT OF 1980.—Section 9 independent agencies. Senator COHEN There being no objection, the Senate of the Methane Transportation Research, De- and I wrote to all 89 executive and proceeded to consider the bill. velopment, and Demonstration Act of 1980 independent agencies and asked that (15 U.S.C. 3808) is repealed. AMENDMENT NO. 1788 they identify reports required by law 10. Section 1071(e): Strike this section en- Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I send an tirely. Insert the following in its place: that they believe are no longer nec- amendment to the desk and ask for its COLLECTION OF AND ANNUAL REPORT ON RA- essary or useful and, therefore, that immediate consideration. CIAL AND ETHNIC DATA.—Section 562 of the could be eliminated or modified. We The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Housing and Community Development Act of stressed the importance of a clear and clerk will report. 1987 (42 U.S.C. 3608a) is amended— substantiated justification for each The legislative clerk read as follows: (1) in subsection (a)— recommendation made. (A) in the first sentence— The Senator from Utah [Mr. HATCH], for S. 2156 was unanimously approved by (i) by striking ‘‘the Secretary of Housing Mr. MCCAIN, for himself and Mr. LEVIN, pro- the Governmental Affairs Committee poses an amendment numbered 1788. and Urban Development and’’; and (ii) by striking ‘‘each’’, the first place it on August 2, 1994. Senators GLENN, Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I ask appears; and ROTH, STEVENS, and MCCAIN cospon- unanimous consent that reading of the (B) in the second sentence, by striking in- sored the bill. Unfortunately, the Sen- amendment be dispensed with. volved’’; and ate was unable to act on the bill before

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00089 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10168 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 the close of the 103d Congress. But I am So the bill (S. 790), as amended, was Subtitle H—Federal Retirement Thrift more hopeful that both Houses of Con- passed, as follows: Investment Board gress will pass this very timely piece of S. 790 Sec. 2081. Reports eliminated. legislation this year. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Rep- Subtitle I—General Services Administration In March 1995, the Senate agreed to resentatives of the United States of America in Sec. 2091. Reports eliminated. include the language for S. 2156 in the Congress assembled, Subtitle J—Interstate Commerce form of two separate amendments to S. SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. Commission 244, the Paperwork Reduction Act of This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Federal Re- Sec. 2101. Reports eliminated. 1995. The amendments, however, were ports Elimination and Sunset Act of 1995’’. Subtitle K—Legal Services Corporation struck in conference. But the chairman SEC. 2. TABLE OF CONTENTS. Sec. 2111. Reports modified. of the House Committee on Govern- The table of contents for this Act is as fol- Subtitle L—National Aeronautics and Space ment Reform and Oversight—Rep- lows: Administration resentative WILLIAM CLINGER—pro- Sec. 1. Short title. Sec. 2121. Reports eliminated. Sec. 2. Table of contents. posed to combine and introduce the Subtitle M—National Council on Disability TITLE I—DEPARTMENTS amendments as a free-standing piece of Sec. 2131. Reports eliminated. Subtitle A—Department of Agriculture legislation in the House of Representa- Subtitle N—National Science Foundation tives. The Senate also decided to com- Sec. 1011. Reports eliminated. Sec. 2141. Reports eliminated. bine the amendments into our piece of Sec. 1012. Reports modified. Subtitle O—National Transportation Safety Subtitle B—Department of Commerce legislation—S. 790—and placed directly Board onto the Senate Calendar for imme- Sec. 1021. Reports eliminated. Sec. 2151. Reports modified. diate consideration since the language Sec. 1022. Reports modified. Subtitle P—Neighborhood Reinvestment had previously been approved as Subtitle C—Department of Defense Corporation amendments. Sec. 1031. Reports eliminated. Sec. 2161. Reports eliminated. S. 790 will eliminate 157 reports and Subtitle D—Department of Education Subtitle Q—Nuclear Regulatory Commission modify 59 reports. The legislation also Sec. 1041. Reports eliminated. Sec. 2171. Reports modified. includes a modified version of Senator Sec. 1042. Reports modified. Subtitle R—Office of Personnel Management MCCAIN’S sunset provision which will Subtitle E—Department of Energy eliminate those reports with an an- Sec. 2181. Reports eliminated. Sec. 1051. Reports eliminated. Sec. 2182. Reports modified. nual, semi-annual, or regular periodic Sec. 1052. Reports modified. Subtitle S—Office of Thrift Supervision reporting basis 4 years after the bill’s Subtitle F—Department of Health and enactment, while allowing Members of Human Services Sec. 2191. Reports modified. Subtitle T—Panama Canal Commission Congress to reauthorize those reports Sec. 1061. Reports eliminated. it deems necessary in carrying out ef- Sec. 1062. Reports modified. Sec. 2201. Reports eliminated. fective Congressional oversight. the Subtitle G—Department of Housing and Subtitle U—Postal Service sunset provision does not apply to any Urban Development Sec. 2211. Reports modified. reports required under the Inspector Sec. 1071. Reports eliminated. Subtitle V—Railroad Retirement Board General Act of 1978 or the Chief Finan- Sec. 1072. Reports modified. Sec. 2221. Reports modified. cial Officers Act of 1990. Subtitle H—Department of the Interior Subtitle W—Thrift Depositor Protection The House of Representatives cir- Sec. 1081. Reports eliminated. Oversight Board culated its reports elimination and Sec. 1082. Reports modified. Sec. 2231. Reports modified. sunset companion bill to all of its ap- Subtitle I—Department of Justice Subtitle X—United States Information propriate committees in order to re- Sec. 1091. Reports eliminated. Agency ceive their input on the items slated Subtitle J—Department of Labor Sec. 2241. Reports eliminated. for elimination and modification. Since TITLE III—REPORTS BY ALL that time, the House has requested sev- Sec. 1101. Reports eliminated. Sec. 1102. Reports modified. DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES eral minor changes—the overwhelming Subtitle K—Department of State Sec. 3001. Reports eliminated. majority of which are technical, having Sec. 3002. Reports modified. Sec. 1111. Reports eliminated. no effect whatsoever on those items Sec. 3003. Termination of reporting require- being eliminated and modified. For ex- Subtitle L—Department of Transportation ments. ample, a certain legal cite had to be Sec. 1121. Reports eliminated. TITLE I—DEPARTMENTS Sec. 1122. Reports modified. corrected. In other cases, the House re- Subtitle A—Department of Agriculture Subtitle M—Department of the Treasury quested that certain reports selected SEC. 1011. REPORTS ELIMINATED. for elimination be kept in order to con- Sec. 1131. Reports eliminated. (a) REPORT ON MONITORING AND EVALUA- duct proper oversight functions. The Sec. 1132. Reports modified. TION.—Section 1246 of the Food Security Act House has also requested the elimi- Subtitle N—Department of Veterans Affairs of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3846) is repealed. nation of five additional Department of Sec. 1141. Reports eliminated. (b) REPORT ON RETURN ON ASSETS.—Section 2512 of the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, Energy reports beyond those listed in TITLE II—INDEPENDENT AGENCIES and Trade Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 1421b) is S. 790. The Senate Committee on En- Subtitle A—Action amended— ergy and Natural Resources—both the Sec. 2011. Reports eliminated. (1) in subsection (a), by striking ‘‘(a) IM- majority and minority sides—con- Subtitle B—Environmental Protection PROVING’’ and all that follows through curred with the House on this matter. Agency ‘‘FORECASTS.—’’; and (2) by striking subsection (b). On the Senate side, one report slated Sec. 2021. Reports eliminated. for elimination was reinstated. As of (c) REPORT ON FARM VALUE OF AGRICUL- Subtitle C—Equal Employment Opportunity TURAL PRODUCTS.—Section 2513 of the Food, this moment, the language for the Sen- Commission ate and House bills are identical. Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of Both the Senate and House of Rep- Sec. 2031. Reports modified. 1990 (7 U.S.C. 1421c) is repealed. (d) REPORT ON ORIGIN OF EXPORTS OF PEA- resentatives are ready to eliminate Subtitle D—Federal Aviation Administration NUTS.—Section 1558 of the Food, Agriculture, those reports that are never or are sim- Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. Sec. 2041. Reports eliminated. ply dropped into file cabinets and 958) is repealed and sections 1559 and 1560 of wastebaskets, never to be seen again. Subtitle E—Federal Communications such Act are redesignated as sections 1558 In this era, we must ensure that our Commission and 1559, respectively. scarce resources are utilized efficiently Sec. 2051. Reports eliminated. (e) REPORT ON REPORTING OF IMPORTING toward productive activities. I urge my Subtitle F—Federal Deposit Insurance FEES.—Section 407 of the Agricultural Trade Corporation Development and Assistance Act of 1954 (7 colleagues to support this bipartisan U.S.C. 1736a) is amended— Sec. 2061. Reports eliminated. piece of legislation. (1) by striking subsection (b); and The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there Subtitle G—Federal Emergency Management (2) by redesignating subsections (c) is no objection, the bill is deemed read Agency through (h) as subsections (b) through (g), the third time, and passed. Sec. 2071. Reports eliminated. respectively.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00090 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10169

(f) REPORT ON AGRICULTURAL INFORMATION (2) by redesignating paragraph (3) as para- (f) 5-YEAR PLAN FOR FOOD AND AGRICUL- EXCHANGE WITH IRELAND.—Section 1420 of graph (2). TURAL SCIENCES.—Section 1407(f)(2) of the the Food Security Act of 1985 (Public Law (v) REPORT ON ECONOMIC IMPACT OF ANIMAL National Agricultural Research, Extension, 99–198; 99 Stat. 1551) is amended— DAMAGE ON AQUACULTURE INDUSTRY.—Sec- and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. (1) in subsection (a), by striking ‘‘(a)’’; and tion 1475(e) of the National Agricultural Re- 3122(f)(2)) is amended by striking the second (2) by striking subsection (b). search, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act sentence. (g) REPORT ON POTATO INSPECTION.—Sec- of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 3322(e)) is amended— (g) REPORT ON EXAMINATION OF FEDERALLY tion 1704 of the Food Security Act of 1985 (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ‘‘(1)’’; and SUPPORTED AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH AND EX- (Public Law 99–198; 7 U.S.C. 499n note) is (2) by striking paragraph (2). TENSION PROGRAMS.—Section 1408(g)(1) of the amended by striking the second sentence. (w) REPORT ON AWARDS MADE BY THE NA- National Agricultural Research, Extension, (h) REPORT ON TRANSPORTATION OF FER- TIONAL RESEARCH INITIATIVE AND SPECIAL and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. TILIZER AND AGRICULTURAL CHEMICALS.—Sec- GRANTS.—Section 2 of the Act of August 4, 3123(g)(1)) is amended by inserting ‘‘may pro- tion 2517 of the Food, Agriculture, Conserva- 1965 (7 U.S.C. 450i), is amended— vide’’ before ‘‘a written report’’. tion, and Trade Act of 1990 (Public Law 101– (1) by striking subsection (l); and (h) REPORT ON EFFECTS OF FOREIGN OWNER- 624; 104 Stat. 4077) is repealed and sections (2) by redesignating subsection (m) as sub- SHIP OF AGRICULTURAL LAND.—Section 5(b) of 2518 and 2519 of such Act are redesignated as section (l). the Agricultural Foreign Investment Disclo- sections 2517 and 2518, respectively. (x) REPORT ON PAYMENTS MADE UNDER RE- sure Act of 1978 (7 U.S.C. 3504(b)) is amended SEARCH FACILITIES ACT.—Section 8 of the Re- (i) REPORT ON UNIFORM END-USE VALUE to read as follows: search Facilities Act (7 U.S.C. 390i) is re- TESTS.—Section 307 of the Futures Trading ‘‘(b) An analysis and determination shall pealed. Act of 1986 (Public Law 99–641; 7 U.S.C. 76 be made, and a report on the Secretary’s (y) REPORT ON FINANCIAL AUDIT REVIEWS OF note) is amended by striking subsection (c). findings and conclusions regarding such STATES WITH HIGH FOOD STAMP PARTICIPA- (j) REPORT ON PROJECT AREAS WITH HIGH analysis and determination under subsection TION.—The first sentence of section 11(l) of FOOD STAMP PAYMENT ERROR RATES.—Sec- the Food Stamp Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 2020(l)) (a) shall be transmitted within 90 days after tion 16(i) of the Food Stamp Act of 1977 (7 is amended by striking ‘‘, and shall, upon the end of each of the following periods: U.S.C. 2025(i)) is amended by striking para- completion of the audit, provide a report to ‘‘(1) The period beginning on the date of graph (3). Congress of its findings and recommenda- the enactment of the Federal Reports Elimi- (k) REPORT ON EFFECT OF EFAP DISPLACE- tions within one hundred and eighty days’’. nation and Sunset Act of 1995 and ending on MENT ON COMMERCIAL SALES.—Section (z) REPORT ON RURAL TELEPHONE BANK.— December 31, 1995. 203C(a) of the Emergency Food Assistance Section 408(b)(3) of the Rural Electrification ‘‘(2) Each 10-year period thereafter.’’. Act of 1983 (7 U.S.C. 612c note) is amended by Act of 1936 (7 U.S.C. 948(b)(3)) is amended by Subtitle B—Department of Commerce striking the last sentence. striking out subparagraph (I) and redesig- SEC. 1021. REPORTS ELIMINATED. (l) REPORT ON WIC EXPENDITURES AND PAR- nating subparagraph (J) as subparagraph (I). (a) REPORT ON VOTING REGISTRATION.—Sec- TICIPATION LEVELS.—Section 17(m) of the SEC. 1012. REPORTS MODIFIED. Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1786(m)) tion 207 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (42 (a) REPORT ON ANIMAL WELFARE ENFORCE- U.S.C. 1973aa–5) is repealed. is amended— MENT.—The first sentence of section 25 of the (b) REPORT ON ESTIMATE OF SPECIAL AGRI- (1) by striking paragraphs (8) and (9); and Animal Welfare Act (7 U.S.C. 2155) is amend- CULTURAL WORKERS.—Section 210A(b)(3) of (2) by redesignating paragraphs (10) and ed— the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 (11) as paragraphs (8) and (9), respectively. (1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of para- U.S.C. 1161(b)(3)) is repealed. (m) REPORT ON WIC MIGRANT SERVICES.— graph (3); (c) REPORT ON LONG RANGE PLAN FOR PUB- Section 17 of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (2) by striking the period at the end of LIC BROADCASTING.—Section 393A(b) of the (42 U.S.C. 1786) is amended by striking sub- paragraph (4) and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and section (j). Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. (3) by adding at the end the following new 393a(b)) is repealed. (n) REPORT ON DEMONSTRATIONS INVOLVING paragraph: (d) REPORT ON STATUS, ACTIVITIES, AND EF- INNOVATIVE HOUSING UNITS.—Section 506(b) ‘‘(5) the information and recommendations FECTIVENESS OF UNITED STATES COMMERCIAL of the Housing Act of 1949 (42 U.S.C. 1476(b)) described in section 11 of the Horse Protec- CENTERS IN ASIA, LATIN AMERICA, AND AFRICA is amended by striking the last sentence. tion Act of 1970 (15 U.S.C. 1830).’’. AND PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS.—Section (o) REPORT ON LAND EXCHANGES IN COLUM- (b) REPORT ON HORSE PROTECTION ENFORCE- 401(j) of the Jobs Through Exports Act of 1992 BIA RIVER GORGE NATIONAL SCENIC AREA.— MENT.—Section 11 of the Horse Protection (15 U.S.C. 4723a(j)) is repealed. Section 9(d)(3) of the Columbia River Gorge Act of 1970 (15 U.S.C. 1830) is amended by (e) REPORT ON KUWAIT RECONSTRUCTION National Scenic Area Act (16 U.S.C. striking ‘‘On or before the expiration of thir- CONTRACTS.—Section 606(f) of the Persian 544g(d)(3)) is amended by striking the second ty calendar months following the date of en- Gulf Conflict Supplemental Authorization sentence. actment of this Act, and every twelve cal- and Personnel Benefits Act of 1991 is re- (p) REPORT ON INCOME AND EXPENDITURES endar months thereafter, the Secretary shall pealed. OF CERTAIN LAND ACQUISITIONS.—Section 2(e) submit to the Congress a report upon’’ and (f) REPORT ON UNITED STATES-CANADA of Public Law 96–586 (94 Stat. 3382) is amend- inserting the following: ‘‘As part of the re- FREE-TRADE AGREEMENT.—Section ed by striking the second sentence. port submitted by the Secretary under sec- (q) REPORT ON SPECIAL AREA DESIGNA- tion 25 of the Animal Welfare Act (7 U.S.C. 409(a)(3)(B) of the United States-Canada TIONS.—Section 1506 of the Agriculture and 2155), the Secretary shall include informa- Free-Trade Agreement Implementation Act Food Act of 1981 (16 U.S.C. 3415) is repealed tion on’’. of 1988 (19 U.S.C. 2112 note) is amended to and sections 1507, 1508, 1509, and 1511 of such (c) REPORT ON AGRICULTURAL QUARANTINE read as follows: Act are redesignated as sections 1506, 1507, INSPECTION FUND.—The Secretary of Agri- ‘‘(3) The United States members of the 1508, and 1509, respectively. culture shall not be required to submit a re- working group established under article 1907 (r) REPORT ON EVALUATION OF SPECIAL port to the appropriate committees of Con- of the Agreement shall consult regularly AREA DESIGNATIONS.—Section 1510 of the Ag- gress on the status of the Agricultural Quar- with the Committee on Finance of the Sen- riculture and Food Act of 1981 (16 U.S.C. 3419) antine Inspection fund more frequently than ate, the Committee on Ways and Means of is repealed. annually. the House of Representatives, and advisory (s) REPORT ON AGRICULTURAL PRACTICES (d) REPORT ON ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES committees established under section 135 of AND WATER RESOURCES DATABASE DEVELOP- UNDER FOOD STAMP PROGRAM.—The third the Trade Act of 1974 regarding— MENT.—Section 1485 of the Food, Agriculture, sentence of section 18(a)(1) of the Food ‘‘(A) the issues being considered by the Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. Stamp Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 2027(a)(1)) is working group; and 5505) is amended— amended— ‘‘(B) as appropriate, the objectives and (1) in subsection (a), by striking ‘‘(a) RE- (1) by striking ‘‘by the fifteenth day of strategy of the United States in the negotia- POSITORY.—’’; and each month’’ and inserting ‘‘for each quarter tions.’’. (2) by striking subsection (b). or other appropriate period’’; and (g) REPORT ON ESTABLISHMENT OF AMER- (t) REPORT ON PLANT GENOME MAPPING.— (2) by striking ‘‘the second preceding ICAN BUSINESS CENTERS AND ON ACTIVITIES OF Section 1671 of the Food, Agriculture, Con- month’s expenditure’’ and inserting ‘‘the ex- THE INDEPENDENT STATES BUSINESS AND AG- servation, and Trade Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. penditure for the quarter or other period’’. RICULTURE ADVISORY COUNCIL.—Section 305 of 5924) is amended— (e) REPORT ON PRIORITIES FOR RESEARCH, the Freedom for Russia and Emerging De- (1) by striking subsection (g); and EXTENSION, AND TEACHING.—Section 1407(f)(1) mocracies and Open Markets Support Act of (2) by redesignating subsection (h) as sub- of the National Agricultural Research, Ex- 1992 (22 U.S.C. 5825) is repealed. section (g). tension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (7 (h) REPORT ON FISHERMAN’S CONTINGENCY (u) REPORT ON APPRAISAL OF PROPOSED U.S.C. 3122(f)(1)) is amended— FUND REPORT.—Section 406 of the Outer Con- BUDGET FOR FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL (1) in the paragraph heading, by striking tinental Shelf Lands Act Amendments of SCIENCES.—Section 1408(g) of the National ‘‘ANNUAL REPORT’’ and inserting ‘‘REPORT’’; 1978 (43 U.S.C. 1846) is repealed. Agricultural Research, Extension, and and (i) REPORT ON USER FEES ON SHIPPERS.— Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 3123(g)) (2) by striking ‘‘Not later than June 30 of Section 208 of the Water Resources Develop- is amended— each year’’ and inserting ‘‘At such times as ment Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2236) is amended (1) by striking paragraph (2); and the Joint Council determines appropriate’’. by—

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00091 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10170 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995

(1) striking subsection (b); and (b) REPORT ON SUPPORTED EMPLOYMENT AC- (1) in the first sentence by striking ‘‘the (2) redesignating subsections (c), (d), (e), TIVITIES.—Subsection (c) of section 311 of the items specified in the calendar have been and (f) as subsections (b), (c), (d), and (e), re- Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 777a(c)) completed and provide all relevant forms, spectively. is amended— rules, and instructions with such notice’’ and SEC. 1022. REPORTS MODIFIED. (1) by striking paragraph (3); and inserting ‘‘a deadline included in the cal- (a) REPORT ON FEDERAL TRADE PROMOTION (2) by redesignating paragraph (4) as para- endar described in subsection (a) is not met’’; STRATEGIC PLAN.—Section 2312(f) of the Ex- graph (3). and port Enhancement Act of 1988 (15 U.S.C. (c) REPORT ON THE CLIENT ASSISTANCE PRO- (2) by striking the second sentence. 4727(f) is amended to read as follows: GRAM.—Subsection (g) of section 112 of the (d) ANNUAL REPORT ON ACTIVITIES UNDER ‘‘(f) REPORT TO THE CONGRESS.—The chair- Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 732(g)) is THE REHABILITATION ACT OF 1973.—Section 13 person of the TPCC shall prepare and submit amended— of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and (1) by striking paragraphs (4) and (5); and 712) is amended by striking ‘‘twenty’’ and in- Urban Affairs of the Senate, and the Com- (2) in paragraph (6), by striking ‘‘such re- mittee on Foreign Affairs of the House of serting ‘‘eighty’’. port or for any other’’ and inserting ‘‘any’’. (e) REPORT TO THE CONGRESS REGARDING Representatives, not later than September (d) REPORT ON THE SUMMARY OF LOCAL REHABILITATION TRAINING PROGRAMS.—The 30, 1995, and annually thereafter, a report de- EVALUATIONS OF COMMUNITY EDUCATION EM- second sentence of section 302(c) of the Reha- scribing— PLOYMENT CENTERS.—Section 370 of the Carl bilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 774(c)) is ‘‘(1) the strategic plan developed by the D. Perkins Vocational and Applied Tech- amended by striking ‘‘simultaneously with TPCC pursuant to subsection (c), the imple- nology Act (20 U.S.C. 2396h) is amended— the budget submission for the succeeding fis- mentation of such plan, and any revisions (1) in the section heading, by striking cal year for the Rehabilitation Services Ad- thereto; and ‘‘AND REPORT’’; ‘‘(2) the implementation of sections 303 and ministration’’ and inserting ‘‘by September (2) in subsection (a), by striking ‘‘(a) LOCAL 30 of each fiscal year’’. 304 of the Freedom for Russia and Emerging EVALUATION.—’’; and (f) ANNUAL AUDIT OF STUDENT LOAN INSUR- Democracies and Open Markets Support Act (3) by striking subsection (b). ANCE UND of 1992 (22 U.S.C. 5823 and 5824) concerning (e) REPORT ON THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE F .—Section 432(b) of the Higher funding for export promotion activities and VOCATIONAL EDUCATION ACT OF 1917.—Section Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1082(b)) is the interagency working groups on energy of 18 of the Vocational Education Act of 1917 (20 amended to read as follows: the TPCC.’’. U.S.C. 28) is repealed. ‘‘(b) FINANCIAL OPERATIONS RESPONSIBIL- (b) REPORT ON EXPORT POLICY.—Section (f) REPORT BY THE INTERDEPARTMENTAL ITIES.—The Secretary shall, with respect to 2314(b)(1) of the Export Enhancement Act of TASK FORCE ON COORDINATING VOCATIONAL the financial operations arising by reason of 1988 (15 U.S.C. 4729(b)(1)) is amended— EDUCATION AND RELATED PROGRAMS.—Sub- this part prepare annually and submit a (1) in subparagraph (E) by striking out section (d) of section 4 of the Carl D. Perkins budget program as provided for wholly ‘‘and’’ after the semicolon; Vocational and Applied Technology Edu- owned Government corporations by chapter (2) in subparagraph (F) by striking out the cation Act Amendments of 1990 (20 U.S.C. 91 of title 31, United States Code. The trans- period and inserting in lieu thereof a semi- 2303(d)) is repealed. actions of the Secretary, including the set- colon; and (g) REPORT ON THE EVALUATION OF THE tlement of insurance claims and of claims (3) by adding at the end thereof the fol- GATEWAY GRANTS PROGRAM.—Subparagraph for payments pursuant to section 1078 of this lowing new subparagraphs: (B) of section 322(a)(3) of the Adult Edu- title, and transactions related thereto and ‘‘(G) the status, activities, and effective- cation Act (20 U.S.C. 1203a(a)(3)(B)) is amend- vouchers approved by the Secretary in con- ness of the United States commercial centers ed by striking ‘‘and report the results of such nection with such transactions, shall be final established under section 401 of the Jobs evaluation to the Committee on Education and conclusive upon all accounting and other Through Exports Act of 1992 (15 U.S.C. 4723a); and Labor of the House of Representatives officers of the Government.’’. ‘‘(H) the implementation of sections 301 and the Committee on Labor and Human Re- Subtitle E—Department of Energy and 302 of the Freedom for Russia and sources of the Senate’’. SEC. 1051. REPORTS ELIMINATED. Emerging Democracies and Open Markets (h) REPORT ON THE BILINGUAL VOCATIONAL Support Act of 1992 (22 U.S.C. 5821 and 5822) TRAINING PROGRAM.—Paragraph (3) of section (a) REPORTS ON PERFORMANCE AND DIS- concerning American Business Centers and 441(e) of the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and POSAL OF ALTERNATIVE FUELED HEAVY DUTY the Independent States Business and Agri- Applied Technology Education Act (20 U.S.C. VEHICLES.—Paragraphs (3) and (4) of section culture Advisory Council; 2441(e)(3)) is amended by striking the last 400AA(b) of the Energy Policy and Conserva- ‘‘(I) the programs of other industrialized sentence thereof. tion Act (42 U.S.C. 6374(b)(3), 6374(b)(4)) are (i) REPORT ON ANNUAL UPWARD MOBILITY nations to assist their companies with their repealed. PROGRAM ACTIVITY.—Section 2(a)(6)(A) of the (b) REPORT ON WIND ENERGY SYSTEMS.— efforts to transact business in the inde- Act of June 20, 1936 (20 U.S.C. 107a(a)(6)(A)), pendent states of the former Soviet Union; Section 9(a)(3) of the Wind Energy Systems is amended by striking ‘‘and annually sub- Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9208(a)(3)) is repealed. and mit to the appropriate committees of Con- ‘‘(J) the trading practices of other Organi- (c) REPORT ON COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAM gress a report based on such evaluations,’’. MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR OCEAN THERMAL EN- zation for Economic Cooperation and Devel- SEC. 1042. REPORTS MODIFIED. opment nations, as well as the pricing prac- ERGY CONVERSION.—Section 3(d) of the Ocean (a) REPORT ON THE CONDITION OF BILINGUAL Thermal Energy Conversion Research, De- tices of transitional economies in the inde- EDUCATION IN THE NATION.—Section 6213 of pendent states, that may disadvantage velopment, and Demonstration Act (42 U.S.C. the Augustus F. Hawkins-Robert T. Stafford 9002(d)) is repealed. United States companies.’’. Elementary and Secondary School Improve- (d) REPORTS ON SUBSEABED DISPOSAL OF Subtitle C—Department of Defense ment Amendments of 1988 (20 U.S.C. 3303 SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL AND HIGH-LEVEL RA- SEC. 1031. REPORTS ELIMINATED. note) is amended— DIOACTIVE WASTE.—Subsections (a) and (b)(5) (a) REPORT ON SEMATECH.—Section 274 of (1) in the section heading, by striking ‘‘re- of section 224 of the Nuclear Waste Policy The National Defense Authorization Act for port on’’ and inserting ‘‘information regard- Fiscal Years 1988 and 1989 (Public Law 100– Act of 1982 (42 U.S.C. 10204(a), 10204(b)(5)) are ing’’; and repealed. 180; 101 Stat. 1071) is amended— (2) by striking the matter preceding para- (1) in section 6 by striking out the item re- (e) REPORT ON FUEL USE ACT.—Sections graph (1) and inserting ‘‘The Secretary shall 711(c)(2) and 806 of the Powerplant and Indus- lating to section 274; and collect data for program management and (2) by striking out section 274. trial Fuel Use Act of 1978 (42 U.S.C. 8421(c)(2), accountability purposes regarding—’’. 8482) are repealed. (b) REPORT ON REVIEW OF DOCUMENTATION (b) REPORT TO CONGRESS ON THE STEWART (f) REPORT ON TEST PROGRAM OF STORAGE IN SUPPORT OF WAIVERS FOR PEOPLE ENGAGED B. MCKINNEY HOMELESS ASSISTANCE ACT.— IN ACQUISITION ACTIVITIES.— Subsection (b) of section 724 of the Stewart OF REFINED PETROLEUM PRODUCTS WITHIN (1) IN GENERAL.—Section 1208 of the Na- B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act (42 THE STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE.—Sec- tional Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal U.S.C. 11434(b)) is amended by striking para- tion 160(g)(7) of the Energy Policy and Con- Year 1991 (10 U.S.C. 1701 note) is repealed. graph (4) and the first paragraph (5) and in- servation Act (42 U.S.C. 6240(g)(7)) is re- (2) CLERICAL AMENDMENT TO TABLE OF CON- serting the following: pealed. TENTS.—Section 2(b) of such Act is amended ‘‘(4) The Secretary shall prepare and sub- (g) REPORT ON NAVAL PETROLEUM AND OIL by striking out the item relating to section mit a report to the appropriate committees SHALE RESERVES PRODUCTION.—Section 7434 1208. of the Congress at the end of every other fis- of title 10, United States Code, is repealed. Subtitle D—Department of Education cal year. Such report shall— (h) REPORT ON EFFECTS OF PRESIDENTIAL SEC. 1041. REPORTS ELIMINATED. ‘‘(A) evaluate the programs and activities MESSAGE ESTABLISHING A NUCLEAR NON- (a) REPORT ON PERSONNEL REDUCTION AND assisted under this part; and PROLIFERATION POLICY ON NUCLEAR RESEARCH ANNUAL LIMITATIONS.—Subsection (a) of sec- ‘‘(B) contain the information received from AND DEVELOPMENT COOPERATIVE AGREE- tion 403 of the Department of Education Or- the States pursuant to section 722(d)(3).’’. MENTS.—Section 203 of the Department of ganization Act (20 U.S.C. 3463(a)) is amended (c) REPORT TO GIVE NOTICE TO CONGRESS.— Energy Act of 1978—Civilian Applications (22 in paragraph (2), by striking all beginning Subsection (d) of section 482 of the Higher U.S.C. 2429 note) is repealed. with ‘‘and shall,’’ through the end thereof Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1089(d)) is (i) REPORT ON WRITTEN AGREEMENTS RE- and inserting a period. amended— GARDING NUCLEAR WASTE REPOSITORY

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00092 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10171

SITES.—Section 117(c) of the Nuclear Waste (1) by inserting ‘‘, as part of the report re- thereafter as part of the report required Policy Act of 1982 (42 U.S.C. 10137(c)) is quired under section 548(b),’’ after ‘‘the Sec- under section 101(a)(3)(A), the Secretary of amended by striking the following: ‘‘If such retary shall’’; and Energy shall report on activities taken to written agreement is not completed prior to (2) by striking ‘‘promptly’’. carry out this Act.’’. the expiration of such period, the Secretary (c) REPORT ON THE PROGRESS, STATUS, AC- (k) REPORT ON NATIONAL HIGH-PERFORM- shall report to the Congress in writing not TIVITIES, AND RESULTS OF PROGRAMS REGARD- ANCE COMPUTING PROGRAM.—Section 101(a)(4) later than 30 days after the expiration of ING THE PROCUREMENT AND IDENTIFICATION OF of the High-Performance Computing Act of such period on the status of negotiations to ENERGY EFFICIENT PRODUCTS.—Section 161(d) 1991 (15 U.S.C. 5511(a)(4)) is amended— develop such agreement and the reasons why of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C. (1) in subparagraph (D), by striking ‘‘and’’ such agreement has not been completed. 8262g(d)) is amended by striking ‘‘of each at the end; Prior to submission of such report to the year thereafter,’’; and inserting ‘‘thereafter (2) by redesignating subparagraph (E) as Congress, the Secretary shall transmit such as part of the report required under section subparagraph (F); and report to the Governor of such State or the 548(b) of the National Energy Conservation (3) by inserting after subparagraph (D) the governing body of such affected Indian tribe, Policy Act,’’. following new subparagraph: as the case may be, for their review and com- (d) REPORT ON THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ‘‘(E) include the report of the Secretary of ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM.—Section ments. Such comments shall be included in Energy required by section 203(d); and’’. 548(b) of the National Energy Conservation such report prior to submission to the Con- (l) REPORT ON NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 8258(b)) is amended— gress.’’. PROGRAM.—Section 304(d) of the Nuclear (1) in paragraph (1)— (j) QUARTERLY REPORT ON STRATEGIC PE- Waste Policy Act of 1982 (42 U.S.C. 10224(d)) (A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ‘‘and’’ TROLEUM RESERVES.—Section 165(b) of the is amended to read as follows: after the semicolon; Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 ‘‘(d) AUDIT BY GAO.—If requested by either (B) by redesignating subparagraph (B) as U.S.C. 6245(b)) is repealed. House of the Congress (or any committee subparagraph (C); and (k) REPORT ON THE DEPARTMENT OF EN- thereof) or if considered necessary by the (C) by inserting after subparagraph (A) the ERGY.—The Federal Energy Administration Comptroller General, the General Account- following new subparagraph: Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 790d), is amended by ing Office shall conduct an audit of the Of- ‘‘(B) the information required under sec- striking out section 55. fice, in accord with such regulations as the tion 543(b)(2); and’’; (l) REPORT ON CURRENT STATUS OF COM- Comptroller General may prescribe. The (2) in paragraph (2), by striking ‘‘and’’ PREHENSIVE MANAGEMENT FOR NUCLEAR Comptroller General shall have access to after the semicolon; SAFETY RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, AND DEM- such books, records, accounts, and other ma- (3) in paragraph (3), by striking the period ONSTRATION.—Section 8(c) of the Nuclear terials of the Office as the Comptroller Gen- at the end and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and Safety Research, Development, and Dem- eral determines to be necessary for the prep- (4) by adding at the end the following new onstration Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9707(c)) is re- aration of such audit. The Comptroller Gen- paragraph: pealed. eral shall submit a report on the results of ‘‘(4) the information required under section (m) REPORT ON ACTIVITIES OF THE GEO- each audit conducted under this section.’’. 161(d) of the Energy Policy Act of 1992.’’. THERMAL ENERGY COORDINATION AND MAN- (e) REPORT ON ALTERNATIVE FUEL USE BY Subtitle F—Department of Health and AGEMENT PROJECT.—Section 302(a) of the SELECTED FEDERAL VEHICLES.—Section Human Services Geothermal Energy Research, Development, 400AA(b)(1)(B) of the Energy Policy and Con- SEC. 1061. REPORTS ELIMINATED. and Demonstration Act of 1974 (30 U.S.C. servation Act (42 U.S.C. 6374(b)(1)(B)) is (a) REPORT ON THE EFFECTS OF TOXIC SUB- 1162(a)) is repealed. amended by striking ‘‘and annually there- STANCES.—Subsection (c) of section 27 of the (n) REPORT ON ACTIVITIES UNDER THE MAG- after’’. Toxic Substance Control Act (15 U.S.C. NETIC FUSION ENERGY ENGINEERING ACT OF (f) REPORT ON THE OPERATION OF STATE EN- 2626(c)) is repealed. 1980.—Section 12 of the Magnetic Fusion En- ERGY CONSERVATION PLANS.—Section 365(c) of (b) REPORT ON COMPLIANCE WITH THE CON- ergy Engineering Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9311) the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 SUMER-PATIENT RADIATION HEALTH AND SAFE- is repealed. U.S.C. 6325(c)) is amended by striking ‘‘re- TY ACT.—Subsection (d) of section 981 of the (o) REPORT ON ACTIVITIES UNDER THE ELEC- port annually’’ and inserting ‘‘, as part of the Consumer-Patient Radiation Health and TRIC AND HYBRID VEHICLE RESEARCH, DEVEL- report required under section 657 of the De- Safety Act of 1981 (42 U.S.C. 10006(d)) is re- OPMENT, AND DEMONSTRATION ACT OF 1976.— partment of Energy Organization Act, re- pealed. Section 14 of the Electric and Hybrid Vehicle port’’. (c) REPORT ON EVALUATION OF TITLE VIII Research, Development, and Demonstration (g) REPORT ON THE DEPARTMENT OF EN- PROGRAMS.—Section 859 of the Public Health Act of 1976 (15 U.S.C. 2513) is repealed. ERGY.—Section 657 of the Department of En- Service Act (42 U.S.C. 298b–6) is repealed. (p) REPORT ON ACTIVITIES UNDER THE METH- ergy Organization Act (42 U.S.C. 7267) is (d) REPORT ON MODEL SYSTEM FOR PAYMENT ANE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH, DEVELOP- amended by inserting after ‘‘section 15 of the FOR OUTPATIENT HOSPITAL SERVICES.—Para- MENT, AND DEMONSTRATION ACT OF 1980.—Sec- Federal Energy Administration Act of 1974,’’ graph (6) of section 1135(d) of the Social Se- tion 9 of the Methane Transportation Re- the following: ‘‘section 365(c) of the Energy curity Act (42 U.S.C. 1320b–5(d)(6)) is re- search, Development, and Demonstration Policy and Conservation Act, section 304(c) pealed. Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 3808) is repealed. of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982,’’. (e) REPORT ON MEDICARE TREATMENT OF SEC. 1052. REPORTS MODIFIED. (h) REPORT ON COST-EFFECTIVE WAYS TO INCREASE HYDROPOWER PRODUCTION AT FED- UNCOMPENSATED CARE.—Paragraph (2) of sec- (a) REPORTS ON PROCESS-ORIENTED INDUS- ERAL WATER FACILITIES.—Section 2404 of the tion 603(a) of the Social Security Amend- TRIAL ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND INDUSTRIAL IN- Energy Policy Act of 1992 (16 U.S.C. 797 note) ments of 1983 (42 U.S.C. 1395ww note) is re- SULATION AUDIT GUIDELINES.— is amended— pealed. (1) Section 132(d) of the Energy Policy Act (1) in subsection (a), by striking ‘‘The Sec- (f) REPORT ON PROGRAM TO ASSIST HOME- of 1992 (42 U.S.C. 6349(d)) is amended— retary, in consultation with the Secretary of LESS INDIVIDUALS.—Subsection (d) of section (A) in the language preceding paragraph the Interior and the Secretary of the Army,’’ 9117 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation (1), by striking ‘‘Not later than 2 years after and inserting ‘‘The Secretary of the Interior Act of 1987 (42 U.S.C. 1383 note) is repealed. October 24, 1992, and annually thereafter’’ and the Secretary of the Army, in consulta- SEC. 1062. REPORTS MODIFIED. and inserting ‘‘Not later than October 24, tion with the Secretary,’’; and (a) REPORT OF THE SURGEON GENERAL.— 1995, and biennially thereafter’’; (2) in subsection (b), by striking ‘‘the Sec- Section 239 of the Public Health Service Act (B) in paragraph (4), by striking ‘‘and’’ at retary’’ and inserting ‘‘the Secretary of the (42 U.S.C. 238h) is amended to read as fol- the end; Interior, or the Secretary of the Army,’’. lows: (C) in paragraph (5), by striking the period (i) REPORT ON PROGRESS MEETING FUSION at the end and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and ‘‘BIANNUAL REPORT ENERGY PROGRAM OBJECTIVES.—Section (D) by adding at the end the following new 2114(c)(5) of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (42 ‘‘SEC. 239. The Surgeon General shall trans- paragraph: U.S.C. 13474(c)(5)) is amended by striking out mit to the Secretary, for submission to the ‘‘(6) the information required under section the first sentence and inserting in lieu there- Congress, on January 1, 1995, and on January 133(c).’’. of ‘‘The President shall include in the budget 1, every 2 years thereafter, a full report of (2) Section 133(c) of the Energy Policy Act submitted to the Congress each year under the administration of the functions of the of 1992 (42 U.S.C. 6350(c)) is amended— section 1105 of title 31, United States Code, a Service under this Act, including a detailed (A) by striking, ‘‘October 24, 1992’’ and in- report prepared by the Secretary describing statement of receipts and disbursements.’’. serting ‘‘October 24, 1995’’; and the progress made in meeting the program (b) REPORT ON HEALTH SERVICE RESEARCH (B) by inserting ‘‘as part of the report re- objectives, milestones, and schedules estab- ACTIVITIES.—Subsection (b) of section 494A of quired under section 132(d),’’ after ‘‘and bien- lished in the management plan.’’. the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. nially thereafter,’’. (j) REPORT ON HIGH-PERFORMANCE COM- 289c–1(b)) is amended by striking ‘‘September (b) REPORT ON AGENCY REQUESTS FOR WAIV- PUTING ACTIVITIES.—Section 203(d) of the 30, 1993, and annually thereafter’’ and insert- ER FROM FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT RE- High-Performance Computing Act of 1991 (15 ing ‘‘December 30, 1993, and each December QUIREMENTS.—Section 543(b)(2) of the Na- U.S.C. 5523(d)) is amended to read as follows: 30 thereafter’’. tional Energy Conservation Policy Act (42 ‘‘(d) REPORTS.—Not later than 1 year after (c) REPORT ON FAMILY PLANNING.—Section U.S.C. 8253(b)(2)) is amended— the date of enactment of this subsection, and 1009(a) of the Public Health Service Act (42

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00093 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10172 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995

U.S.C. 300a–7(a)) is amended by striking (d) REPORT ON RECLAMATION REFORM ACT (2) by striking ‘‘preceding year’’ and in- ‘‘each fiscal year’’ and inserting ‘‘fiscal year COMPLIANCE.—Section 224(g) of the Reclama- serting ‘‘preceding two years’’. 1995, and each second fiscal year there- tion Reform Act of 1982 (43 U.S.C. 390ww(g)) (b) ANNUAL REPORT OF THE OFFICE OF after,’’. is amended by striking the last 2 sentences. WORKERS’ COMPENSATION.— (d) REPORT ON THE STATUS OF HEALTH IN- (e) REPORT ON GEOLOGICAL SURVEYS CON- (1) REPORT ON THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE FORMATION AND HEALTH PROMOTION.—Section DUCTED OUTSIDE THE DOMAIN OF THE UNITED LONGSHORE AND HARBOR WORKERS’ COMPENSA- 1705(a) of the Public Health Service Act (42 STATES.—Section 2 of Public Law 87–626 (43 TION ACT.—Section 42 of the Longshore and U.S.C. 300u–4) is amended in the first sen- U.S.C. 31(c)) is repealed. Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act (33 tence by striking out ‘‘annually’’ and insert- (f) REPORT ON RECREATION USE FEES.—Sec- U.S.C. 942) is amended— ing in lieu thereof ‘‘biannually’’. tion 4(h) of the Land and Water Conservation (A) by striking ‘‘beginning of each’’ and all Subtitle G—Department of Housing and Fund Act of 1965 (16 U.S.C. 460l–6a(h)) is re- that follows through ‘‘Amendments of 1984’’ Urban Development pealed. and inserting ‘‘end of each fiscal year’’; and EPORT ON EDERAL URPLUS EAL (B) by adding the following new sentence SEC. 1071. REPORTS ELIMINATED. (g) R F S R PROPERTY PUBLIC BENEFIT DISCOUNT PRO- at the end: ‘‘Such report shall include the (a) REPORTS ON PUBLIC HOUSING HOME- GRAM FOR PARKS AND RECREATION.—Section annual reports required under section 426(b) OWNERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT OPPORTUNI- 203(o)(1) of the Federal Property and Admin- of the Black Lung Benefits Act (30 U.S.C. TIES.—Section 21(f) of the United States 936(b)) and section 8194 of title 5, United Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437s(f)) is re- istrative Services Act of 1949 (40 U.S.C. States Code, and shall be identified as the pealed. 484(o)(1)) is amended by striking ‘‘subsection Annual Report of the Office of Workers’ (b) INTERIM REPORT ON PUBLIC HOUSING (k) of this section and’’. Compensation Programs.’’. MIXED INCOME NEW COMMUNITIES STRATEGY SEC. 1082. REPORTS MODIFIED. (2) REPORT ON THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE DEMONSTRATION.—Section 522(k)(1) of the (a) REPORT ON LEVELS OF THE OGALLALA Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable AQUIFER.—Title III of the Water Resources BLACK LUNG BENEFITS PROGRAM.—Section Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 1437f note) is repealed. Research Act of 1984 (42 U.S.C. 10301 note) is 426(b) of the ‘‘Black Lung Benefits Act (30 (c) BIENNIAL REPORT ON INTERSTATE LAND amended— U.S.C. 936(b)) is amended— SALES REGISTRATION PROGRAM.—Section 1421 (1) in section 306, by striking ‘‘annually’’ (A) by striking ‘‘Within’’ and all that fol- of the Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure and inserting ‘‘biennially’’; and lows through ‘‘Congress the’’ and inserting Act (15 U.S.C. 1719a) is repealed. (2) in section 308, by striking ‘‘intervals of ‘‘At the end of each fiscal year, the’’; and (d) QUARTERLY REPORT ON ACTIVITIES one year’’ and inserting ‘‘intervals of 2 (B) by adding the following new sentence UNDER THE FAIR HOUSING INITIATIVES PRO- years’’. at the end: ‘‘Each such report shall be pre- GRAM.—Section 561(e)(2) of the Housing and (b) REPORT ON EFFECTS OF OUTER CONTI- pared and submitted to Congress in accord- Community Development Act of 1987 (42 NENTAL SHELF LEASING ACTIVITIES ON HUMAN, ance with the requirement with respect to U.S.C. 3616a(e)(2)) is repealed. MARINE, AND COASTAL ENVIRONMENTS.—Sec- submission under section 42 of the Longshore (e) COLLECTION OF AND ANNUAL REPORT ON tion 20(e) of the Outer Continental Shelf Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act (33 RACIAL AND ETHNIC DATA.—Section 562 of the Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1346(e)) is amended by U.S.C. 942).’’. Housing and Community Development Act of striking ‘‘each fiscal year’’ and inserting (3) REPORT ON THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE 1987 (42 U.S.C. 3608a) is amended— ‘‘every 3 fiscal years’’. FEDERAL EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION ACT.—(A) Subchapter I of chapter 81 of title 5, United (1) in subsection (a)— Subtitle I—Department of Justice (A) in the first sentence— States Code, is amended by adding at the end (i) by striking ‘‘the Secretary of Housing SEC. 1091. REPORTS ELIMINATED. thereof the following new section: and Urban Development and’’; and (a) REPORT ON DRUG INTERDICTION TASK ‘‘§ 8152. Annual report FORCE.—Section 3301(a)(1)(C) of the National (ii) by striking ‘‘each’’, the first place it ‘‘The Secretary of Labor shall, at the end Drug Interdiction Act of 1986 (21 U.S.C. 801 appears; and of each fiscal year, prepare a report with re- note; Public Law 99–570; 100 Stat. 3207–98) is (B) in the second sentence, by striking ‘‘in- spect to the administration of this chapter. repealed. volved’’; and Such report shall be submitted to Congress (b) REPORT ON EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE.— (2) in subsection (b)— in accordance with the requirement with re- (A) by striking ‘‘The Secretary of Housing Section 2412(d)(5) of title 28, United States spect to submission under section 42 of the and Urban Development and the’’ and insert- Code, is repealed. Longshore Harbor Workers’ Compensation ing ‘‘The’’; and (c) REPORT ON FEDERAL OFFENDER CHARAC- Act (33 U.S.C. 942).’’. (B) by striking ‘‘each’’. TERISTICS.—Section 3624(f)(6) of title 18, (B) The table of sections for chapter 81 of United States Code, is repealed. SEC. 1072. REPORTS MODIFIED. title 5, United States Code, is amended by in- (d) REPORT ON COSTS OF DEATH PENALTY.— (a) REPORT ON HOMEOWNERSHIP OF MULTI- serting after the item relating to section 8151 The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 (Public Law FAMILY UNITS PROGRAM.—Section 431 of the the following: 100–690; 102 Stat. 4395; 21 U.S.C. 848 note) is Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable amended by striking out section 7002. ‘‘8152. Annual report.’’. Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 12880) is amended— (e) MINERAL LANDS LEASING ACT.—Section (c) ANNUAL REPORT ON THE DEPARTMENT OF (1) in the section heading, by striking ‘‘AN- 8B of the Mineral Lands Leasing Act (30 LABOR.—Section 9 of an Act entitled ‘‘An Act NUAL’’; and U.S.C. 208–2) is repealed. to create a Department of Labor’’, approved (2) by striking ‘‘The Secretary shall annu- (f) SMALL BUSINESS ACT.—Subsection (c) of March 4, 1913 (29 U.S.C. 560) is amended by ally’’ and inserting ‘‘The Secretary shall no section 10 of the Small Business Act (15 striking ‘‘make a report’’ and all that fol- later than December 31, 1995,’’. U.S.C. 639(c)) is repealed. lows through ‘‘the department’’ and insert- (b) TRIENNIAL AUDIT OF TRANSACTIONS OF (g) ENERGY POLICY AND CONSERVATION ing ‘‘prepare and submit to Congress the fi- NATIONAL HOMEOWNERSHIP FOUNDATION.— nancial statements of the Department that ACT.—Section 252(i) of the Energy Policy Section 107(g)(1) of the Housing and Urban Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6272(i)) is amend- have been audited’’. Development Act of 1968 (12 U.S.C. ed by striking ‘‘, at least once every 6 Subtitle K—Department of State 1701y(g)(1)) is amended by striking the last months, a report’’ and inserting ‘‘, at such SEC. 1111. REPORTS ELIMINATED. sentence. intervals as are appropriate based on signifi- Section 8 of the Migration and Refugee As- (c) REPORT ON LOW-INCOME HOME ENERGY cant developments and issues, reports’’. sistance Act of 1962 (22 U.S.C. 2606) is amend- ASSISTANCE PROGRAM.—Section 2605(h) of the (h) REPORT ON FORFEITURE FUND.—Section ed by striking subsection (b), and redesig- Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Act of 524(c) of title 28, United States Code, is nating subsection (c) as subsection (b). 1981 (Public Law 97–35; 42 U.S.C. 8624(h)), is amended— amended by striking out ‘‘(but not less fre- Subtitle L—Department of Transportation (1) by striking out paragraph (7); and quently than every three years),’’. SEC. 1121. REPORTS ELIMINATED. (2) by redesignating paragraphs (8) through (a) REPORT ON DEEPWATER PORT ACT OF Subtitle H—Department of the Interior (12) as paragraphs (7) through (11), respec- 1974.—Section 20 of the Deepwater Port Act SEC. 1081. REPORTS ELIMINATED. tively. of 1974 (33 U.S.C. 1519) is repealed. (a) REPORT ON AUDITS IN FEDERAL ROYALTY Subtitle J—Department of Labor (b) REPORT ON COAST GUARD LOGISTICS CA- MANAGEMENT SYSTEM.—Section 17(j) of the PABILITIES RITICAL TO ISSION ERFORM SEC. 1101. REPORTS ELIMINATED. C M P - Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 226(j)) is ANCE.—Sections 5(a)(2) and 5(b) of the Coast Section 408(d) of the Veterans Education amended by striking the last sentence. Guard Authorization Act of 1988 (10 U.S.C. and Employment Amendments of 1989 (38 (b) REPORT ON DOMESTIC MINING, MINERALS, 2304 note) are repealed. U.S.C. 4100 note) is repealed. AND MINERAL RECLAMATION INDUSTRIES.— (c) REPORT ON MARINE PLASTIC POLLUTION Section 2 of the Mining and Minerals Policy SEC. 1102. REPORTS MODIFIED. RESEARCH AND CONTROL ACT OF 1987.—Sec- Act of 1970 (30 U.S.C. 21a) is amended by (a) REPORT ON THE ACTIVITIES CONDUCTED tion 2201(a) of the Marine Plastic Pollution striking the last sentence. UNDER THE FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT OF Research and Control Act of 1987 (33 U.S.C. (c) REPORT ON PHASE I OF THE HIGH PLAINS 1938.—Section 4(d)(1) of the Fair Labor 1902 note) is amended by striking ‘‘bienni- STATES GROUNDWATER DEMONSTRATION Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 204(d)(1)) is ally’’ and inserting ‘‘triennially’’. PROJECT.—Section 3(d) of the High Plains amended— (d) REPORT ON APPLIED RESEARCH AND States Groundwater Demonstration Program (1) by striking ‘‘annually’’ and inserting TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM.—Section 307(e)(11) of Act of 1983 (43 U.S.C. 390g–1(d)) is repealed. ‘‘biannually’’; and title 23, United States Code, is repealed.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00094 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10173

(e) REPORTS ON HIGHWAY SAFETY IMPROVE- (c) REPORT ON PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION.— (A) redesignating subparagraph (C) as sub- MENT PROGRAMS.— Section 308(e)(1) of title 49, United States paragraph (D); (1) REPORT ON RAILWAY-HIGHWAY CROSSINGS Code, is amended by striking ‘‘January of (B) in subparagraph (A), by striking out PROGRAM.—Section 130(g) of title 23, United each even-numbered year’’ and inserting ‘‘subparagraph (D)’’ and inserting in lieu States Code, is amended by striking the last ‘‘March 1995, March 1996, and March of each thereof ‘‘subparagraph (C)’’; and 3 sentences. odd-numbered year thereafter’’. (C) in subparagraph (B), by striking out (2) REPORT ON HAZARD ELIMINATION PRO- (d) REPORT ON NATION’S HIGHWAYS AND ‘‘subparagraph (D)’’ and inserting in lieu GRAM.—Section 152(g) of title 23, United BRIDGES.—Section 307(h) of title 23, United thereof ‘‘subparagraph (C)’’. States Code, is amended by striking the last States Code, is amended by striking ‘‘Janu- TITLE II—INDEPENDENT AGENCIES 3 sentences. ary 1983, and in January of every second year Subtitle A—Action (f) REPORT ON HIGHWAY SAFETY PERFORM- thereafter’’ and inserting ‘‘March 1995, ANCE—FATAL AND INJURY ACCIDENT RATES ON March 1996, and March of each odd-numbered SEC. 2011. REPORTS ELIMINATED. PUBLIC ROADS IN THE UNITED STATES.—Sec- year thereafter’’. Section 226 of the Domestic Volunteer Service Act of 1973 (42 U.S.C. 5026) is amend- tion 207 of the Highway Safety Act of 1982 (23 Subtitle M—Department of the Treasury U.S.C. 401 note) is repealed. ed— SEC. 1131. REPORTS ELIMINATED. (g) REPORT ON HIGHWAY SAFETY PROGRAM (1) by striking subsection (b); and (a) REPORT ON THE OPERATION AND STATUS STANDARDS.—Section 402(a) of title 23, (2) in subsection (a)— OF STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT FISCAL AS- United States Code, is amended by striking (A) in paragraph (2), by striking ‘‘(2)’’ and SISTANCE TRUST FUND.—Paragraph (8) of sec- the fifth sentence. inserting ‘‘(b)’’; and tion 14001(a) of the Consolidated Omnibus (h) REPORT ON RAILROAD-HIGHWAY DEM- (B) in paragraph (1)— Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (31 U.S.C. ONSTRATION PROJECTS.—Section 163(o) of the (i) by striking ‘‘(1)(A)’’ and inserting ‘‘(1)’’; 6701 note) is repealed. Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1973 (23 U.S.C. and (b) REPORT ON THE ANTIRECESSION PROVI- 130 note) is repealed. (ii) in subparagraph (B)— SIONS OF THE PUBLIC WORKS EMPLOYMENT (i) REPORT ON UNIFORM RELOCATION ACT (I) by striking ‘‘(B)’’ and inserting ‘‘(2)’’; ACT OF 1976.—Section 213 of the Public Works AMENDMENTS OF 1987.—Section 103(b)(2) of and Employment Act of 1976 (42 U.S.C. 6733) is re- the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real (II) by striking ‘‘subparagraph (A)’’ and in- pealed. Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 serting ‘‘paragraph (1)’’. (c) REPORT ON THE ASBESTOS TRUST U.S.C. 4604(b)(2)) is repealed. Subtitle B—Environmental Protection FUND.—Paragraph (2) of section 5(c) of the (j) REPORT ON FEDERAL RAILROAD SAFETY Agency Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act of ACT OF 1970.—Section 211 of the Federal Rail- 1986 (20 U.S.C. 4022(c)) is repealed. SEC. 2021. REPORTS ELIMINATED. road Safety Act of 1970 (45 U.S.C. 440) is re- SEC. 1132. REPORTS MODIFIED. (a) REPORT ON ALLOCATION OF WATER.—Sec- pealed. tion 102 of the Federal Water Pollution Con- (k) REPORT ON RAILROAD FINANCIAL ASSIST- (a) REPORT ON THE WORLD CUP USA 1994 COMMEMORATIVE COIN ACT.—Subsection (g) of trol Act (33 U.S.C. 1252) is amended by strik- ANCE.—Section 308(d) of title 49, United ing subsection (d). States Code, is repealed. section 205 of the World Cup USA 1994 Com- memorative Coin Act (31 U.S.C. 5112 note) is (b) REPORT ON VARIANCE REQUESTS.—Sec- (l) REPORT ON USE OF ADVANCED TECH- tion 301(n) of the Federal Water Pollution NOLOGY BY THE AUTOMOBILE INDUSTRY.—Sec- amended by striking ‘‘month’’ and inserting ‘‘calendar quarter’’. Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1311(n)) is amended by tion 305 of the Automotive Propulsion Re- striking paragraph (8). search and Development Act of 1978 (15 (b) REPORTS ON VARIOUS FUNDS.—Sub- section (b) of section 321 of title 31, United (c) REPORT ON IMPLEMENTATION OF CLEAN U.S.C. 2704) is amended by striking the last LAKES PROJECTS.—Section 314(d) of the Fed- sentence. States Code, is amended— (1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of para- eral Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. (m) REPORT ON OBLIGATIONS.—Section 4(b) 1324(d)) is amended— of the Federal Transit Act (49 U.S.C. App. graph (5), (2) by striking the period at the end of (1) by striking paragraph (3); and 1603(b)) is repealed. (2) by redesignating paragraph (4) as para- (n) REPORT ON SUSPENDED LIGHT RAIL SYS- paragraph (6) and inserting ‘‘; and’’, and (3) by adding after paragraph (6) the fol- graph (3). TEM TECHNOLOGY PILOT PROJECT.—Section (d) REPORT ON USE OF MUNICIPAL SEC- 26(c)(11) of the Federal Transit Act (49 U.S.C. lowing new paragraph: ‘‘(7) notwithstanding any other provision ONDARY EFFLUENT AND SLUDGE.—Section 516 App. 1622(c)(11)) is repealed. of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (o) REPORT ON SAINT LAWRENCE SEAWAY of law, fulfill any requirement to issue a re- port on the financial condition of any fund (33 U.S.C. 1375) (as amended by subsection DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION.—Section 10(a) of (g)) is further amended— the Act of May 13, 1954 (68 Stat. 96, chapter on the books of the Treasury by including the required information in a consolidated (1) by striking subsection (c); and 201; 33 U.S.C. 989(a)) is repealed. (2) by redesignating subsections (d) and (e) (p) REPORTS ON PIPELINES ON FEDERAL report, except that information with respect to a specific fund shall be separately re- as subsections (c) and (d), respectively. LANDS.—Section 28(w)(4) of the Mineral (e) REPORT ON CERTAIN WATER QUALITY Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 185(w)(4)) is repealed. ported if the Secretary determines that the consolidation of such information would re- STANDARDS AND PERMITS.—Section 404 of the (q) REPORTS ON PIPELINE SAFETY.— Water Quality Act of 1987 (Public Law 100–4; (1) REPORT ON NATURAL GAS PIPELINE SAFE- sult in an unwarranted delay in the avail- ability of such information.’’. 33 U.S.C. 1375 note) is amended— TY ACT OF 1968.—Section 16(a) of the Natural (1) by striking subsection (c); and (c) REPORT ON THE JAMES MADISON-BILL OF Gas Pipeline Safety Act of 1968 (49 U.S.C. (2) by redesignating subsection (d) as sub- App. 1683(a)) is amended in the first sentence RIGHTS COMMEMORATIVE COIN ACT.—Sub- section (c) of section 506 of the James Madi- section (c). by striking ‘‘of each year’’ and inserting ‘‘of (f) REPORT ON CLASS V WELLS.—Section each odd-numbered year’’. son-Bill of Rights Commemorative Coin Act (31 U.S.C. 5112 note) is amended by striking 1426 of title XIV of the Public Health Service (2) REPORT ON HAZARDOUS LIQUID PIPELINE Act (commonly known as the ‘‘Safe Drinking SAFETY ACT OF 1979.—Section 213 of the Haz- out ‘‘month’’ and inserting in lieu thereof ‘‘calendar quarter’’. Water Act’’) (42 U.S.C. 300h–5) is amended— ardous Liquid Pipeline Safety Act of 1979 (49 (1) in subsection (a), by striking ‘‘(a) MONI- U.S.C. App. 2012) is amended in the first sen- Subtitle N—Department of Veterans Affairs TORING METHODS.—’’; and tence by striking ‘‘of each year’’ and insert- SEC. 1141. REPORTS ELIMINATED. (2) by striking subsection (b). ing ‘‘of each odd-numbered year’’. (a) REPORT ON ADEQUACY OF RATES FOR (g) REPORT ON SOLE SOURCE AQUIFER DEM- SEC. 1122. REPORTS MODIFIED. STATE HOME CARE.—Section 1741 of such title ONSTRATION PROGRAM.—Section 1427 of title (a) REPORT ON OIL SPILL LIABILITY TRUST is amended— XIV of the Public Health Service Act (com- FUND.—The quarterly report regarding the (1) by striking out subsection (c); and monly known as the ‘‘Safe Drinking Water Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund required to be (2) by redesignating subsections (d) and (e) Act’’) (42 U.S.C. 300h–6) is amended— submitted to the House and Senate Commit- as subsections (c) and (d), respectively. (1) by striking subsection (l); and tees on Appropriations under House Report (b) REPORT ON LOANS TO PURCHASE MANU- (2) by redesignating subsections (m) and (n) 101–892, accompanying the appropriations for FACTURED HOMES.—Section 3712 of such title as subsections (l) and (m), respectively. the Coast Guard in the Department of Trans- is amended— (h) REPORT ON SUPPLY OF SAFE DRINKING portation and Related Agencies Appropria- (1) by striking out subsection (l); and WATER.—Section 1442 of title XIV of the Pub- tions Act, 1991, shall be submitted not later (2) by redesignating subsection (m) as sub- lic Health Service Act (commonly known as than 30 days after the end of the fiscal year section (l). the ‘‘Safe Drinking Water Act’’) (42 U.S.C. in which this Act is enacted and annually (c) REPORT ON COMPLIANCE WITH FUNDED 300h–6) is amended— thereafter. PERSONNEL CODING.— (1) by striking subsection (c); (b) REPORT ON JOINT FEDERAL AND STATE (1) REPEAL OF REPORT REQUIREMENT.—Sec- (2) by redesignating subsection (d) as sub- MOTOR FUEL TAX COMPLIANCE PROJECT.—Sec- tion 8110(a)(4) of title 38, United States Code, section (c); and tion 1040(d)(1) of the Intermodal Surface is amended by striking out subparagraph (C). (3) by redesignating subsections (f) and (g) Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (23 (2) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—Section as subsections (d) and (e), respectively. U.S.C. 101 note) is amended by striking ‘‘Sep- 8110(a)(4) of title 38, United States Code, is (i) REPORT ON NONNUCLEAR ENERGY AND tember 30 and’’. amended by— TECHNOLOGIES.—Section 11 of the Federal

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00095 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10174 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995

Nonnuclear Energy Research and Develop- ‘‘(1) QUARTERLY REPORTING.—Not later ‘‘(g) NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE AD- ment Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5910) is repealed. than 90 days after the end of any calendar MINISTRATION AND REGIONAL TECHNOLOGY (j) REPORT ON EMISSIONS AT COAL-BURNING quarter in which the Federal Deposit Insur- TRANSFER CENTERS.—The National Aero- POWERPLANTS.— ance Corporation (hereafter in this section nautics and Space Administration and re- (1) Section 745 of the Powerplant and In- referred to as the ‘Corporation’) has any ob- gional technology transfer centers supported dustrial Fuel Use Act of 1978 (42 U.S.C. 8455) ligations pursuant to section 14 of the Fed- by the National Aeronautics and Space Ad- is repealed. eral Deposit Insurance Act outstanding, the ministration are authorized and directed to (2) The table of contents in section 101(b) of Comptroller General of the United States cooperate with small business development such Act (42 U.S.C. prec. 8301) is amended by shall submit a report on the Corporation’s centers participating in the program.’’. striking the item relating to section 745. compliance at the end of that quarter with Subtitle M—National Council on Disability (k) 5-YEAR PLAN FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RE- section 15(c) of the Federal Deposit Insur- SEC. 2131. REPORTS ELIMINATED. SEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, AND DEMONSTRA- ance Act to the Committee on Banking, Section 401(a) of the Rehabilitation Act of TION.— Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate and 1973 (29 U.S.C. 781(a)) is amended— (1) Section 5 of the Environmental Re- the Committee on Banking, Finance and (1) by striking paragraph (9); and search, Development, and Demonstration Urban Affairs of the House of Representa- (2) by redesignating paragraphs (10) and Authorization Act of 1976 (42 U.S.C. 4361) is tives. Such a report shall be included in the (11) as paragraphs (9) and (10), respectively. repealed. Comptroller General’s audit report for that (2) Section 4 of the Environmental Re- year, as required by section 17 of the Federal Subtitle N—National Science Foundation search, Development, and Demonstration Deposit Insurance Act.’’. SEC. 2141. REPORTS ELIMINATED. Authorization Act of 1978 (42 U.S.C. 4361a) is Subtitle G—Federal Emergency Management (a) STRATEGIC PLAN FOR SCIENCE AND ENGI- repealed. Agency NEERING EDUCATION.—Section 107 of the Edu- (3) Section 8 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 4365) is cation for Economic Security Act (20 U.S.C. SEC. 2071. REPORTS ELIMINATED. amended— 3917) is repealed. Section 201(h) of the Federal Civil Defense (A) by striking subsection (c); and (b) BUDGET ESTIMATE.—Section 14 of the Act of 1950 (50 U.S.C. App. 2281(h)) is amend- (B) by redesignating subsections (d) National Science Foundation Act of 1950 (42 ed by striking the second proviso. through (i) as subsections (c) through (h), re- U.S.C. 1873) is amended by striking sub- spectively. Subtitle H—Federal Retirement Thrift section (j). (l) PLAN ON ASSISTANCE TO STATES FOR Investment Board Subtitle O—National Transportation Safety RADON PROGRAMS.—Section 305 of the Toxic SEC. 2081. REPORTS ELIMINATED. Board Substances Control Act (15 U.S.C. 2665) is Section 9503 of title 31, United States Code, SEC. 2151. REPORTS MODIFIED. amended— is amended by adding at the end thereof the Section 305 of the Independent Safety (1) by striking subsection (d); and following new subsection: Board Act of 1974 (49 U.S.C. 1904) is amend- ‘‘(c) The requirements of this section are (2) by redesignating subsections (e) and (f) ed— satisfied with respect to the Thrift Savings as subsections (d) and (e), respectively. (1) in paragraph (2) by adding ‘‘and’’ after Plan described under subchapter III of chap- Subtitle C—Equal Employment Opportunity the semicolon; ter 84 of title 5, by preparation and trans- Commission (2) in paragraph (3) by striking out ‘‘; and’’ mission of the report described under section and inserting in lieu thereof a period; and SEC. 2031. REPORTS MODIFIED. 8439(b) of such title.’’. Section 705(k)(2)(C) of the Civil Rights Act (3) by striking out paragraph (4). Subtitle I—General Services Administration of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000e–4(k)(2)(C)) is amend- Subtitle P—Neighborhood Reinvestment ed— SEC. 2091. REPORTS ELIMINATED. Corporation (a) REPORT ON PROPERTIES CONVEYED FOR (1) in the matter preceding clause (i), by SEC. 2161. REPORTS ELIMINATED. HISTORIC MONUMENTS AND CORRECTIONAL FA- striking ‘‘including’’ and inserting ‘‘includ- Section 607(c) of the Neighborhood Rein- CILITIES.—Section 203(o) of the Federal Prop- ing information, presented in the aggregate, vestment Corporation Act (42 U.S.C. 8106(c)) erty and Administrative Services Act of 1949 relating to’’; is amended by striking the second sentence. (40 U.S.C. 484(o)) is amended— (2) in clause (i), by striking ‘‘the identity Subtitle Q—Nuclear Regulatory Commission of each person or entity’’ and inserting ‘‘the (1) by striking out paragraph (1); number of persons and entities’’; (2) by redesignating paragraphs (2) and (3) SEC. 2171. REPORTS MODIFIED. Section 208 of the Energy Reorganization (3) in clause (ii), by striking ‘‘such person as paragraphs (1) and (2), respectively; and Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5848) is amended by or entity’’ and inserting ‘‘such persons and (3) in paragraph (2) (as so redesignated) by striking ‘‘each quarter a report listing for entities’’; and striking out ‘‘paragraph (2)’’ and inserting in that period’’ and inserting ‘‘an annual report (4) in clause (iii)— lieu thereof ‘‘paragraph (3)’’. (b) REPORT ON PROPOSED SALE OF SURPLUS listing for the previous fiscal year’’. (A) by striking ‘‘fee’’ and inserting ‘‘fees’’; REAL PROPERTY AND REPORT ON NEGOTIATED and Subtitle R—Office of Personnel Management SALES.—Section 203(e)(6) of the Federal (B) by striking ‘‘such person or entity’’ and SEC. 2181. REPORTS ELIMINATED. Property and Administrative Services Act of inserting ‘‘such persons and entities’’. (a) REPORT ON SENIOR EXECUTIVE SERV- 1949 (40 U.S.C. 484(e)(6)) is repealed. ICE.—(1) Section 3135 of title 5, United States Subtitle D—Federal Aviation Administration (c) REPORT ON PROPERTIES CONVEYED FOR Code, is repealed. SEC. 2041. REPORTS ELIMINATED. ILDLIFE CONSERVATION.—Section 3 of the W (2) The table of sections for chapter 31 of Act entitled ‘‘An Act authorizing the trans- Section 7207(c)(4) of the Anti-Drug Abuse title 5, United States Code, is amended by fer of certain real property for wildlife, or Act of 1988 (Public Law 100–690; 102 Stat. 4428; striking out the item relating to section other purposes.’’, approved May 19, 1948 (16 49 U.S.C. App. 1354 note) is amended— 3135. U.S.C. 667d; 62 Stat. 241) is amended by strik- (1) by striking out ‘‘GAO’’; and (b) REPORT ON PERFORMANCE AWARDS.— (2) by striking out ‘‘the Comptroller Gen- ing out ‘‘and shall be included in the annual Section 4314(d) of title 5, United States Code, eral’’ and inserting in lieu thereof ‘‘the De- budget transmitted to the Congress’’. is repealed. partment of Transportation Inspector Gen- Subtitle J—Interstate Commerce Commission (c) REPORT ON TRAINING PROGRAMS.—(1) eral’’. SEC. 2101. REPORTS ELIMINATED. Section 4113 of title 5, United States Code, is Subtitle E—Federal Communications Section 10327(k) of title 49, United States repealed. Commission Code, is amended to read as follows: (2) The table of sections for chapter 41 of SEC. 2051. REPORTS ELIMINATED. ‘‘(k) If an extension granted under sub- title 5, United States Code, is amended by striking out the item relating to section (a) REPORT TO THE CONGRESS UNDER THE section (j) is not sufficient to allow for com- 4113. COMMUNICATIONS SATELLITE ACT OF 1962.— pletion of necessary proceedings, the Com- (d) REPORT ON PREVAILING RATE SYSTEM.— Section 404(c) of the Communications Sat- mission may grant a further extension in an Section 5347(e) of title 5, United States Code, ellite Act of 1962 (47 U.S.C. 744(c)) is repealed. extraordinary situation if a majority of the is amended by striking out the fourth and (b) REIMBURSEMENT FOR AMATEUR EXAM- Commissioners agree to the further exten- fifth sentences. INATION EXPENSES.—Section 4(f)(4)(J) of the sion by public vote.’’. (e) REPORT ON ACTIVITIES OF THE MERIT Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. Subtitle K—Legal Services Corporation SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD AND THE OFFICE 154(f)(4)(J)) is amended by striking out the SEC. 2111. REPORTS MODIFIED. OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT.—Section 2304 of last sentence. Section 1009(c)(2) of the Legal Services title 5, United States Code, is amended— Subtitle F—Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Act (42 U.S.C. 2996h(c)(2)) is (1) in subsection (a) by striking out ‘‘(a)’’; Corporation amended by striking out ‘‘The’’ and insert- and SEC. 2061. REPORTS ELIMINATED. ing in lieu thereof ‘‘Upon request, the’’. (2) by striking subsection (b). Section 102(b)(1) of the Federal Deposit In- Subtitle L—National Aeronautics and Space SEC. 2182. REPORTS MODIFIED. surance Corporation Improvement Act of Administration (a) REPORT ON DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA RE- 1991 (Public Law 102–242; 105 Stat. 2237; 12 SEC. 2121. REPORTS ELIMINATED. TIREMENT FUND.—Section 145 of the District U.S.C. 1825 note) is amended to read as fol- Section 21(g) of the Small Business Act (15 of Columbia Retirement Reform Act (Public lows: U.S.C. 648(g)) is amended to read as follows: Law 96–122; 93 Stat. 882) is amended—

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00096 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10175 (1) in subsection (b)— TITLE III—REPORTS BY ALL specified on the list described under sub- (A) in paragraph (1)— DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES section (c) shall cease to be effective, with (i) by striking out ‘‘(1)’’; SEC. 3001. REPORTS ELIMINATED. respect to that requirement, 4 years after (ii) by striking out ‘‘and the Comptroller (a) REPORT ON PART-TIME EMPLOYMENT.— the date of the enactment of this Act. General shall each’’ and inserting in lieu (1) Section 3407 of title 5, United States Code, (2) EXCEPTION.—The provisions of para- thereof ‘‘shall’’; and is repealed. graph (1) shall not apply to any report re- (iii) by striking out ‘‘each’’; and (2) The table of sections for chapter 34 of quired under— (B) by striking out paragraph (2); and title 5, United States Code, is amended by (A) the Inspector General Act of 1978 (5 (2) in subsection (d), by striking out ‘‘the striking out the item relating to section U.S.C. App.); or Comptroller General and’’ each place it ap- 3407. (B) the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990 pears. (b) BUDGET INFORMATION ON CONSULTING (Public Law 101–576), including provisions en- (b) REPORT ON REVOLVING FUND.—Section SERVICES.—(1) Section 1114 of title 31, United acted by the amendments made by that Act. 1304(e)(6) of title 5, United States Code, is States Code, is repealed. (b) IDENTIFICATION OF WASTEFUL RE- amended by striking out ‘‘at least once every (2) The table of sections for chapter 11 of PORTS.—The President shall include in the three years’’. title 31, United States Code, is amended by first annual budget submitted pursuant to Subtitle S—Office of Thrift Supervision striking out the item relating to section section 1105 of title 31, United States Code, 1114. after the date of enactment of this Act a list SEC. 2191. REPORTS MODIFIED. (c) SEMIANNUAL REPORT ON LOBBYING.— of reports that the President has determined Section 18(c)(6)(B) of the Federal Home Section 1352 of title 31, United States Code, are unnecessary or wasteful and the reasons Loan Bank Act (12 U.S.C. 1438(c)(6)(B)) is is amended by— for such determination. amended— (1) striking out subsection (d); and (c) LIST OF REPORTS.—The list referred to (1) by striking out ‘‘annually’’; (2) redesignating subsections (e), (f), (g), under subsection (a) is the list prepared by (2) by striking out ‘‘audit, settlement,’’ and (h) as subsections (d), (e), (f), and (g), re- the Clerk of the House of Representatives for and inserting in lieu thereof ‘‘settlement’’; spectively. the first session of the 103d Congress under and (d) REPORTS ON PROGRAM FRAUD AND CIVIL clause 2 of rule III of the Rules of the House (3) by striking out ‘‘, and the first audit’’ REMEDIES.—(1) Section 3810 of title 31, of Representatives (House Document No. 103– and all that follows through ‘‘enacted’’. United States Code, is repealed. 7). Subtitle T—Panama Canal Commission (2) The table of sections for chapter 38 of Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I move to SEC. 2201. REPORTS ELIMINATED. title 31, United States Code, is amended by reconsider the vote. (a) REPORTS ON PANAMA CANAL.—Section striking out the item relating to section Mr. GLENN. I move to lay that mo- 1312 of the Panama Canal Act of 1979 (Public 3810. tion on the table. Law 96–70; 22 U.S.C. 3722) is repealed. (e) REPORT ON RIGHT TO FINANCIAL PRIVACY ACT.—Section 1121 of the Right to Financial The motion to lay on the table is (b) TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMEND- agreed to. MENT.—The table of contents in section 1 of Privacy Act of 1978 (12 U.S.C. 3421) is re- such Act is amended by striking out the pealed. f item relating to section 1312. (f) REPORT ON PLANS TO CONVERT TO THE METRIC SYSTEM.—Section 12 of the Metric MAKING TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS Subtitle U—Postal Service Conversion Act of 1975 (15 U.S.C. 205j–1) is re- TO SENATE RESOLUTION 120 SEC. 2211. REPORTS MODIFIED. pealed. Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I ask (a) REPORT ON CONSUMER EDUCATION PRO- (g) REPORT ON TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION unanimous consent that the Senate GRAMS.—Section 4(b) of the mail Order Con- AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS.—Sec- proceed to the immediate consider- sumer Protection Amendments of 1983 (39 tion 11(f) of the Stevenson-Wydler Tech- U.S.C. 3001 note; Public Law 98–186; 97 Stat. nology Innovation Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. ation of Senate Resolution 153, sub- 1318) is amended to read as follows: 3710(f)) is repealed. mitted earlier today by Senators DOLE ‘‘(b) A summary of the activities carried (h) REPORT ON EXTRAORDINARY CONTRAC- and DASCHLE. out under subsection (a) shall be included in TUAL ACTIONS TO FACILITATE THE NATIONAL The PRESIDING OFFICER. The the first semiannual report submitted each DEFENSE.—Section 4(a) of the Act entitled clerk will report. year as required under section 5 of the In- ‘‘An Act to authorize the making, amend- The bill clerk read as follows: ment, and modification of contracts to fa- spector General Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.).’’. A resolution (Senate Resolution 153) to cilitate the national defense’’, approved Au- (b) REPORT ON INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES.— make certain technical corrections to Sen- gust 28, 1958 (50 U.S.C. 1434(a)), is amended by Section 3013 of title 39, United States Code, ate Resolution 120. is amended in the last sentence by striking striking out ‘‘all such actions taken’’ and in- out ‘‘the Board shall transmit such report to serting in lieu thereof ‘‘if any such action The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there the Congress’’ and inserting in lieu thereof has been taken’’. objection to the immediate consider- ‘‘the information in such report shall be in- (i) REPORTS ON DETAILING EMPLOYEES.— ation of the resolution? cluded in the next semiannual report re- Section 619 of the Treasury, Postal Service, There being no objection, the Senate quired under section 5 of the Inspector Gen- and General Government Appropriations proceeded to consider the resolution. eral Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.)’’. Act, 1993 (Public Law 102–393; 106 Stat. 1769), Mr. HATCH. I ask unanimous consent is repealed. Subtitle V—Railroad Retirement Board that the resolution be considered and SEC. 3002. REPORTS MODIFIED. agreed to, and the motion to reconsider SEC. 2221. REPORTS MODIFIED. Section 552b(j) of title 5, United States Section 502 of the Railroad Retirement Code, is amended to read as follows: be laid upon the table, and that any Solvency Act of 1983 (45 U.S.C. 231f–1) is ‘‘(j) Each agency subject to the require- statements relating to the resolution amended by striking ‘‘On or before July 1, ments of this section shall annually report appear at the appropriate place in the 1985, and each calendar year thereafter’’ and to the Congress regarding the following: RECORD. inserting ‘‘As part of the annual report re- ‘‘(1) The changes in the policies and proce- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without quired under section 22(a) of the Railroad Re- dures of the agency under this section that tirement Act of 1974 (45 U.S.C. 231u(a))’’. objection, it is so ordered. have occurred during the preceding 1-year So the resolution (S. Res. 153) was Subtitle W—Thrift Depositor Protection period. considered and agreed to. Oversight Board ‘‘(2) A tabulation of the number of meet- The resolution is as follows: SEC. 2231. REPORTS MODIFIED. ings held, the exemptions applied to close S. RES. 153 Section 21A(k)(9) of the Federal Home meetings, and the days of public notice pro- Loan Bank Act (12 U.S.C. 1441a(k)(9)) is vided to close meetings. Resolved, That Senate Resolution 120, amended by striking out ‘‘the end of each ‘‘(3) A brief description of litigation or for- agreed to May 17, 1995 (104th Congress, 1st calendar quarter’’ and inserting in lieu mal complaints concerning the implementa- Session), is amended—(1) in section 2(a)(1)(A) thereof ‘‘June 30 and December 31 of each tion of this section by the agency. by inserting ‘‘, except that Senator Frank H. calendar year’’. ‘‘(4) A brief explanation of any changes in Murkowski shall substitute for Senator Phil law that have affected the responsibilities of Gramm’’ before the semicolon; Subtitle X—United States Information the agency under this section.’’. (2) in section 5(b)— Agency SEC. 3003. TERMINATION OF REPORTING RE- (A) in paragraph (11) by inserting ‘‘with SEC. 2241. REPORTS ELIMINATED. QUIREMENTS. the approval of the Committee on Rules and Notwithstanding section 601(c)(4) of the (a) TERMINATION.— Administration’’ before the period; and Foreign Service Act of 1980 (22 U.S.C. (1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to the provisions (B) in paragraph (12) by inserting ‘‘and the 4001(c)(4)), the reports otherwise required of paragraph (2), each provision of law re- Committee on Rules and Administration’’ under such section shall not cover the activi- quiring the submittal to Congress (or any after ‘‘concerned’’; and ties of the United States Information Agen- committee of the Congress) of any annual, (3) in section 8 by adding at the end the fol- cy. semiannual, or other regular periodic report lowing: ‘‘There are authorized such sums as

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00097 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS S10176 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE July 17, 1995 may be necessary for agency contributions ate completes its business today it There being no objection, the Senate, related to the compensation of employees of stand in recess until the hour of 9 a.m., at 7:18 p.m., recessed until Tuesday, the Special Committee from May 17, 1995 on Tuesday, July 18, 1995; that fol- July 18, 1995, at 9 a.m. through February 29, 1996, to be paid from the appropriations account for ‘Expenses of lowing the prayer, the Journal of Pro- Inquiries and Investigations’ of the Senate.’’. ceedings be deemed approved to date, f the time for the two leaders be re- f served for their use later in the day, NOMINATIONS IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY and there then be a period for morning ACT AMENDMMENT business until the hour of 10 a.m., with Executive nominations received by Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I ask Senators permitted to speak for up to 5 the Senate July 17, 1995: unanimous consent that the Senate minutes each; with the following ex- DEPARTMENT OF STATE proceed to the immediate consider- ceptions: Senator NUNN, 30 minutes; EILEEN B. CLAUSSEN, OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, TO BE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE FOR OCEANS ation of Calendar No. 130, S. 457, a bill Senator GORTON, 5 minutes; Senator AND INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL AND SCIENTIFIC to amend the Immigration and Nation- MURRAY, 5 minutes; Senator PRESSLER, AFFAIRS, VICE ELINOR G. CONSTABLE. ality Act to update references in the 10 minutes; and Senator THURMOND, 10 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION classification of children for purposes minutes. GRETA JOY DICUS, OF ARKANSAS, TO BE A MEMBER OF of U.S. immigration laws. Further, that at the hour of 10:00, the THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION FOR THE TERM OF 5 YEARS EXPIRING JUNE 30, 1998, VICE JAMES R. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate immediately resume consider- CURTISS, TERM EXPIRED. clerk will report. ation of S. 343, the Regulatory Reform EUROPEAN BANK FOR RECONSTRUCTION AND The legislative clerk read as follows: bill. DEVELOPMENT A bill (S. 457) to amend the Immigration The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without and Nationality Act to update references in LEE F. JACKSON, OF MASSACHUSETTS, TO BE U.S. DI- objection, it is so ordered. RECTOR OF THE EUROPEAN BANK FOR RECONSTRUCTION the classification of children for purposes of Mr. HATCH. I now ask unanimous AND DEVELOPMENT, VICE JAMES H. SCHEUER, RE- U.S. immigration laws. SIGNED. consent that the Senate stand in recess DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there on Tuesday between the hours of 12:30 objection to the immediate consider- p.m. and 2:15 p.m. in order to accommo- ELUID LEVI MARTINEZ, OF NEW MEXICO, TO BE COM- ation of the bill? MISSIONER OF RECLAMATION, VICE DANIEL P. BEARD, date respective party luncheons. RESIGNED. There being no objection, the Senate The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT proceeded to consider the bill. Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I ask objection, it is so ordered. ERNEST J. MONIZ, OF MASSACHUSETTS, TO BE AN AS- SOCIATE DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND unanimous consent that the bill be f TECHNOLOGY POLICY, VICE MARY RITA COOKE GREEN- considered deemed read a third time, PROGRAM WOOD, RESIGNED. passed, that the motion to reconsider FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, for the be laid upon the table, and that any DONALD S. WASSERMAN, OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUM- statements relating to the bill be information of all Senators, the Senate BIA, TO BE A MEMBER OF THE FEDERAL LABOR RELA- will resume consideration of the Regu- TIONS AUTHORITY FOR A TERM OF 5 YEARS EXPIRING placed at the appropriate place in the JULY 1, 2000, VICE PAMELA TALKIN, TERM EXPIRED. latory Reform bill at 10 a.m. on Tues- RECORD. CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND COMMUNITY day. Pending to the bill is the Glenn The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without SERVICE substitute amendment to the Dole/ objection, it is so ordered. HARRIS WOFFORD, OF PENNSYLVANIA, TO BE CHIEF So the bill (S. 457) was deemed read Johnston substitute amendment. EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF THE CORPORATION FOR NA- for the third time, and passed as fol- Under the previous order, there will be TIONAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICE, VICE ELI J. SEGAL. lows: a vote on the Glenn substitute at 2:15 IN THE NAVY S.457 p.m. and a cloture vote on the Dole/ THE FOLLOWING-NAMED OFFICER FOR PROMOTION IN Johnston substitute amendment imme- THE NAVY OF THE UNITED STATES TO THE GRADE INDI- Be it enacted by the Senate and House of CATED UNDER TITLE 10, UNITED STATES CODE, SECTION Representatives of the United States of diately following the Glenn vote. As a 624: America in Congress assembled, reminder to all Senators, under the SENIOR HEALTH CARE EXECUTIVE SECTION 1. DEFINITION OF CHILD. provisions of rule XII, any second de- To be rear admiral Section 101(b) of the Immigration and Na- gree amendment must be filed by 12:30 REAR ADM. (LH) S. TODD FISHER, 000–00–0000. tionality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(b)) is amended— p.m. on Tuesday. Further, the majority (1) in paragraph (1)— leader has filed a third cloture motion (A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ‘‘le- f gitimate child’’ and inserting ‘‘child born in today on the Dole/Johnston substitute, wedlock’’; and therefore Members may file first de- (B) in subparagraph (D), by striking ‘‘an il- gree amendments with respect to that WITHDRAWAL legitimate child’’ and inserting ‘‘a child born third cloture motion until 12:30 p.m. on Executive message transmitted by out of wedlock’’; and Tuesday. (2) in paragraph (2), by striking ‘‘an illegit- the President to the Senate on July 17, imate child’’ and inserting ‘‘a child born out f 1995, withdrawing from further Senate consideration the following nomina- of wedlock’’. RECESS UNTIL 9 A.M. TOMORROW f tion: Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, if there is NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ORDERS FOR TUESDAY, JULY 18, no further business to come before the ROBERT M. SUSMAN, OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 1995 Senate, I now ask unanimous consent TO BE A MEMBER OF THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COM- Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I ask that the Senate stand in recess under MISSION FOR A TERM OF 5 YEARS EXPIRING JUNE 30, 1998, VICE JAMES R. CURTISS, TERM EXPIRED, WHICH WAS unanimous consent that when the Sen- the previous order. SENT TO THE SENATE ON JANUARY 5, 1995.

VerDate Aug 31 2005 05:51 May 28, 2008 Jkt 041999 PO 00000 Frm 00098 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 9801 J:\ODA15\1995_F~1\S17JY5.REC S17JY5 mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — Extensions of Remarks E 1443 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS

INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT FOR REMEMBERING LIVEO ‘‘OLLIE’’ Southern is recognized in the magazine's Oc- CONCESSION REFORM LEGISLA- OLIVOTTI tober 1994, issue as one of the best values in TION—H.R. 2028 higher education. Birmingham-Southern is HON. BILL BAKER ranked No. 8 among the 160 National Liberal Arts Colleges in the category of Most Efficient HON. JAMES V. HANSEN OF CALIFORNIA Schools. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF UTAH Enrollment has reached a high in recent IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, July 17, 1995 years. From an enrollment of only 727 in Monday, July 17, 1995 Mr. BAKER of California. Mr. Speaker, later 1976, Birmingham-Southern enrolled some this summer, America will celebrate the 50th 1,800 students this Fall. Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Speaker, last Thursday I anniversary of the end of the war in the Pa- The recognition and enrollment are the re- introduced comprehensive legislation to reform cific. One of the heroes of that war, Ollie sult of the college's outstanding academic rep- the concession policies on Federal lands. This Olivotti, recently passed away and will soon utation and the leadership its president, Dr. is a topic which has been extensively debated be interred at Arlington National Cemetery. Neal R. Berte, who is an acknowledged na- in recent years, with particular emphasis on Ollie was a long-time resident of the city of tional leader in higher education across the National Park Service concession policies. Livermore in my district, and I wanted to take country, and the leadership and hard work of Currently, there are over 8,000 concession this opportunity to honor him for his sterling the trustees and the faculty. operations on lands managed by the Forest service to his country and his community and Four prestigious guides, ``The National Re- Service, National Park Service, Corps of Engi- view College Guide,'' ``The Fiske Guide to Col- for his devotion to his family. neers, Bureau of Land Management, Bureau Ollie was a young serviceman in the Army leges 1994,'' the ``Princeton Review 1994 edi- tion of The Student Access Guide to The Best of Reclamation, and Fish and Wildlife Service. Air Corps stationed at Clark Field in the Phil- 286 Colleges,'' and U.S. News & World Report Each agency has its own independent set of ippines when the war began. He fought on the magazine have ranked Birmingham-Southern rules and regulations designed to implement Bataan Peninsula until the surrender to the College as among 58 of ``America's Top Lib- at least 11 different and sometimes conflicting Japanese in April, 1942. He survived not only laws. Concessioners have to wade through a eral Arts Schools,'' according to National Re- the brutal Bataan Death March but also 31¤2 view; as among ``315 of the best and most in- mountain of differing requirements from agen- years in captivity, finally being liberated by teresting colleges in America,'' according to cy to agency and are even required to collect Russian troops in 1945. Fiske; among the highest ranked in academ- and file different information with each agency He retired as CWO from the U.S. Air Force ics, quality of life and financial aid, according on a single trip. in 1960 after winning the Bronze Star, the to the Princeton Review, and among the 140 In report after report, the General Account- Prisoner of War Medal, and a host of other top national liberal arts colleges, according to ing Office and others have suggested that military honors. He then began working at Federal concession management needs re- U.S. News in its October 4, 1993 issue. Sandia National Laboratory, where he retired Birmingham-Southern graduates' records in- form. My legislation is based on three primary as a section supervisor after 21 years of serv- principles as follows: dicate the quality of the educational experi- ice. ence at Birmingham-Southern. They are ad- First, provide for a uniform and consistent Active in community affairs, Ollie was mar- concession policy among the Federal land mitted to graduate schools, law schools, and ried for 48 years to his beloved wife Harriet. medical schools at rates two to three times management agencies to the extent feasible. He leaves her, their three daughters and their Second, recognition of the importance of the higher than most colleges across America. husbands, and nine grandchildren. And he These recognitions and impressive enroll- public-private partnership in providing a high also leaves a legacy of commitment to the val- ment standards at Birmingham-Southern are quality recreation experience on Federal ues of family and freedom that have helped the result of the outstanding academic reputa- lands, and make America great. tion and hard work of the trustees and faculty Third, utilization of the competitive process It is an honor for me to recognize Ollie along with the superior leadership of BSC's to ensure quality service to the public at rea- Olivotti today in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. president, Dr. Neal R. Berte. Accomplishments sonable prices and a fair return to the Govern- Our country has lost a hero, his family a loving such as the ones mentioned above would ment. husband and friend, and his community a loyal make any school proud, but Birmingham- This legislation includes many features supporter. Southern College's successes go far beyond which have not been included in previous leg- f the classroom. islative proposals. For example, this bill pro- The Birmingham-Southern College Men's vides a consistent concession policy among all CONGRATULATING THE BIR- basketball team was unranked in the pre- land management agencies, allows rates to MINGHAM SOUTHERN COLLEGE season poll and selected to finish fourth in the the public to be set by the market place to the MEN’S BASKETBALL TEAM Southern States Conference. Despite these maximum extent possible, provides a truly predictions, the Panthers were the first team competitive selection process which recog- HON. SPENCER BACHUS to go 14±0 in Southern States competition and nizes the value of concessioners with a prov- OF ALABAMA made their fourth trip to the tournament in only en record of performance, ensures a higher IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 6 years, and their second championship in rate of return for the Government and permits that time. They completed the season with an Monday, July 17, 1995 concession fees collected to remain with the incredible 32-consecutive-game winning agencies, provides incentives to encourage Mr. BACHUS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to streak, the longest in college basketball. Their the private sector to develop and maintain pri- congratulate Birmingham Southern College record for the year was 35 wins, with only 2 vate recreation facilities on Federal lands, pro- and it's men's basketball team for winning the losses, setting a record for the most wins in vides an independent appeals process to re- NAIA championship in Tulsa, OK. school history. solve disputes and permits the privatization of Birmingham-Southern College is ranked The record setting performance of the Bir- certain concession activities on Bureau of ``among the best and most noteworthy in mingham-Southern College men's basketball Land Management and Forest Service lands. North America'' by ``The Insiders Guide to the team can be attributed to the relationships that I believe that the policies outlined in this bill Colleges 1994'' edition, compiled and edited are developed between coach and player. The are sound. I encourage my colleagues to join by the staff of the Yale Daily News. Bir- Panthers winning attitude and success is a di- with me in the further refinement of this legis- mingham-Southern College has again been rect correlation with the accomplishments of lation to ensure a high quality, concession-pro- ranked as one of the top ``National Liberal Arts Head Coach Duane Reboul and his assistant vided recreation experience awaits the Amer- Colleges'' by U.S. News and World Report in coaches Dwight Evans and Paul Arthur. Win- ican public on all their Federal lands. the magazine's recent ``Best Colleges'' issue. ning 83 percent of his games, coach Reboul

∑ This ‘‘bullet’’ symbol identifies statements or insertions which are not spoken by a Member of the Senate on the floor. Matter set in this typeface indicates words inserted or appended, rather than spoken, by a Member of the House on the floor. E 1444 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — Extensions of Remarks July 17, 1995 has the best winning percentage in the NAIA. them continued success in their next assign- A NATIONAL LATINA ORGANIZA- As one of Birmingham-Southern College's ment at National War College. TION HONORS RITA DI MARTINO most successful basketball coaches, the big- gest achievement for Reboul is not the f HON. JOSE´ E. SERRANO records he attains, but the respect he receives IN HONOR OF ALL THE VOLUN- OF NEW YORK from former players. Each year, the goals re- IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES main the sameÐwinning a championship and TEERS WHO MAKE PROJECT Monday, July 17, 1995 striving to make each player the best possible CHILDREN A REALITY FOR THE person he can be. Consequently, the student- YOUNG PEOPLE OF NORTHERN Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay athletes take these ideals and this winning at- IRELAND tribute to Rita Di Martino, a national Latina titude into the classroom and win them for the leader who will be honored on July 27, 1995 rest of their lives. by MANA: A National Latina Organization. On Finally, the winning attitude that has been HON. ROBERT MENENDEZ that evening the organization will announce the establishment of the Rita Di Martino Schol- instilled in the minds of the players should not OF NEW JERSEY go unnoticed. At this time, I would like to con- arship in Communications. gratulate the student athletes who have IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES MANA was founded over 20 years ago and through its programs has worked to achieve worked so hard, and dedicated their time and Monday, July 17, 1995 efforts to achieving these accomplishments. recognition for Latin American women Chris Armstrong, Obra Carter, James Cason, Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise today throughout the United States. The Rita Di Nigel Coates, Bo Coln, Tommy Dalley, to pay tribute to all the people who make Martino Scholarship is the first of many schol- Dwayne Elliot, Paul Fleming, Todd Largen, Project Children a great success. Project Chil- arships that MANA will establish in the future to recognize the impressive accomplishments Jay Mitchell, Mike Schwallie, Eddie Walter, dren is an organization that brings together of Latin American women in this country. Damon Wilcox, and Will Worrell are each to children from Northern Ireland and American Latina leaders' achievements and service in be applauded for their accomplishments both host families. These volunteers give up their the fields of business, education, politics, on and off of the court. I wish them all suc- time to dedicate themselves to providing these cess in their academic as well as athletic pur- science, medicine, and the space industries children with a peaceful and fun-filled summer. suits. will be honored in this way. Congratulations to Coach Reboul and his There are many heroes involved with Rita Di Martino is the first Latin American team for an outstanding year. We look forward Project Children. John and Joan Hughes co- woman to be recognized by MANA for her out- to your continued success and achievement of ordinate the Project Children in New Jersey standing contribution to both the Hispanic excellence. and I am grateful for their devotion. The community and to our Nation as a whole. She f Hughes' have dedicated much of their time to is an esteemed spokesperson for the Hispanic raising funds that make it possible for these community and a nationally recognized expert TRIBUTE TO LT. COL. MICHAEL J. children to travel. They are assisted by many on Hispanic affairs. LEPPER others, including Carolyn Malizia, Maryanne Ms. Di Martino is a member of the Council McAdams, Patty Moreale, Kevin Ferrick, Joe of Foreign Relations, the Ana Mendez Univer- sity System, and Gems Television Inter- HON. GREG LAUGHLIN Masterson. They have all dedicated their time national. She serves on the Executive Com- OF TEXAS and resources to provide a summer away from IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES mittee of the National Council of La Raza, the the troubles and pain of Northern Ireland. I National Hispanic Corporate Council, the Monday, July 17, 1995 have singled out some of the people respon- Cuban American National Council, the Na- Mr. LAUGHLIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to sible for Project Children, but there are many tional Association of Latino Elected and Ap- recognize Lt. Col. Michael J. Lepper for his other volunteers, too numerous to mention pointed Officials, the U.S. Senate Republican distinguished and exemplary service to the here, who also deserve our thanks. Every year Task Force, is the Vice-Chair of the Congres- U.S. Air Force and this great Nation as Deputy I hold a luncheon for these young children and sional Hispanic Caucus Institute, and is a Chief of the House Liaison Office from March their host families. For the past 2 years Mr. Presidential appointee to the USO World 29, 1993, to July 5, 1995. In this capacity, and Mrs. Liam Benson, owners of Board of Governors. Mike has excelled in providing the House of O'Donohues Pub in Hoboken, NJ, have been In 1982, President Ronald Reagan ap- Representatives with outstanding service and gracious enough to donate their services. pointed Ms. Di Martino as the U.S. Ambas- unselfish commitment above and beyond the Project Children is an organization founded sador to the UNICEF Executive Board. Ms. Di call of duty. He quickly established a solid rep- by Denis Mulcahy and his brother Pat Martino influenced policy regarding the rela- utation with both Members and staff, display- tionship of the United States and UNICEF, Mulcahy. Through the years, the organization ing his extensive knowledge of Air Force pro- achieved increases in UNICEF's financial sup- has grown and has provided thousands of grams and issues, as well as national defense port, and extended the scale of programs in children many wonderful summers in the Unit- strategy. As a highly trained and experienced the areas of child health, water quality and fighter pilot, I can think of no one who has ed States. It is an opportunity for these chil- sanitation, nutrition, and education. Ms. Di provided better guidance, advice, and real- dren to experience a different type of life, a life Martino conducted oversight and program re- world expertise on a wide array of aerospace away from the threat of violence with which view visits in Central and South America, East and other national security issues than Mike they live daily. Project Children aims to touch and West Africa, Egypt, and Morocco. Lepper. His intelligence, charm, keen wit, and each individual child and imprint in their heart Ms. Di Martino is currently the Director of can-do attitude have made an indelible impact and mind the memories of a lifetime. Federal Government Affairs for AT&T where on us. He has aided us immeasurably in our This year there is new hope for Northern she coordinates the company's relations with day-to-day operations, and his effectiveness Ireland with the recent signing of a ceasefire the administration, Congress, and various on Capitol Hill is legendary. No one has a bet- agreement. Hopefully, this will mark the dawn State governments. She enhanced the political ter feel for the congressional pulse. In the of a new era. These children can, perhaps standing of At&T by securing recognition of challenging arena of international travel, Mike now, return to a Northern Ireland that is free AT&T as a major corporate citizen by the cur- has always been the military escort of choice. of bloodshed. May they return to a country rent administration. As a leader in the His- He was brilliant in planning, organizing, and panic community, Ms. Di Martino provides in- united by a common cultural heritage and ac- executing numerous congressional delegation formation and guidance to the company's ad- cepting of its religious diversity. trips to virtually every corner of the Earth. ministration about this growing segment of the Having personally traveled with Mike, he has Please join me in honoring all those respon- population and offers leadership and direction a way of making the difficult look effortless, sible for this summer of peace. Let us hope with respect to multicultural issues. She is fre- and the impossible a reality. Because of that the cease-fire agreement will be the first quently called upon to act as a spokesperson Mike's credibility and goodwill, the Air Force stepping stone to a peaceful resolution. We for AT&T in both Spanish and English publica- and the Department of Defense will long reap hope that next year these children will enjoy a tions, broadcasts, electronic media, and live the benefits of his tenure on the Hill. My col- wonderful summer in a peaceful Northern Ire- events. leagues and I bid a fond farewell to Lt. Col. land. Ms. Di Martino has been recognized by Mike Lepper and his wife, Joanne, and wish Who's Who in America, 100 Hispanic July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — Extensions of Remarks E 1445 Influentials in America Today, and Cattell's Boyd has guided his staff through the most and tobacco is enjoying one of its strongest Who's Who in American Politics. She has eventful and challenging period of its postwar years ever. Last year Macon County farmers been widely honored and recognized for her history. Having planned over 58 operations in placed second in the State in burley tobacco efforts in the areas of public policy, commu- direct response to National Command Author- production, bringing home more than $11.5 nications, and public service by businesses ity tasks, and ultimately executing 32 of those million to boost the local economy. and community organizations, colleges, uni- operations, General Boyd's strong and positive It is the people of Macon County that have versities, and various educational institutions, influence on U.S. foreign policy and national in addition to numerous publications and jour- security strategy will be felt well into the next made all this hard work possible. The spirit of nals. decade. community, the willingness to always look for Through MANA's scholarship program Ms. The United States Air Force will not forget new ways to make your community a better Di Martino and her achievements will continue General Boyd's many years of faithful and place to live is contagious. The Donoho Hotel to inspire and enable generations of young dedicated service to his country. Throughout and the Red Boiling Springs Inn are two ex- Hispanic women to strive to be the leaders of his service he has demonstrated not only amples. They're enjoying a rebirth and the tomorrow. courage and bravery, but shown his patriotism Macon County Chamber of Commerce is f toward his country. Perhaps he is best rep- working to spread the word to potential tour- resented by the statue of Karl W. Richter, a ists about the beauty of Macon County. CONGRATULATIONS GEN. CHARLES statue dedicated to the brave souls from the G. BOYD ON HIS RETIREMENT I am proud of all our efforts and am eager Vietnam War. General Boyd's leadership, like to help write the next, successful chapter of this statue at the center of Academic Circle at Macon County's history. HON. IKE SKELTON Maxwell Air Force Base, will continue to in- OF MISSOURI spire future generations of Air Force leaders. f IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES f Monday, July 17, 1995 TRIBUTE TO DAVID PRUITT Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, today I wish to WILLIAM SICKLICK HONORED FOR congratulate Gen. Charles G. Boyd, Deputy LIFETIME OF SERVICE Commander-in-Chief of the United States Eu- HON. SONNY CALLAHAN ropean Command, who will retire on July 31, HON. CAROLYN B. MALONEY OF ALABAMA 1995. General Boyd's career spans 36 years, OF NEW YORK over a third of a century in which he has given IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES distinguished service as a leader in the United Monday, July 17, 1995 Monday, July 17, 1995 States Air Force. Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today Born in Rockwell City, IA, Chuck Boyd's Mr. CALLAHAN. Mr. Speaker, it is with deep to honor the life and mourn the sad passing of roots extend deep into the heartland of Amer- sadness that I report the death of David Carl William Sicklick, a long-time community activ- ica. He graduated from Aviation Cadet Pro- Pruitt, III, a long-time Capitol Hill staffer, and gram, Greenville Air Force Base, MI and was ist, an auxiliary police officer, and a great New my former administrative assistant. commissioned as a second lieutenant in July Yorker. 1960. As a captain, General Boyd piloted the Like all great Americans, Bill Sicklick often I know many of my colleagues and Hill staff- F±105 ``Thud'' over Vietnam, logging 105 com- answered his community's call to action. He ers remember David. He served as AA to bat missions before being shot down. He also courageously served as a captain of the Auxil- former Congressman Jack Edwards from 1965 interned for 7 years as a prisoner of war at iary Police Force, Seventh Precinct. At Gov- until 1985, when he joined my office to help various locations throughout Southeast Asia. ernor's Hospital, he served on the advisory get a new freshman acclimated to Washing- Following his release, Chuck Boyd served in a board. He was a member of Community Board ton. variety of assignments throughout Europe, the #3, and always sought to improve the lives of David Pruitt died tragically after suffering a Pacific, and the Continental United States. the disadvantaged. The positions included vice commander of the With the passing of Mr. Sicklick, we mourn heart attack at his home in Mobile, AL, on July Strategic Air Command's 8th Air Force, direc- not only a proud and capable community lead- 10. He was 61 years old. tor of plans at Headquarters U.S. Air Force, er, but also a loving family man. Mr. Sicklick David grew up in Birmingham, AL, and Washington, D.C., and commander of the Air is survived by his wife, Norma, and his two graduated from the University of Alabama. He University, Maxwell Air Force Base, AL. Gen- children, Jeffrey and Leslie. was a die-hard Tide fan all his life. After grad- eral Boyd retires as the most senior command Mr. Speaker, I would ask that my colleagues uating and military service, he moved to Mo- pilot of the Gray Eagle of the United States Air join me in saluting the life of Bill Sicklick and bile where he was the first director of what be- Force. extending sympathy to his wife, children, and came the America's Junior Miss Pageant. He Commander at the Air University was one of family. His life demonstrates truly American remained active in this pageant as well as in many positions of high importance in which values. His tireless dedication to public service the Miss Alabama and Miss America pageants General Boyd faithfully served his country. As and family are an example to us all. during his years in Washington and after his commander, he was responsible for the man- f return to Mobile. agement of 21 separate Air Force schools. His leadership has had a great impact on the pro- MACON COUNTY, TN David retired from the House of Representa- fessional military education of the entire Air tives to set up a florist business in Mobile Force. His stewardship took the command HON. BART GORDON where he was quite successful. He was active from a position of being widely criticized in this OF TENNESSEE in Mobile area civic activities. Most notably, he Chamber to one which was praised from the IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES helped found the Betbeze-Rocco House, an House floor as the finest educational com- organization offering relief and solace to those Monday, July 17, 1995 mand in the Department of Defense. His stel- infected with HIV and AIDS. He also was a lar leadership of the schools and visionary ap- Mr. GORDON. Mr. Speaker, it is with great major fund raiser for Mobile AIDS Support plication of Airpower is best demonstrated by pride that I share with my fellow Members Services. His contributions to our community the conception and implementation of the some of my thoughts about one of the most helped improve the quality of life for our resi- School for Advance Airpower Studies. This is beautiful areas of my district, Macon County, dents. a graduate level program to teach the employ- TN. ment of Airpower in Joint Coalition and Air Tucked away on the Tennessee-Kentucky One of David's finest qualities was his gen- Force pure operations. This school, General border is a place that has attracted many visi- erosity to his friends and family. Whenever Boyd's project from start to finish, will have the tors to enjoy its unique natural features, while someone was in need, David was the one greatest single impact of any educational en- still retaining a sense of community for those called because we could rely on his unfailing tity in insuring that the United States Air Force who call it home. efforts to help. He leaves many, many friends is prepared for the challenges of the 21st Cen- Macon County has endured good times and who will relish delightful memories of him. To tury. bad because Macon citizens have a tremen- them and to his sister, Jean Pruitt Holtsford, I As the Deputy Commander in chief of the dous pride in their community. We all know offer my most sincere condolences. United States European Command, General the strong tobacco tradition in Macon County E 1446 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — Extensions of Remarks July 17, 1995 PERSONAL EXPLANATION Mr. Speaker, Monroe was a long-time friend unteers. I would like to take this moment to and a businessman whom I greatly admired pay tribute to those families who have opened HON. MIKE WARD and respected. I also have a great amount of their hearts and homes to some very special OF KENTUCKY respect for Odessa Salvant, his wife, who is kids from Northern Ireland as part of Project IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES very much involved in our community as an Children. These children come from a land Monday, July 17, 1995 officer in the NAACP, and holds memberships that for too long has been steeped in violence. in other organizations. I join members of the Everyday of their young lives these children Mr. WARD. Mr. Speaker, due to the fact Cleveland community in mourning the passing have lived with the threat of violence and ter- that I was unavoidably detained, I missed sev- of Mr. Salvant. I take this opportunity to ex- ror. This year they received some news of eral rollcall votes during consideration of H.R. tend my deepest sympathy to members of the hope. The hope came in the form of a peace 1977, Interior and Related Agencies Appro- Salvant family. It is my hope that the family agreement that was signed several months priations bill, on July 13, 1995. Had I been will find comfort in knowing that others share ago. present on rollcall vote 504, Mr. HUTCHINSON's their loss. amendment to eliminate $3.5 million Federal This year 26 families from my home State of MONROE SALVANT, RAN FLOWER SHOP, subsidy for the National Trust for Historic New Jersey are sharing their homes with 30 GOLFED Preservation, I would have voted ``no.'' Had I Irish children. As part of the program, these MAYFIELD HEIGHTS.—Monroe Covington BEY children are given the opportunity to come to been present on rollcall vote 505, Mr. O 's Salvant and his wife, Odessa, operated motion for the committee to rise, I would have the United States to enjoy a carefree, fun-filled Monroe’s Flower Shop at E, 84th St. and summer. It gives them an opportunity to get voted ``aye.'' Had I been present on rollcall Cedar Ave. for 34 years. When the shop was vote 506, Mr. OBEY's motion for the committee not open, Monroe cold be found on a golf away from the violence. These 30 children will to rise, I would have voted ``aye.'' Had I been course, where he won numerous trophies. enjoy the simple pleasures of childhood present on rollcall vote 507, Mr. OBEY's pref- Mr. Salvant last swung a club when he thanks to the generosity of caring American erential motion for the committee to rise and took a few chip shots in his yard in Mayfield volunteers. report bill to House with recommendation that Heights Monday. He suffered a heart attack This year, we welcome Gemma Walker, the enacting clause be stricken, I would have later that day and was flown to Meridia Huron Hospital. He died there Tuesday Paul Kerr, Joanne Brady, Daniel Fearon, voted ``aye.'' Had I been present on rollcall morning. He was 82. Claire McKinley, Lorraine Fitzpatrick, Jennifer vote 508, Mr. OBEY's motion for the committee Mr. Salvant was born in Pass Christian, Kenny, Alice Crilly, Danielle McLonglin, David to rise, I would have voted ``aye.'' Had I been Miss. His family moved to Cleveland in the Tierney, Colum Haddock, Seadhna Billings, present on rollcall vote 509, Mr. FAZIO's early 1920s. He developed his interest in golf Seainin Keenan, Denise Burt, Terence Austin, amendment supporting the California Desert while working as a caddy at local country Barye Dobbin, Matthew Anderson, Margaret Protection Act, I would have voted ``aye.'' Had clubs. He graduated from Central High McKee, Michelle Johnston, Christopher Mel- I been present on rollcall vote 510, Mr. School in 1932 and from John Carroll Univer- rose, Kenneth Murphy, Leeanne Doyle, sity with a degree in psychology in 1939. He YOUNG's amendment striking funding for vehi- then worked in the headquarters of the Martina O'Hare, Darren Diamond, Marc cles for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, I Standard Oil Co. (Ohio) until he was drafted Hegney, Elaine Murray, Margaret White, Sonia would have voted ``no.'' Had I been present on into the Army during World War II. He O'Neill, Darren Coghlan, and Padraig O'Hara. rollcall vote 511, Mr. SANDERS's amendment served in the Counterintelligence Corps in The people that are gracious enough to transferring $3,063,000 into the Advisory the United States. open their hearts and their homes to these Council on Historic Preservation, I would have Mr. Salvant married Odessa Christopher in children are Cheryl Stone, Brian and Patricia 1941. He was a lifetime member of the voted ``aye.'' Carmen, Dennis and Mary Crowley, Anthony f NAACP, of which his wife was a local officer. Mr. Salvant was also a member of the and Marge DeSando, Al and Ellen Dorso, NOTING THE PASSING OF MONROE Catholics Interracial Council; the 6th City John and Mary Garcia, Brian and Lorri SALVANT Golf Club, the Hi Sen Golf Club, the Rey- McGorty, Robert and Dyan Moore, Gary and nards Social Club and the Sunday Night Tina Shannon, Douglas and Susanna Stroud, HON. LOUIS STOKES Bridge Club. Joseph and Barbara Wells, Steven and Aileen In addition to his wife, Mr. Salvant is sur- Williamson, James and Beverly Aibel, OF OHIO vived by a daughter, Carolyn Jean Bradford Dominick and Carolyn Daniele, Arnold and IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES of Baltimore; five grandchildren; a great- Madeline Fatteross, Rick and Arlene Faustini, Monday, July 17, 1995 grandchild; and a sister. Services will be at 9:30 a.m. Saturday at Kenneth and Arleen Ferguson, Al and Bernie Mr. STOKES. Mr. Speaker, I am saddened St. Francis of Assisi Catholic Church, 6850 Gillio, John and Anne Neebling, Stephen and to report the passing of a distinguished resi- Mayfield Rd., Gates Mills. Jean Revis, John and Lori Rose, Micheal and dent of my congressional district. The Cleve- Arrangements are being handled by the Diane Scheller, Gary and Kathryn Seaman, land community recently mourned the passing E.F. Boyd & Son Funeral Home of Cleveland. James and Louise Sweeney, Micheal and of Monroe C. Salvant. For 34 years, Mr. f Anne Tizio, John and Barbara White, and Salvant operated Monroe's Flower Shop in John and Christine Woods. IN HONOR OF THE FAMILIES AND Cleveland. Mr. Salvant was a respected mem- I know that my colleagues will join me in ex- ber of the business community. He was also PARTICIPANTS OF PROJECT CHILDREN 95 tending our best wishes to our young visitors, well known for his involvement in community- and in commending the generosity and based organizations, including the NAACP warmth displayed by their American hosts. and the Catholic Interracial Council. HON. ROBERT MENENDEZ Furthermore, we pray that the ceasefire-agree- His friends recall that Mr. Salvant was also OF NEW JERSEY ment is the beginning of a new era for North- an avid golfer. When he was not operating his IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ern Ireland. Perhaps, in the future these chil- flower shop, he could be found on the golf Monday, July 17, 1995 dren will be enjoying fresh summer breezes in course. In addition to winning numerous golf- their beloved Emerald Isle. ing trophies, Mr. Salvant was a member of the Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Speaker I rise today to Sixth City Golf Club and the Hisen Golf Club. recognize the work of some very special vol- July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — Extensions of Remarks E 1447 SENATE COMMITTEE MEETINGS Special Committee To Investigate Special Committee To Investigate Whitewater Development Corporation Whitewater Development Corporation Title IV of Senate Resolution 4, and Related Matters and Related Matters agreed to by the Senate on February 4, To continue hearings to examine issues To continue hearings to examine issues 1977, calls for establishment of a sys- relating to the President’s involvement relating to the President’s involvement tem for a computerized schedule of all with the Whitewater Development Cor- with the Whitewater Development Cor- meetings and hearings of Senate com- poration. poration. mittees, subcommittees, joint commit- SH–216 SH–216 tees, and committees of conference. 2:00 p.m. 2:00 p.m. This title requires all such committees Appropriations Foreign Relations to notify the Office of the Senate Daily Business meeting, to mark up H.R. 1817, African Affairs Subcommittee making appropriations for military To hold hearings to examine the situa- Digest—designated by the Rules Com- construction, family housing, and base mittee—of the time, place, and purpose tion in Nigeria. realignment and closure for the De- SD–419 of the meetings, when scheduled, and partment of Defense for the fiscal year any cancellations or changes in the ending September 30, 1996. JULY 21 meetings as they occur. SD–192 9:30 a.m. As an additional procedure along Foreign Relations Finance with the computerization of this infor- To hold hearings on the nominations of Frances D. Cook, of Florida, to be Am- To hold hearings to examine foreign tax mation, the Office of the Senate Daily issues, including the deferral of income Digest will prepare this information for bassador to the Sultanate of Oman, Richard Henry Jones, of Nebraska, to tax on the earnings of U.S. businesses printing in the Extensions of Remarks be Ambassador to the Republic of Leb- operating overseas, section 956A of the section of the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD anon, and Thomas W. Simons, Jr., of Internal Revenue Code, and the tax on Monday and Wednesday of each the District of Columbia, to be Ambas- treatment of passive foreign invest- week. sador to the Islamic Republic of Paki- ment companies and foreign sales cor- Meetings scheduled for Tuesday, July stan. porations. 18, 1995, may be found in the Daily Di- SD–419 SD–215 gest of today’s RECORD. Governmental Affairs 10:00 a.m. To hold hearings to review criminal debt Judiciary MEETINGS SCHEDULED collection efforts. To hold hearings to examine certain ac- SD–342 tivities of the Bureau of Alcohol, To- JULY 19 bacco and Firearms of the Department JULY 20 of the Treasury, and recent events in 8:30 a.m. Energy and Natural Resources 8:30 a.m. Tennessee. Business meeting, to mark up S. 852, to Judiciary SD–226 provide for uniform management of Business meeting, to consider pending livestock grazing on Federal land. calendar business. JULY 24 SD–366 SD–226 10:00 a.m. 9:00 a.m. 9:00 a.m. Judiciary Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry To hold hearings to examine child por- Business meeting, to continue to mark Business meeting, to continue to mark nography on the Internet. up proposed legislation to strengthen up proposed legislation to strengthen SD–226 and improve U.S. agricultural pro- and improve U.S. agricultural pro- grams. grams. JULY 25 SR–332 SR–332 9:30 a.m. 9:30 a.m. Environment and Public Works Energy and Natural Resources Environment and Public Works Drinking Water, Fisheries, and Wildlife Forests and Public Land Management Sub- Clean Air, Wetlands, Private Property, and Subcommittee committee Nuclear Safety Subcommittee To resume hearings on proposed legisla- To hold hearings on S. 45, to require the To hold oversight hearings on the imple- tion authorizing funds for programs of Secretary of the Interior to sell Fed- mentation of section 404 (relating to the Endangered Species Act. wetlands) of the Clean Water Act. SD–406 eral real and personal property held in SD–406 9:30 a.m. connection with activities carried out Finance Commerce, Science, and Transportation under the Helium Act, S. 738, to pro- To hold hearings to examine Medicare Business meeting, to consider pending hibit the Bureau of Mines from refining payment policies, focusing on how doc- calendar business. helium and selling refined helium, and tors, hospitals, and other providers are SR–253 to dispose of the United States helium paid. Finance reserve, and S. 898, to cease operation SD–215 To continue hearings to examine Medi- of the government helium refinery, au- Labor and Human Resources care payment policies, focusing on the thorize facility and crude helium dis- Business meeting, to mark up S. 856, to Medicare services experiencing the posal, and cancel the helium debt. amend the National Foundation on the most rapid growth in spending, includ- SD–366 Arts and the Humanities Act of 1965, ing home health care, skilled nursing, Indian Affairs the Museum Services Act, and the Arts To resume hearings on S. 487, to amend and Artifacts Indemnity Act to im- rehabilitation hospitals and clinical the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. prove and extend the Acts, S. 916, to laboratories. Room to be announced amend the Individuals With Disabil- SD–215 ities Education Act to extend the Act, Finance 10:00 a.m. and proposed legislation relating to Social Security and Family Policy Sub- Judiciary health centers consolidation, and to committee To hold hearings to examine issues relat- consider the nominations of Mary S. To hold hearings on provisions of S. 1029, ing to prison reform. Furlong, of California, to be a Member to establish and strengthen policies SD–226 of the National Commission on Librar- and programs for the early stabiliza- ies and Information Science, Richard J. tion of world population through the JULY 26 Stern, of Illinois, to be a Member of the global expansion of reproductive 9:30 a.m. National Council on the Arts, National choice. Labor and Human Resources Foundation on the Arts and the Hu- SR–418 To hold hearings to examine emerging manities, and Lynn Waihee, of Hawaii, Labor and Human Resources infections and their impact on society. to be a Member of the National Insti- To hold hearings on proposed legislation SD–430 to authorize funds for the Organ Trans- tute for Literacy Advisory Board. 10:00 a.m. SD–430 plant Act, focusing on the role of the Judiciary Select on Intelligence Government in the oversight, regula- To hold hearings to examine punitive To hold hearings to examine intelligence tion, and financing of solid organ and damagesreform. roles and missions. bone marrow transplantation. SD–106 SD–430 SD–226 E 1448 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — Extensions of Remarks July 17, 1995 2:00 p.m. AUGUST 1 CANCELLATIONS Commission on Security and Cooperation 2:00 p.m. in Europe Judiciary JULY 20 To resume hearings to examine the To hold hearings on pending nomina- 9:30 a.m. Chechnya crisis, focusing on prospects tions. Energy and Natural Resources for peace. SD–226 To hold hearings on S. 871, to provide for 2200 Rayburn Building AUGUST 2 the management and disposition of the Hanford Reservation, and to provide JULY 27 9:30 a.m. for environmental management activi- 10:00 a.m. Indian Affairs Business meeting, to consider pending ties at the Reservation. Judiciary SD–366 Business meeting, to consider pending calendar business; to be followed by calendar business. oversight hearings on the implementa- tion of the Indian Tribal Justice Act SD–226 (P.L. 103-176). SR–485 Monday, July 17, 1995 Daily Digest Senate Adopted: Chamber Action (1) Domenici Amendment No. 1533 (to Amend- Routine Proceedings, pages S10079–S10176 ment No. 1487), to facilitate small business involve- Measures Introduced: Seven bills and three resolu- ment in the regulatory development process. tions were introduced, as follows: S. 1039–1045, and Pages S10138±41 (2) Domenici Amendment No. 1784 (to Amend- S. Res. 151–153. Pages S10146±47 ment No. 1533), in the nature of a substitute. Measures Passed: Pages S10138±41 Portrait Monument Restoration: Senate agreed to (3) Hatch (for McCain/Lieberman) Amendment S. Con. Res. 21, directing that the ‘‘Portrait Monu- No. 1785 (to Amendment No. 1487), to repeal the ment’’ carved in the likeness of Lucretia Mott, Susan requirement that employers report certain health B. Anthony, and Elizabeth Cady Stanton, now in the coverage information to the Health Care Financing crypt of the Capitol, be restored to its original state Administration for use by the Medicare and Medic- and be placed in the Capitol Rotunda, after agreeing aid Coverage Data Bank. Pages S10141±44 to the following amendment proposed thereto: Pending: (1) Dole Amendment No. 1487, in the nature of Pages S10166±67 a substitute. Pages S10086±S10146 Hatch (for Stevens) Amendment No. 1787, to (2) Levin (for Glenn) Amendment No. 1581 (to amend the resolving clause. Pages S10166±67 Amendment No. 1487), in the nature of a sub- Federal Reports Elimination and Sunset Act: stitute. Pages S10086±S10138 Senate passed S. 790, to provide for the modification (3) Ashcroft Amendment No. 1786 (to Amend- or elimination of Federal reporting requirements, ment No. 1487), to provide for the designation of after agreeing to the following amendment proposed distressed areas within qualifying cities as Regu- thereto: Pages S10167±75 latory Relief Zones and for the selective waiver of Hatch (for McCain/Levin) Amendment No. 1788, Federal regulations within such zones. to eliminate the reports with an annual, semi-annual Pages S10145±46 reporting basis four years after enactment, and to A unanimous-consent agreement was reached pro- eliminate certain additional Department of Energy viding for a vote to occur on Levin (for Glenn) Amendment No. 1581, listed above, to occur at reports. Page S10167 2:15 p.m., on Tuesday, July 18, 1995, following Technical Corrections: Senate agreed to S. Res. which Senate will vote on the second motion to close 153, to make certain technical corrections to Senate further debate on Amendment No. 1487, listed Resolution 120. Pages S10175±76 above. Page S10146 Classification of Immigrant Children: Senate During consideration of this measure today, Senate passed S. 457, to amend the Immigration and Na- also took the following action: tionality Act to update references in the classification By 48 yeas to 46 nays (Vote No. 309), three-fifths of children for purposes of United States immigra- of those Senators duly chosen and sworn not having voted in the affirmative, Senate failed to close further tions laws. Page S10176 debate on Amendment No. 1487, listed above. Comprehensive Regulatory Reform Act: Senate Page S10135 continued consideration of S. 343, to reform the reg- A third motion was entered to close further de- ulatory process, taking action on amendments pro- bate on Amendment No. 1487, listed above and, in posed thereto, as follows: Pages S10086±S10146 accordance with the provisions of Rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate, a vote on the cloture motion will occur on Wednesday, July 19, 1995. Page S10146 D 863 D 864 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — DAILY DIGEST July 17, 1995

Senate will resume consideration of the bill on Amendments Submitted: Pages S10154±66 Tuesday, July 18, 1995. Authority for Committees: Page S10166 Nominations Received: Senate received the follow- Additional Statements: Page S10166 ing nominations: Eileen B. Claussen, of the District of Columbia, to Record Votes: One record vote was taken today. be Assistant Secretary of State for Oceans and Inter- (Total–309) Page S10135 national Environmental and Scientific Affairs. Recess: Senate convened at 9:30 a.m., and recessed Greta Joy Dicus, of Arkansas, to be a Member of at 7:18 p.m., until 9 a.m., on Tuesday, July 18, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for the term of 1995. (For Senate’s program, see the remarks of the five years expiring June 30, 1998. Acting Majority Leader in today’s RECORD on page Lee F. Jackson, of Massachusetts, to be United S10176). States Director of the European Bank for Reconstruc- tion and Development. Committee Meetings Eluid Levi Martinez, of New Mexico, to be Com- missioner of Reclamation. (Committees not listed did not meet) Ernest J. Moniz, of Massachusetts, to be an Asso- ciate Director of the Office of Science and Tech- NOMINATIONS nology Policy. Committee on Foreign Relations: Committee concluded Donald S. Wasserman, of the District of Colum- hearings on the nominations of Sandra J. Kristoff, of bia, to be a Member of the Federal Labor Relations Virginia, for the rank of Ambassador during her ten- Authority for a term of five years expiring July 1, ure of service as United States Coordinator for Asia 2000. Pacific Economic Cooperation, John Raymond Harris Wofford, of Pennsylvania, to be Chief Ex- Malott, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to Malaysia, ecutive Officer of the Corporation for National and Kenneth Michael Quinn, of Iowa, to be Ambassador Community Service. to the Kingdom of Cambodia, William H. Itoh, of 1 Navy nomination in the rank of admiral. New Mexico, to be Ambassador to the Kingdom of Page S10176 Thailand, and J. Stapleton Roy, of Pennsylvania, to Communications: Page S10146 be Ambassador to the Republic of Indonesia, after the nominees testified and answered questions in Statements on Introduced Bills: Pages S10147±53 their own behalf. Mr. Quinn was introduced by Sen- Additional Cosponsors: Page S10153 ator McCain. h House of Representatives pendent Agencies for the fiscal year ending Septem- Chamber Action ber 30, 1996 (H. Rept. 104–190). Page H7067 Bills Introduced: Five public bills, H.R. Speaker Pro Tempore: Read a letter from the 2043–2047; one private bill, H.R. 2048; and one Speaker wherein he designates Representative Everett resolution, H. Res. 191 were introduced. Page H7067 to act as Speaker pro tempore for today. Page H7015 Reports Filed: Reports were filed as follows: Recess: House recessed at 10:31 a.m. and recon- H.J. Res. 96, disapproving the extension of non- vened at noon. Page H7015 discriminatory treatment (most-favored-nation treat- ment) to the products of the People’s Republic of Presidential Message—Arctic Research: Read a China; adversely (H. Rept. 104–188); message from the President wherein he transmits the S. 268, to authorize the collection of fees for ex- fourth biennial revision (1996–2000) to the United penses for triploid grass carp certification inspections States Arctic Research Plan—referred to the Com- (H. Rept. 104–189); and mittee on Science. Page H7016 H. Res. 190, providing for the consideration of Recess: House recessed at 12:14 p.m. and recon- H.R. 2020, making appropriations for the Treasury vened at 4:04 p.m.; and recessed at 5:34 p.m. and Department, the United States Postal Service, the reconvened at 6:03 p.m. Pages H7017, H7030 Executive Office of the President, and certain Inde- July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — DAILY DIGEST D 865 Agriculture Appropriations: House completed all Arts by $10 million (rejected by a recorded vote of debate on H. Res. 188, providing for consideration 179 ayes to 227 noes, Roll No. 512); and of H.R. 1976, making appropriations for Agri- Pages H7032±39, H7047±48 culture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Admin- The Tiahrt amendment that sought to reduce the istration, and Related Agencies programs for the fis- appropriation for fossil energy research and develop- cal year ending September 30, 1996. The vote on or- ment by $163.6 million (rejected by a recorded vote dering the previous question on the rule was post- of 144 ayes to 267 noes, Roll No. 515). poned. Pages H7017±21 Pages H7044±47, H7049±50 Committees To Sit: The following committees and Points of order were sustained against the follow- their subcommittees received permission to sit today ing amendments: during proceedings of the House under the 5-minute The Kennedy of Massachusetts amendment that rule: Committees on Government Reform and Over- sought to reduce the appropriation for the National sight, Judiciary, and Resources. Pages H7029±30 Forest System by $13.5 million and reduce the For- est Service construction account by $5 million; Interior Appropriations: House continued consid- Pages H7050±51 eration of H.R. 1977, making appropriations for the The Sanders amendment that sought to transfer Department of the Interior and related agencies for $100 million from fossil energy research and devel- the fiscal year ending September 30, 1996; but came opment to the weatherization assistance program; to no resolution thereon. Proceedings under the 5- Page H7054 minute rule will continue on Tuesday, July 18. The Tiahrt amendment that sought to reduce Pages H7030±64 funding for energy conservation programs by $189 When the Committee of the Whole rose, votes million; and Pages H7060±61 had been postponed until Tuesday, July 18, on the The Fox amendment that sought to transfer $50 following amendments debated earlier: million from the Energy Information Administration The Schaefer amendment that seeks to strike lan- to the weatherization assistance program. guage allowing DOE to sell up to seven million bar- Pages H7061±62 rels of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and The Bass amendment was offered but subse- deposit the receipts in a fund for decommissioning quently withdrawn that sought to direct the Forest the Weeks Island site and reduces the SPR appro- Service to make a priority emergency purchase of the priation by $100 million; and Pages H7051±54 Bretton Woods tract within the White Mountain The Chabot amendment that seeks to strike all National Forest in New Hampshire. Pages H7030±31 funding for the National Endowment for the Hu- H. Res. 189, the rule which is providing for the manities. Pages H7055±60 further consideration of the bill, was agreed to earlier Agreed To: by a voice vote. Pages H7021±29, H7030 The Coburn amendment, as modified, that pro- Agreed to the Drier amendment to the rule that vides $52.5 million for the Education Department’s provides additional debate time for nine specific Office of Elementary and Secondary Education to be amendments. Page H7029 allocated to local educational agencies for Indian education programs and to reduce the Forest Service Amendments Ordered Printed: Amendments or- general administrative account by $10 million; dered printed pursuant to the rule appear on pages H7068–71. Pages H7031±32 The Smith of Washington amendment that re- Quorum Calls—Votes: Four recorded votes devel- duces the funding on the Woodrow Wilson Inter- oped during the proceedings of the House today and national Center for Scholars by $1 million (agreed to appear on pages H7047–48, H7048, H7049, and by a recorded vote of 286 ayes and 124 noes, Roll H7049–50. There were no quorum calls. No. 513); Pages H7039±41, H7048 Adjournment: Met at 10:30 a.m. and adjourned at The Kleczka amendment that reduces funding for 10:32 p.m. fossil energy research and development by $5 million (agreed to by a recorded vote of 251 ayes to 160 Committee Meetings noes, Roll No. 514); and Pages H7041±43, H7049 The Skaggs amendment, as modified, that pro- IMMIGRATION IN THE NATIONAL vides an additional $3.5 million for the weatheriza- INTEREST ACT tion assistance program. Pages H7054±55 Committee on the Judiciary: Subcommittee on Immi- Rejected: gration and Claims continued markup of H.R. 1915, The Stearns amendment that sought to reduce the Immigration in the National Interest Act of 1995. appropriation for the National Endowment for the Will continue tomorrow. D 866 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — DAILY DIGEST July 17, 1995 TREASURY—POSTAL SERVICE Committee on Finance, to hold hearings on deficit reduc- APPROPRIATIONS tion fuel taxes and diesel dyeing requirements, 9 a.m., SD–215. Committee on Rules: Granted an open rule providing Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Youth Vio- one hour of general debate on H.R. 2020, making lence, to hold hearings to examine the Federal govern- appropriations for the Treasury Department, the ment’s role in helping prevent guns in schools, 10 a.m., United States Postal Service, the Executive Office of SD–226. the President, and certain Independent Agencies for Full Committee, to hold hearings on pending nomina- the fiscal year ending September 30, 1996. The rule tions, 2 p.m., SD–226. waives clause 2 (prohibiting unauthorized and legis- Committee on Labor and Human Resources, to hold hear- lative provisions), and clause 6 (prohibiting reappro- ings on S. 1028, to provide increased access to health care priations) of rule XXI against provisions in the bill, benefits, to provide increased portability of health care except as follows: beginning with ‘‘Provided further’’ benefits, to provide increased security of health care bene- on page 33, line 2, through ‘‘Maryland:’’ on line 13; fits, and to increase the purchasing power of individuals and small employers, 9:30 a.m., SD–430. and page 42, line 9, through page 43, line 6. Special Committee To Investigate Whitewater Devel- The rule provides for the reading of the bill by opment Corporation and Related Matters, to hold hear- title, rather than by paragraph or numbered section, ings to examine issues relating to the President’s involve- for amendment, and each title is considered as read. ment with the Whitewater Development Corporation, The rule authorizes the Chairman of the Committee 9:30 a.m., SH–216. of the Whole to accord priority in recognition to Members who have pre-printed their amendment in NOTICE the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. Finally, the rule pro- For a listing of Senate Committee Meetings sched- vides one motion to recommit with or without in- uled ahead, see pages E1447–48 in today’s RECORD. structions. Testimony was hear from Representatives Lighfoot, Dornan, Cox, McIntosh, Hoyer, and House Schroeder. Committee on Agriculture, to mark up the following bills: f H.R. 714, Illinois Land Conservation Act of 1995; H.R. 701, to authorize the Secretary of Agriculture to convey COMMITTEE MEETINGS FOR TUESDAY, lands to the city of Rolla, MO; and H.R. 1874, to mod- JULY 18, 1995 ify the boundaries of the Talladega National Forest, AL, 9:30 a.m., 1300 Longworth. (Committee meetings are open unless otherwise indicated) Committee on Appropriations, to consider the following: Revised Section 602 (b) Budget Allocations for fiscal year Senate 1996; and VA, HUD and Independent Agencies appro- Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry, business priations for fiscal year 1996, 8:15 a.m., 2360 Rayburn. meeting, to mark up proposed legislation to strengthen Committee on Commerce, Subcommittee on Commerce, and improve U.S. agricultural programs., 9 a.m., SR–332. Trade and, Hazardous Materials, to continue hearings on Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Defense, the reauthorization of the Superfund program, 10 a.m., to hold hearings on proposed budget estimates for fiscal 2322 Rayburn. year 1996 for the Department of Defense, 9:30 a.m., Subcommittee on Health and Environment, to con- SD–138. tinue hearings on the Future of the Medicare program, 10 Full Committee, business meeting, to consider 602(b) a.m., 2123 Rayburn. subcommittee allocations of budget outlays and new Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, to mark budget authority allocated to the committee in up the following bills: H.R. 1655, Intelligence Author- H.Con.Res. 67, setting forth the congressional budget for ization Act for fiscal year 1996; and the Regulatory Sun- the United States Government for fiscal years 1996, set and Review Act of 1995, 1:30 p.m., 2154 Rayburn. 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, and 2002, and to mark Committee on House Oversight, to consider pending busi- up H.R. 1854, making appropriations for the Legislative ness, 10 a.m., 1310 Longworth. Branch for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1996, 3 Committee on International Relations, Subcommittee on p.m., SD–192. Asia and the Pacific and the Subcommittee on Inter- Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to hold hear- national Economic Policy and Trade, joint hearing on the ings to review existing oil production at Prudhoe Bay, Future of Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), 2 Alaska and opportunities for new production on the p.m., 2200 Rayburn. coastal plain of arctic Alaska, 9:30 a.m., SD–366. Subcommittee on International Operations and Human Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, to hold Rights, hearing on the Beijing Conference on Women, 10 hearings to examine First Amendment activities, includ- a.m., 2172 Rayburn. ing sales of message-bearing merchandise, on public lands Committee on the Judiciary, to continue markup of H.R. managed by the National Park Service and the U.S. For- 1833, Partial-Birth Ban Act of 1995, 9:30 a.m., 2141 est Service, 2:30 p.m., SD–366. Rayburn. July 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — DAILY DIGEST D 867

Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims, to continue Committee on Small Business, oversight hearing on the markup of H.R. 1915, Immigration in the National In- Administration’s Regulatory Reduction Efforts Regarding terest Act of 1995, 3 p.m., 2237 Rayburn. Small Businesses, 10 a.m., 2359 Rayburn. Committee on Resources, Subcommittee on Energy and Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, executive, to Mineral Resources, hearing on H.R. 1975, Royalty Fair- consider pending business, 2 p.m., HT–2M Capitol. ness Act, 2 p.m., 1324 Longworth. Committee on Ways and Means, Subcommittee on Over- Subcommittees on Fisheries, Wildlife and Oceans, sight, hearing on the IRS’s Taxpayer Compliance Meas- oversight hearing to assess the governmental urement Program, 10 a.m., B–318 Rayburn. reorganizations’s effect on marine affairs, wildlife re- Subcommittee on Trade, hearing on the Organization sources and oceanography, 10 a.m., 1334 Longworth. for Economic Cooperation and Development Agreement Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Lands, to on Shipbuilding, 10 a.m., 1100 Longworth. mark up the following bills: H.R. 238, Ozark Wild Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, executive, brief- Horses Protection Act; and H.R. 1745, Utah Public Lands Management Act of 1995, 10 a.m., 1324 Long- ing on Denial and Deception, 10 a.m., H–405 Capitol. worth. D 868 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — DAILY DIGEST July 17, 1995

Next Meeting of the SENATE Next Meeting of the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 9 a.m., Tuesday, July 18 9 a.m., Tuesday, July 18

Senate Chamber House Chamber Program for Tuesday: After the recognition of five Sen- Program for Tuesday: Consideration of the rule and ators for speeches and the transaction of any morning general debate only on H.R. 2020, Treasury—Postal business (not to extend beyond 10 a.m.), Senate will re- Service Appropriations for fiscal year 1996 (open rule, 1 sume consideration of S. 343, Comprehensive Regulatory hour of general debate); Reform Act, with a vote on Levin (for Glenn) Amend- Complete consideration of H.R. 1977, Interior Appro- ment No. 1581, to occur at 2:15 p.m., following which priations for fiscal year 1996; a second vote on a motion to close further debate on Vote on previous question and rule on H.R. 1976, Ag- Amendment No. 1487, will occur thereon. riculture Appropriations for fiscal year 1996; and (Senate will recess from 12:30 p.m. until 2:15 p.m. for re- Complete consideration of H.R. 2020, Treasury—Post- spective party conferences.) al Service Appropriations for fiscal year 1996.

Extensions of Remarks, as inserted in this issue

HOUSE Gordon, Bart, Tenn., E1445 Serrano, Jose´ E., N.Y., E1444 Hansen, James V., Utah, E1443 Skelton, Ike, Mo., E1445 Bachus, Spencer, Ala., E1443 Laughlin, Greg, Tex., E1444 Stokes, Louis, Ohio, E1446 Baker, Bill, Calif., E1443 Maloney, Carolyn B., N.Y., E1445 Ward, Mike, Ky., E1446 Callahan, Sonny, Ala., E1445 Menendez, Robert, N.J., E1444, E1446

E PL UR UM IB N U U S The public proceedings of each House of Congress, as reported by the Official Reporters thereof, are printed pursuant to directions Congressional Record of the Joint Committee on Printing as authorized by appropriate provisions of Title 44, United States Code, and published for each day that one or both Houses are in session, excepting very infrequent instances when two or more unusually small consecutive issues are printed at one time. ¶ The Congressional Record is available as an online database through GPO Access, a service of the U.S. Government Printing Office. The online database is updated each day the Congressional Record is published. The database includes both text and graphics from the beginning of the 103d Congress, 2d Session (January 1994) forward. It is available on a Wide Area Information Server (WAIS) through the Internet and via asynchronous dial-in. The annual subscription fee for a single workstation is $375. Six month subscriptions are available for $200 and one month of access can be purchased for $35. Discounts are available for multiple-workstation subscriptions. To subscribe, Internet users should telnet swais.access.gpo.gov and login as newuser (all lower case); no password is required. Dial in users should use communications software and modem to call (202) 512–1661 and login as swais (all lower case); no password is required; at the second login prompt, login as newuser (all lower case); no password is required. Follow the instructions on the screen to register for a subscription for the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access. For assistance, contact the GPO Access User Support Team by sending Internet e-mail to [email protected], or a fax to (202) 512–1262, or by calling (202) 512–1530 between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern time, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. ¶ The Congressional Record paper and 24x microfiche will be furnished by mail to subscribers, free of postage, at the following prices: paper edition, $112.50 for six months, $225 per year, or purchased for $1.50 per issue, payable in advance; microfiche edition, $118 per year, or purchased for $1.50 per issue payable in advance. The semimonthly Congressional Record Index may be purchased for the same per issue prices. Remit check or money order, made payable to the Superintendent of Documents, directly to the Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402. ¶ Following each session of Congress, the daily Congressional Record is revised, printed, permanently bound and sold by the Superintendent of Documents in individual parts or by sets. ¶ With the exception of copyrighted articles, there are no restrictions on the republication of material from the Congressional Record.