Jeff Bingaman

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. I ask unanimous consent that further reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending amendment be temporarily set aside.

Mr. BINGAMAN. I did not hear the request.

Mr. BINGAMAN. If there is a request, I ask I be given 5 minutes to summarize my arguments before we go to a final vote.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, let me just conclude by saying that this amendment goes to the funding which is intended for tribes and tribal organizations to assist in the education of their own children. These are the only funds anywhere in this bill or, as far as I know, anywhere in any of the appropriations bills that are intended to empower tribes to assist in the education of their own children. We give a lot of speeches about empowering people to do things. I think this is a priority. I think we ought to fund this. I regret that we are having to reduce other accounts by 2 percent, but this is a higher priority. I would rather reduce those accounts 2 percent than this funding level here, 34 percent, which is what the present bill calls for. Mr. President, I think the yeas and nays have been requested already.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, over the past several months, I have met with several groups from New Mexico's Indian tribes to discuss the Indian Health Service and the health needs of American Indians. Many mentioned to me that, like the rest of the population in the United States, the incidences of HIV and AIDS is growing among native American populations. I learned recently that on the Navajo Nation, which includes parts of the States of New Mexico, Arizona, and Utah, 53 cases of HIV and AIDS have been reported to IHS. A few years ago, there were almost none. Unfortunately, many of the people who care for HIV-AIDS-infected native Americans believe that the IHS has not begun taking aggressive steps to meet this growing--and potentially very costly--need. Current IHS policy is to treat HIV-AIDS-infected patients with general IHS service funds. The IHS is not funded through the Ryan White CARE Act, although I believe it should be. The result is that already insufficient funds are squeezed even tighter. My amendment would simply require the IHS to do a little preplanning. It directs the IHS to undertake a study of the existing need and develop a plan for meeting the need. Specifically: (I) Study: The Secretary is directed to report to Congress, by Service unit, on: (1) incidences of HIV-AIDS among the American Indians and Alaska Natives; (2) services provided under the PHS Act to HIV- AIDS-positive Indians; (3) unmet needs, including preventive educational needs, of Indians and Alaska Natives living with HIV-AIDS who use the IHS for primary health care; (4) capacity of each Service unit to meet the existing need; and (5) resources, including education, needed to meet existing and projected need. (II) Plan: Based on the results of the study, the Secretary is directed to develop a plan meeting the existing and projected needs. Mr. President, I want to thank the managers of bill for accepting my amendment, and I look forward to working on this issue with them and other interested Members of Congress as the Interior appropriations bill goes to conference with the House. I believe we will be able to effectively deal with this amendment and its reporting requirements during the conference.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I thank the floor managers, the distinguished Senator from Washington [Mr. Gorton], and the distinguished Senator for West Virginia [Mr. Byrd], and the members of their staffs, for working with me on this amendment. I am very pleased that they have agreed to accept it. I offered this amendment to help ensure that the IHS meets the health care needs of the American Indians in an equitable, cost-efficient manner. The amendment requires the Secretary to submit a report to the Congress that contains a comparison and analysis of IHS staffing by health facility and service unit. For several years, I have been very concerned about the inability of the Indian Health Service to fully meet the health care needs of American Indians in my home State of New Mexico and throughout the country. I am particularly apprehensive about the new IHS hospital in Shiprock, NM, which opened last year under-staffed and which remains understaffed today. Too often in the past, the Federal Government has overlooked the health care needs of American Indians. As a result, the IHS currently meets only 45 percent of the total estimated health care need of our Nation's 1.3 million Indians and Alaska Natives. I am concerned that in our zeal to lower the Federal budget deficit and cut waste from the system, we will do harm to Indian children and families if we do not develop strategies for dealing with existing and project funding and staffing shortfalls. We need to work together to streamline administrative services, eliminate bureaucratic waste, and maximize existing resources through the thoughtful, mandatory redistribution of personnel and equipment from areas of lesser need and low productivity to areas of greater need and potential. This amendment will help us achieve these goals. Specifically: First, distribution study and report: To ensure that the Indian Health Service meets the health care needs of the American Indians in an equitable manner, the Secretary is directed to submit to the Congress a report containing a comparative analysis of Indian Health Service staffing by health facility and Service Unit. Such report and analysis shall: First, intra-facility ratio: Compare the ratio of health care providers--by profession--to patients in each IHS hospital facility and clinic; Second, Inter-facility ratio: Compare facility ratios throughout the IHS system to ensure that all areas of the country are being served equitably; and Third, Overall staffing distribution: Analyze overall staffing and distribution levels, including all types of health professionals, support staff, and administrative staff. Again, I thank the managers of the bill and their staffs for accepting this amendment. klamath national wildlife refuge pesticide use

Mr. BINGAMAN. I fully agree that, at a minimum, we have to be able to proceed with the rules affecting Federal facilities. Once built, the taxpayers will have to cover the energy bills for the life of a facility. These standards are required by the Energy Policy Act, which was overwhelmingly supported by the Senate. Furthermore, under the Federal budget situation, we have to do everything we can to minimize ongoing operating costs. To summarize the amendment, it is my understanding that this amendment will only preclude the proposal, issuance, or prescription of rules on new or amended appliance and equipment standards. Testing and labeling will continue. There will not be any limit on grants for State programs or the Home Energy Ratings Systems [HERS] pilot projects. oriskany battlefield

Mr. BINGAMAN. I would like to engage in a colloquy on this amendment with the bill manager, Senator Gorton, and Senator Ford. Federal appliance efficiency standards were established because manufacturers wanted one Federal standard as opposed to 50 different, and perhaps inconsistent, standards. If the Department of Energy cannot implement Federal standards, the States might attempt to revive their individual programs. The appliance standards adopted to date will save consumers a net of $132 billion over the lifetime of the affected products. The Department has committed to work cooperatively with manufacturers to address concerns raised in current reviews of the appliance standards. Where industry has raised significant criticisms of DOE's analysis or approach, as with recent proposals concerning fluorescent lamp ballasts and electric water heaters, DOE has organized workshops and public meetings with manufacturers to solicit further input and work together to correct the problems. The consensus approach to revising standards should be continued.

Mr. BINGAMAN. I thank the Senator for discussing this subject with me. ellis island

Mr. BINGAMAN. From my understanding, the National Park Service transferred about 100 knowledgeable scientists to the NRSA in 1993. These scientists provide long-term information that helps direct management decisions. I am concerned for those scientist positions that will have to be eliminated due to budget constraints. Is it the Senator's position that the National Park Service, in coordination with the NRSA, should be included in the National Resources Science Agency's priority setting efforts for National Park Service research.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, let me ask Senator Gorton a question concerning scientists currently employed by the National Resources Science Agency [NRSA] who had been transferred from the National Park Service in 1993.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I want to take a minute and then defer to the Senator from Washington, and then take the last minute to make a final plea for this amendment. Mr. President, this amendment would restore $126.6 million for Indian education programs that are funded on a competitive basis. The funds go to Indian tribes and Indian tribal organizations. The bill, as it presently stands, contemplates a 34-percent cut in these funds for Indian education. I think that is not a responsible course for us to follow. The amendment has an offset, which essentially is a 2-percent reduction across the board in all other accounts covered by the bill. I know that is not a good result in the eyes of many people, but I do think that the priority of this Senate should be to put in funds for the education of our children and particularly the Indian children of this country who depend upon the Federal Government for support. I will yield 2 minutes to the Senator from Washington.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I would ask unanimous consent that further proceedings under the quorum call be dispensed with.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, today I rise in support of the Codes and Standards Program as mandated under the Energy Policy Act of 1992. Federal appliance efficiency standards were established because manufacturers wanted one federal standard as opposed to 50 different, and perhaps inconsistent, standards. The consumer benefits from the Codes and Standards program. The program establishes minimum energy conservation standards for a variety of electrical components, electrical consumer goods and building codes. The effects of the Codes and Standards program are significant. For example, new energy standards for clothes washers have the potential to save consumers up to two-thirds of their current energy and water costs before the end of the decade. The appliance standards adopted to date will save consumers a net of $132 billion over the lifetime of the affected products. What is good for the consumer is good for the industry. The further benefits of this program are: The standards also decrease pressure on utilities to build new power plants; preserve precious natural fuel resources; promote greater water conservation in drought stricken states; make U.S. products more competitive in domestic markets against foreign competition. I know that the industry has raised significant criticisms of the Department of Energy. As a result, the Department has organized workshops and public meetings with manufacturers to work towards consensus. I support continuing a consensus approach to revising standards. Today, the Senate has accepted an amendment that will preclude the proposal, issuance or prescription of rules on new or amended appliance and equipment standards for one year. After this limited time period for technical review, I urge my colleagues to remain firmly in support of the Codes and Standards program.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, this is a very straightforward amendment, and I do not believe it is controversial. It calls for the head of each agency for which funds are made available under the act to take action to try and reduce by 5 percent the energy costs of the facilities used by that agency in the next fiscal year. It is an amendment that is essentially identical to the amendment that we have offered to each of the appropriations bills this year. I do not believe there is any objection to it on either the Republican or Democratic side. I urge my colleagues to support the amendment. I yield the floor.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that further reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Thank you, Mr. President.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, could I inquire if a Bingaman amendment is reserved?

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Vermont. Based on the statement that the manager of the bill has made about the Senator from Kansas intending to put a statement in the Record but allowing this to be voice voted, I have no objection to that procedure. If we could dispose of it at this time, I urge adoption of the amendment.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I just informed the manager I was advised by Senator Jeffords he did want to speak briefly in favor. I do not know if that is still the case, but we are checking on that. If we can just have another few moments with which to do that, and then have a voice vote? I certainly do not require a rollcall vote on the issue. I would just like him to be able to make a statement if he desires to do so.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I rise today as a cosponsor of the Leahy-Jeffords amendment to restore funding to the National Endowment for the Arts, the National Endowment for the Humanities, and the Institute for Museum Services. I believe it is important to note at the outset that this amendment will not fully restore funding for any of these agencies. Indeed, these agencies are still will face cuts approximately twice that of overall spending in the Interior appropriations bill. Mr. President, I would like to share with the Senate just a few of the worthy programs in New Mexico that received funding in fiscal year 1995 from these agencies. This funding includes $6,100 that the Museum of New Mexico received from the NEA for a traveling exhibit exploring the 20th century phenomenon of Hispanic women as santeras, or makers of saint icons, called ``The Art of the Santera.'' The making of santos is a particularly beautiful and respected art form in New Mexico, and this exhibit traveled throughout the Southwest. The museum also received NEA funding for a family photography project, which served over 24,000 New Mexicans in Raton, Aztec, Jemez, Fort Selden, Clovis, and Las Cruces. Participants in these mostly rural communities learned how to preserves old family photos, and used the photos to improve their understanding of their history and culture. The Museum of Indian Arts and Culture benefited from several NEA grants this year, including $34,000 for the ``Families and Communities'' demonstration and mentoring program. With this funding, the museum will be able to establish eight teams of established and younger Indian artists to conceive, create, and demonstrate their traditional arts. Visitors to the museum will be able to discuss and interact with the teams as they work. Mr. President, both of these award highlight the role the NEA has played and should continue to play in creating and disseminating culture, and facilitating communication and appreciation among the diverse communities living in New Mexico and throughout the Nation. In an increasingly balkanized society, we have more than enough issues that drive us apart. Art is a powerful tool we can use in our attempts to create ties that bind us back together. The NEA is also an important tool in educating our children. We know that many important skills can be taught to children using the arts. Yet in my State, and throughout the Nation, schools are struggling to find funding for art education. I believe that the NEA can help leverage funding for this important activity. The city of Santa Fe, for example, recently applied for a grant of up to $175,000 for arts education. I am told that this application was instrumental to the city council's quick approval of a commitment to match that funding. It is likely that if the city is successful in establishing this program with seed money from the NEA, it will find a way to continue the program, perhaps with the help of private funding. I believe the experience of the city of Santa Fe is a perfect example of how the NEA has been able, with limited funding, to seed the development of enduring and very beneficial programs. The final NEA grant in New Mexico I would briefly like to highlight was given to the Fund for Folk Culture, a national organization headquartered in Santa Fe. The Fund for Folk Culture has been able, with a $50,000 grant from the NEA, to hire a staff person to administer $750,000 in privately donated funds for grants to support folk art throughout the Nation. The NEA funding is needed because of the difficulty the Fund for Folk Culture faces in raising any private foundation money for salaries and administration. Mr. President, this grant is leveraging 15 times the amount of the NEA grant. I challenge my colleagues to point to other Federal programs with this sort of leveraging effect. The NEH and IMS also fund outstanding projects in New Mexico. One that I have found particularly interesting is a grant the University of New Mexico has received from the NEH to find, catalog, and microfilm 2,600 historic newspapers. I am told by the managers of this project that many of the newspapers they are saving through this project are literally coming out of the attics of New Mexicans who had previously had no understanding of the historic resources lurking there. So far, 300,000 pages have been microfilmed as part of this effort, which is part of a nationwide historic preservation project. When complete, the project will be an invaluable resource for both historians and residents of many of the small, rural communities in New Mexico and throughout the Nation. Mr. President, I could continue for some time on the benefits brought to my State and the Nation by the National Endowment for the Arts, the National Endowment for the Humanities, and the Institute for Museum Services. I believe that the examples I have given, however, highlight the central point I wish to make: Far from funding frivolous culture for the elite with public money, the NEA, NEH, and IMS are leveraging funding for educating our children, leveraging large amounts of private funding, and providing access to the arts and humanities for rural and disadvantaged American. This support is, in my opinion, critical to our sense of nation, and our ability to bridge the cultural differences that so often tear us apart rather than bring us together. For all of these reasons, I am proud to cosponsor the amendment of my colleagues from Vermont.