Kit Bond

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. The Senator is correct. The statement of the managers is not intended to limit the EPA's authority with respect to dredging contaminated sediments that pose a substantial threat to public health or the environment where EPA has found, consistent with its contaminated sediment management strategy, that dredging is an appropriate response action. economic development initiatives

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I join with my colleague from Maryland in expressing our appreciation to the House authorizing committee. She mentioned Senator Sarbanes. I want to express my sincere appreciation to Senator Mack. They spent 4 years in ``legislative purgatory'' attempting to come up with a resolution of these very difficult and important issues.

Mr. BOND. I thank our distinguished ranking member, Senator Mikulski. Before I get into the bill, let me say Senator Mikulski and her staff have given us tremendous cooperation, guidance and support. The process is always very difficult in this bill, but it runs much more smoothly because of her leadership, her guidance, and her deep concern for all of the programs covered. Mr. President, I am pleased to present to the Senate the conference report on the fiscal year 1999 VA-HUD and independent agencies appropriations bill. The conference report provides $93.4 billion, including $23.3 billion in mandatory veterans' benefits. I believe this represents a fair and balanced approach to meeting the many compelling needs that are afforded this subcommittee, particularly in the face of a very tight budget allocation. The conference report accords the highest priority to veterans' needs, providing $439 million more than the President's request for veterans' programs. Other priorities include elderly housing, protecting environmental spending, and ensuring sufficient funding for space and science. We did our best to satisfy priorities of Senators who made special requests for such items as economic development grants, water infrastructure improvements, and similar vitally important infrastructure investments. Such requests numbered over 1,000 individual items, illustrating the level of interest and the demand for assistance provided in this bill. We also attempted to address the administration's top concerns wherever possible, including funding for 50,000 new incremental housing vouchers, funding for the National Service Program at the current year rate, additional funding for the cleanup of Boston Harbor, and $650 million in advance funding for Superfund, contingent upon authorization and reform of the Superfund Program by August 1, 1999. For the Department of Veterans Affairs, the conference report provides a total of $42.6 billion. This includes $17.306 billion for veterans medical care. That figure is $278 million more than the President's request, and $249 million more than the 1998 level. Thus, we have increased by just about a quarter of a billion dollars the amount of money going to veterans health care above what was available for the past fiscal year. There was a strong consensus in this body, on a bipartisan basis, that the President's request for veterans medical care was inadequate, and that additional funds were needed to ensure the highest quality care to all eligible veterans seeking care. Funds above the President's request also provided for construction, research, State veterans nursing homes, and the processing of veterans claims. I am confident these additional funds will be spent to honor and care for our Nation's veterans. In HUD, the conference report provides for the Department of Housing and Urban Development a total of $26 billion. Again, this is $1 billion over the President's request. We were able to provide this significant increase in funding because of additional savings from excess section 8 project-based funds as well as savings from our reform of how HUD conducts its FHA property disposition program. Because of these savings and reforms, we have been able to increase funding for a number of important HUD programs, including increasing critically needed funding for public housing modernization from $2.55 billion to $3 billion; increasing HOPE VI to eliminate distressed public housing from $550 million to $625 million; increasing the very important local government top priority, Community Development Block Grants from $4.675 billion to $4.750 billion. We increased HOME funds, providing the flexibility for local governments to make improvements in providing needed housing for low- income and needy residents, from $1.5 billion to $1.6 billion, and we increased funding for homeless assistance from $823 million to over $1 billion, including requirements for HUD, recapturing and reprogramming unused homeless funds. We also included $854 million for section 202 elderly housing, and section 811 disabled housing. This is an increase of some $550 million over the President's request for the section 202 program. This reflects the sense of this body, expressed in a resolution jointly sponsored by my ranking member and myself, saying that we could not afford an 80-percent cut in assistance for elderly housing as proposed by the Office of Management and Budget. I want to be clear that these funding decisions for HUD do not reflect a vote of confidence for HUD. HUD remains a troubled agency with significant capacity problems and dysfunctional decisionmaking. Let me remind my colleagues that HUD remains designated as a high-risk area by the General Accounting Office, the only department-wide agency ever so designated. I am not confident that HUD is making appropriate progress. I also want to warn my colleagues that, while we have provided the additional 50,000 welfare-to-work incremental vouchers that the administration requested, HUD and we are fast approaching a train wreck. And the debris will be on our hands. Let me call our colleagues' attention to this chart. It shows an explosion. To be specific, in fiscal year 1997 we had to appropriate $3.6 billion in budget authority for the renewal of existing section 8 vouchers. These are the renewals for people who are now receiving section 8 assistance. Because in prior years we had multiyear authorizations, those authorizations are expiring, and just to maintain the section 8 assistance we are providing we had to go up to $8.2 billion this year. We will go up next year to $11.1 billion, the year after $12.8 billion, and by 2004 we will have to find budget authority of $18.2 billion, just to maintain the section 8 certificates, the vouchers for assisted housing for those in need that we already provide. So, this is a budgetary problem of huge magnitude and it is something that is coming. Unless we are to stop providing assistance for those who need section 8, we are going to have to find in the budget room for that much budget authority. I have asked HUD repeatedly, in hearings before our committee, to address this fiscal crisis. Yet HUD has repeatedly failed to fulfill these responsibilities. This is something this body and the House are going to have to work on next year and the year after and the year after. The problem grows significantly more severe as we move into the outyears. The conference report, at the request of the House and the leaders of the Housing Authorization Committee in the Senate--the distinguished chairman of that subcommittee, Senator Mack, will be addressing this later--includes a public housing reform bill entitled the ``Quality Housing and Work Responsibility Act of 1998.'' I congratulate the members of the authorizing committee for making significant and positive reforms to public and assisted housing programs. I believe that, given the legislative calendar and the situation, it was appropriate, with the advice, counsel and direction of the leadership, that we included it. There are some issues I want to flag now because I think we may want to come back and readdress them, as we do in so many things that we pass in the housing area in this body. I am concerned that the requirements on targeting might adversely impact the elderly poor. I am concerned about a provision that could allow HUD to micromanage housing choices of public housing families on a building-by-building basis, and I don't agree with the provision that would provide the HUD Secretary with a slush fund of some $110 million. Most of my concerns, however, relate to provisions that will become effective in fiscal year 2000. I expect that we will continue to review these areas and we will work, as we have in the past, in full cooperation with our distinguished colleagues on the authorizing committees in both the House and the Senate and discuss these further in future bills. Finally, this appropriations bill provides a significant increase for FHA mortgage insurance. We raised the floor from $86,000 to $109,000 and the ceiling for high-cost areas from $170,000 to $197,000. This is a critical provision. It means that families will have new and important opportunities to become homeowners. With respect to the Environmental Protection Agency, the conference report provides $7.650 billion for EPA. That is about $200 million more than current year funding. Included in this is the President's full request for the clean water action plan which totals $150 million in new funding, principally for State grants aimed at controlling polluted runoff or nonpoint source pollution. The conference report also provides $2.125 billion for State clean water and safe drinking water revolving funds, an increase of $275 million over the President's request and $50 million over the current year. Mr. President, I am very proud that we were able to provide this, because I think in every State, if you talk with the people who are actually doing the hard work of making sure that wastewater is cleaned up and that we have safe drinking water, they will tell you that these State revolving funds, which provide low-cost loans and enable communities to take vitally important steps necessary to ensure that they clean up their wastewater and they have safe drinking water, they will tell you that these State revolving funds are absolutely critical for meeting the long-term needs of our communities. Back to the rest of the bill, for Superfund, the conference report provides $1.5 billion, the same as the current year funding. In addition, there is an advance appropriation of $650 million, contingent upon authorization by August 1, 1999. Other high priorities in EPA, which we have funded, include particulate matter research, funding for the brownfields at the full request level, providing to the States the tools they need to prevent pollution, cleanup of waste sites and enforcing environmental laws. Almost half of the funds provided in this bill will go directly to the States for these purposes. For FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, there is a total of $827 million, approximately the same amount as current year funding, with emphasis on preparing for both natural and man-made disasters. The conference report includes the President's request of $308 million for disaster relief spending. While there are not any additional funds above the President's request for disaster relief, let me assure everyone that the current balances in the disaster relief fund are sufficient to meet all the needs at this time, including those stemming from Hurricane Georges, as well as the flooding that hit my State over the weekend and resulted in tragic deaths in the Kansas City area, as well as severe damage to homes and businesses. We all appreciate the good work FEMA has done to help the victims struggling to recover from recent devastation, whether it is hurricanes, floods or tornadoes. Our thoughts and prayers are with the many people who suffered severe losses because of natural disasters. In order to support efforts aimed at mitigating against future disasters, the conference report provides $25 million for predisaster mitigation grants. These funds are intended to ensure communities will be better prepared and that losses will be minimized when the next disaster strikes. We hope these funds will be well spent to strengthen the Nation's preparedness for natural disasters. Finally, within FEMA, the conference agreement provides the full budget amount requested by the administration in July for antiterrorism activities. My ranking member and I believe this is vitally important preparation. It is something we need to be looking at in every area, and we are very proud to be able to provide this assistance for FEMA, because this is critical as part of an interagency effort aimed at preparing States and local governments for possible terrorists incidents. For the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, NASA, the conference report provides a total of $13.665 billion. This is $200 million over the President's request, including $5.480 billion for the international space station and shuttle activities. We remain very concerned over cost overruns, and the failure of the Russian Government to meet its obligations as a partner in the development and operation of the space station. As a result, this conference report includes requirements for NASA to address Russian noncompliance and includes a provision addressing the need for NASA to explore alternative ways of doing business with the Russians. Again, I thank my distinguished ranking member for her leadership on this issue. For the National Science Foundation, the conference agreement provides $3.6 billion for NSF. This is $242 million above the enacted level for the past year. Included in this is $50 million for the plant genome program. Mapping the significant crop genomes is vitally important to the future of agriculture and to feeding our country and to feeding the hungry people of the world. This is an increase of $10 million over last year's level and the initial phases of what I believe will be a significant scientific breakthrough. Before I yield to my colleague from Maryland, I do want to take this opportunity to talk about a crisis that is wreaking havoc throughout our country. That crisis is in Medicare home health benefits. They are in severe jeopardy. The Health Care Financing Administration implemented a home health interim payment system, the IPS, which hits hundreds of home health agencies, many of which are small, freestanding providers, and has been forcing them out of business. In Missouri alone where we had last year 230 home health care agencies, 50 agencies have already shut their doors entirely or have stopped accepting Medicare patients. One of them is the largest program in the State, the St. Louis Visiting Nurses Association, but many of them are small businesses that provide vitally needed health care services. It may be in rural areas or it may be in the inner cities, but they are serving some of the most deserving, poor elderly and disabled in our country. The agencies that are being hit are those that serve the most complex cases, the ones with the most difficult challenges. Some parts of Missouri are losing their only source of home health care. My hometown of Mexico, MO, has a small rural hospital. It is the Audrain Medical Center. We are very proud of it. But recently I received a letter from David Neuendorf, the medical center's chief financial officer, describing the difficulties they are facing. He stated the following: In Mexico the HealthCor, Beacon of Hope, and Homecare Connections agencies have closed. Other firms headquartered elsewhere have closed their Mexico offices. People who need home care in this area are simply not going to be able to get it in the future. When they become sick enough they will end up in the hospital where they will receive more expensive treatment. Mr. President, in Missouri we have a well known phrase: ``Show me.'' Mr. President, people in Missouri have shown me that the interim payment system is denying access to critical home health services. The IPS is the worst case of false economy I have ever seen. If the elderly and disabled cannot get care in the home, what is going to happen? They either will wind up in the emergency room very sick or they will go into institutionalized care, going into expensive nursing homes or even hospitals, or the patients simply will not get care at all. One agency chief officer who testified before the Small Business Committee exemplifies the problem. She tells me she provides care to the most complex cases, the most difficult ones to serve in a central city area. And if this system and the proposed cuts go through, she could go out of business, and of the 350 patients she has, almost half of them would have to go immediately into nursing homes. This means that not only will Medicare costs rise, but there will be an explosion in State and Federal Medicaid budgets. We are going to have to pay for these poor, elderly, and disabled who are very sick. If we do not take care of them in the home health setting, we are going to take care of them in less convenient, less comfortable ways for them but far more expensive ways for us. We must demand this insane, inequitable, and punitive system be corrected before we adjourn. And there are many proposals floating around. I believe Members on both sides of the aisle of this body know stories about how serious this crisis is. Some of them provide needed relief to home health agencies, those whom they serve. Some of them merely add a few lifeboats to a sinking ship. But it is clear one important consideration is missing. It is imperative we restore access to home health care for medically complex patients, especially those in center cities and rural areas. We cannot just reshuffle the deck and cause losses to vulnerable patients. Mr. President, I would have addressed this under the VA-HUD bill, under the FEMA's emergency budget. Unfortunately, home health care does not qualify for disaster relief. But let me assure my colleagues, that the human disaster of failing to address this home health care problem is going to be as severe, if not more severe, than many of the tragic natural disasters we address in FEMA. Mr. President, to sum up, I am very proud of the work that we have been able to accomplish. I appreciate once again the work of my distinguished colleague. I will recognize others who have worked on this later, but now it is my pleasure to defer to the distinguished Senator from Maryland. I thank the Chair.

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from Ohio. I, too, join with him in expressing appreciation for the services of our colleague, Senator Glenn, and our colleague on the House side, Congressman Stokes. I believe it is very important that we recognize them in this bill. I thank him for his comments. Again, my sincerest thanks to Senator Mikulski, to Andy Givens, David Bowers, and Bertha Lopez on their side. On my side, this is a very difficult bill, and I could not have done it without the leadership of Jon Kamarck and the dedicated efforts of Carrie Apostolou and Lashawnda Leftwich. We have the statement by the chairman of the Budget Committee saying this bill is within the budget guidelines. I urge my colleagues to support this measure because I believe, while it has many compromises in it, they are reasonable compromises. I am most hopeful that we can have a resounding vote and see this measure signed into law. I thank the Chair and staff for their courtesies, and I urge a yes vote on the conference report. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on this conference report.

Mr. BOND. I yield to my distinguished colleague from Maryland for a request. Privilege Of The Floor

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to The Reverend Sylvester Laudermill, Jr. for his dedication and service to Saint Peter's African Methodist Episcopal (A.M.E.) church in St. Louis, Missouri. On Sunday, October 4, 1998, the St. Peter's A.M.E. Church will celebrate the good work of Reverend Sylvester Laudermill whose leadership has helped to bridge the gap between church and community. Among several of the outstanding contributions of The Reverend is his musical talent. St. Peter's Inspirational Choir is one of the most sought after choirs and they have an annual touring schedule. Another outstanding aspect is the Reverend Laudermill's family-oriented approach to faith. He is an inspiration to the entire community. I commend Reverend Laudermill for his spirit and energy throughout his many years of leadership and hope he continues to enrich the St. Louis community for years to come.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, this is an important bill that will benefit thousands of small businesses throughout the United States. I urge my colleagues strong support for its final passage.

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I rise today in support of H.R. 3412, the Year 2000 Readiness and Small Business Programs Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998. On September 15, 1998, the Committee on Small Business conducted a mark-up of H.R. 3412, a bill making technical amendments to the SBIC Program which passed the House of Representatives on March 24, 1998, and was referred to the Committee on Small Business. The Committee approved 18-0 my amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 3412, which included the Year 2000 Readiness Act (S. 2372), the Small Business Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998 (S. 2407) and portions of Senator Kerry's bill, the Small Business Loan Enhancement Act (S. 2448). Prior to approving my substitute amendment, the Committee approved seven amendments by unanimous voice votes. title i Title I addresses the Committee's concerns about the impact the Year 2000 computer problem will have on small businesses. Earlier this year, the Committee held a hearing on this problem, and the witnesses' testimony was alarming. The majority of small businesses that are likely to have Y2K computer failures are unprepared. In a study conducted by Wells Fargo Bank and the NFIB, there are an estimated 4,750,000 small employers who will encounter Y2K problems. However, only 15 percent of all businesses with under 200 employees have begun to inventory the automated systems that may be affected by this computer glitch, much less commenced fixing such systems. Given the impact that a substantial number of small business failures would have on our Nation's economy, the Committee determined that it was not only important for small businesses to be aware of the Y2K problem, but that they also had to have access to capital to fix such problems. H.R. 3412 directs SBA to establish a limited-term loan program under the FA$TRAK pilot program that would guarantee 50 percent of the principal amount of a loan made by a private lender to assist small businesses in correcting Y2K computer problems. The Committee adopted an amendment sponsored by Senator Kerry that states that all SBA-approved lenders under the 7(a) loan program may also make loans for Y2K corrections under the 7(a) loan program. Since I became Chairman of the Committee in 1995, the Committee has maintained an active role overseeing credit programs at the Small Business Administration. To assist the Committee in conducting its oversight of these credit programs, H.R. 3412 includes a new provision that requires SBA to provide notification to the Senate and House Committees on Small Business whenever it initiates or changes a pilot program under the 7(a) loan program. Further, SBA is required to report annually to the Committees on the status of each pilot program. Such report will include the number and amount of loans, the number of lenders participating, and the default rate, delinquency rate, and recovery rate for loans made under each pilot program. title ii Title II of the Year 2000 Readiness and Small Business Programs Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998 includes improvements in Federal Programs that are in great demand by small firms. Just last year, the Committee approved a significant increase in the Women's Business Center Program. Demands being placed on this program are exceeding last year's estimates, and H.R. 3412 increases the annual authorization level for grants from $8 million to $12 million. To assist the Committee in its oversight role, the bill directs the Comptroller General to conduct a baseline study and a follow-up study on the management of the Women's Business Center Program by SBA's Office of Women's Business Ownership. Last year, the Committee approved an increase from 20 percent to 23 percent in the amount of Federal prime contract dollars that will be set aside each year for small businesses. This goal is extremely important to the viability of thousands of small firms. Importantly, the Federal government is also a big winner, since small businesses delivery high quality, competitively priced goods and services. The managers' amendment that Senator Kerry and I have offered amends a provision in H.R. 3412 that requires SBA to report annually to the Senate and House Committees on Small Business on the success of each Federal agency in meeting the 23 percent goal. The provision in the bill was crafted after the Committee received a report issued in April 1998 by the Department of Energy's Office of Inspector General that indicates that the Department of Energy exploited a change in its statistical methodology to inflate its small business contracting achievements. The managers' amendment refines the provision contained in H.R. 3412 that was approved unanimously by the Committee on September 15. These changes reflect clarifications requested by the Small Business Administration, while retaining the bill's key provisions intended to discourage the reporting of erroneous or misleading statistics. At SBA's request, the managers' amendment provides for use of data from the Federal Procurement Data System in preparing reports to the Congress on Federal procurement activities. The managers' amendment also reduces the burden placed on the Chief Counsel for Advocacy for commenting on SBA letters authorizing changes in statistical methodology by the reporting agencies. As reported by the Committee on Small Business, H.R. 3412 would have allowed such letters to take effect 45 days after copies had been transmitted to the Senate and House Committee on Small Business. During this time, the Chief Counsel would have had 30 days to comment on such letters. The Chief Counsel expressed concern to us about being able to meet this deadline due to limited staff resources, so the managers' amendment changes these deadlines. The Chief Counsel's comments will now be included with the initial transmission from SBA notifying the Committees and will not be subject to a separate statutory deadline. The managers anticipate that this approach will encourage SBA to make the Chief Counsel a part of any negotiations leading to the preparation of such a letter in the first place. The managers' amendment retains three key facets of the Committee- reported bill, with some simpler language. The Committee continues to believe it is appropriate, and consistent with the Chief Counsel's other reporting responsibilities, for the Chief Counsel to comment on letters authorizing changes in statistical methodology. Second, whenever an agency seeks to reclassify contracts so they are not included in statistics issued in previous years, or are included as part of the calculation of a different statistic, the Committee wants this information disclosed. Disclosure is vital so that recipients of these statistics will know that they attempt to measure the same thing from year to year--and if they do not, how they differ. Finally, the Committee continues to require a separate calculation of what the reporting year's statistics would have been in the absence of such changes. This is intended to remove any incentive for an agency to massage its statistics to inflate its small business contracting achievements. The managers' amendment also makes an adjustment to the HUBZone program that was approved last year as part of the Small Business Reauthorization Act of 1997 (P.L. 105-135). At the request of SBA, the Department of Labor would be added to the list of Federal agencies that may participate under the HUBZone Program within the provision limiting participation to selected agencies prior to September 30, 2000. Title II of H.R. 3412 has other significant provisions to improve Federal programs to help small business owners. The following highlights the changes: The Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program is made permanent. Since this program was last re-authorized in 1992, its success has exceeded our expectations. The bill requires Federal agencies to utilize its outreach activities to encourage greater participation of small research firms from states that receive few SBIR awards. The program authorization level for participating securities under the Small Business Investment Company (SBIC) Program is increased from $800 million to $1 billion in FY 1999; from $900 million to $1.2 billion in FY 2000. Following the statutory changes in the SBIC Program approved by the Committee in 1996, the growth in the program has exceeded most estimates. The Pilot Liquidation Program under the 504 Certified Development Company Program is made permanent. A new Office of Veterans Business Development is established at SBA, which is directed to provide comprehensive help to veteran-owned small businesses. An Advisory Committee on Veterans' Business Affairs composed of 15 members is established, and a new position of National Veterans' Business Coordinator is created within SCORE. Title II also includes amendments that were offered by members of the Committee on Small Business. It includes two amendments offered by Senator Kerry. The first restructures the loan loss reserve requirements under SBA's Microloan Program. His second amendment changes SBA's appraisal standards under the 504 and 7(a) loan programs to require appraisals of real estate collateral by state-licensed or state-certified appraisers only when more than $250,000 of the loan proceeds are to be used to acquire, construct or improve real property. The Committee approved an amendment included in Title II sponsored by Senator Bumpers to strike the cap on the amount of loan funds that a single state can receive under the Microloan Program, while ensuring equitable funding to Microloan Lender Intermediaries. An amendment sponsored by Senator Cleland to establish a pilot disaster mitigation loan program at SBA was accepted. And lastly, the Committee approved an amendment offered by Senator Wellstone which authorizes a total of $20 million over four years to create the Community Development Venture Capital Demonstration Program at SBA. Title III Title III of the Year 2000 Readiness and Small Business Programs Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998 incorporates an amendment offered by Senator Burns to create the Small Business Environmental Assistance Pilot Program at SBA. The purpose of this pilot program is to provide technical assistance to small businesses to help them comply with environmental regulations. Witnesses have testified before the Committee on Small Business about the complexity of environmental regulations and the importance of environmental compliance tools designed to help small businesses comply with the law and regulations administered by the Environmental Protection Agency. The Small Business Environmental Assistance Pilot Program has two principal sections. The first establishes an Advisory Committee on Small Business Environmental Assistance Programs that will review existing programs that provide environmental assistance to small businesses and chart the course for small business environmental compliance assistance. The second section authorizes SBA to establish a demonstration grant program based on the recommendations and strategy developed by the Advisory Committee. Under this program, SBA will make 4-year grants to certain Small Business Development Centers to provide environmental compliance assistance to small businesses in partnership with existing programs. Mr. President, when the Committee on Small Business filed its report on S. 3412, the Congressional Budget Office had not completed its estimate of the costs associated with the bill. I am now in receipt of the CBO analysis of H.R. 3412 and ask unanimous consent that it be printed in the Record.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to the Gatesworth at One McKnight Place in St. Louis, Missouri on its ten-year anniversary. The Gatesworth is an extremely elegant adult living community. In its years of existence The Gatesworth has received much praise for its commitment to active independent living. During its short existence, The Gatesworth has received numerous awards including, National Home Builders ``Best Lowrise,'' Contemporary Longterm Care ``Best Interior Design,'' and Professional Builder Magazine ``Feature Performance Award,'' just to name a few. Among the outstanding features of The Gatesworth are the four story atrium, two dining rooms, 102 seat theater, fitness center with indoor pool, on- site bank, beauty shop, gift shop, convenience store, library and billiard room. I commend The Gatesworth staff for their spirit and energy throughout their ten-years of existence and hope The Gatesworth continues to prosper for several more decades.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. How long, Mr. President?

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I thank my friend from Montana. I also thank the distinguished chairman of the Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee.

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I wanted to ask, I need about 5 minutes to introduce a bill. I wanted to find out if my good friend from Montana is going to wrap up; I didn't want to interfere. But if it would be agreeable with him, and with the manager of the energy and water bill, to briefly introduce a measure, I would ask my colleagues, if that would accommodate them, if I could do that.

Mr. BOND. I ask for 5 minutes following the Senator from Montana.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, Sunday evening in St. Charles, MO, I was attending a picnic. Late in the afternoon a bright-eyed, starry-eyed 10-year-old boy came in. He had just witnessed something that is truly historic. I told the young man I hoped he had a really good memory, because I imagine that he would be telling not only his schoolmates, but his children and his grandchildren, and we might even hope his great grandchildren about it. As a matter of fact, as we travel around Missouri and other parts of the country, people have been talking about it all over. That is, of course, that on Sunday, Mark McGwire of the St. Louis Cardinals hit his 69th and 70th home run this season; a grand total of 70 home runs. To do that, he hit 5 home runs in his last 11 at bats. There were people who thought it would be very difficult to break the wonderful record that Roger Maris had established of 61 home runs. This year we saw something truly extraordinary. Another outstanding athlete, Sammy Sosa, hit 66. And the contest between these two superb athletes and wonderful human beings electrified this country. As somebody who has been a baseball fan for a long time, I was so delighted to see the excitement and enthusiasm as baseball came back to the status it has had as our Nation's pastime. People who never cared about sports in my State were clustering around the radios or the television whenever Mark McGwire came up. Mark McGwire is a man of immense physical stature, conditioning and strength. When I met him I was overwhelmed with his size and muscle. But he is a man of great mental dedication, of great concentration, determination, and--reading the column in today's Washington Post by Tom Boswell--probably possessing other extraordinary capabilities of which we mere mortals cannot be aware. He did something that, for baseball fans, was truly remarkable. It has done more for our State, the city of St. Louis--but for the country as well--when we look at the sportsmanship and the example of how hard work and determination and doggedness pay off. I would like to believe in other countries where baseball is played they felt the same excitement and the same enthusiasm that we did. To both Mark McGwire and to Sammy Sosa, we say congratulations and thank you for a wonderful season. Mr. Sosa has some more games to play with the Chicago Cubs. But I did not want this moment to pass without asking this body to consider acting on something that I think is a good idea. Actually, I read about it on the sports page. Bernie Miklasz' column in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch suggested it. I talked to my friends at the St. Louis Cardinals and they have been thinking about it. You see, there is an interstate highway that runs through St. Louis, interstate 70--a very fortuitous number, given the feat that Mr. McGwire has achieved. There are some of us--we don't want to raise a question, be nitpicking--who think he actually hit 71, if you count one in Milwaukee. But we are willing to pass on that one and say that there were 70 home runs that were hit. I am going to propose a measure today to designate a portion of interstate 70 in Missouri as the Mark McGwire Interstate Route 70; through St. Louis County and St. Louis City, to recognize the man who has not only brought baseball back to the top of everybody's mind and heart, but has done a tremendous amount for the community as well. This, I think, is a small measure for us to undertake. We are contacting our colleagues in the House to ask for their support. The mayor of St. Louis has indicated his support, and we are asking others to join with us. We hope to have clearance later on today, if we can obtain clearance to pass it in wrap-up. We also invite additional cosponsors. I have three who wish to cosponsor it to recognize this tremendous feat and to designate this in honor of the man who has really brought the thrill back to baseball and has shown that human beings have tremendous talent. I send to the desk a bill to designate the Mark McGwire Interstate Route 70. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent, before being referred, that the bill be held at the desk to seek clearance from the minority side of the aisle.

Mr. BOND. Yes.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I very much appreciate the courtesy of my distinguished colleague from Pennsylvania. I congratulate him on his leadership on this issue. These are very, very difficult procedures to describe and I know that no one here on the floor enjoys hearing them. But the fact that they are so horrendous I think is one of the reasons we are here today. Mr. President, the Senate will soon vote on whether to override the President's veto of the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act. This legislation would ban a particularly hideous form of late term abortion known as ``partial birth'' abortion. Unfortunately, while a majority of Senators supported the ban last year, the vote count was not enough at that time to override the subsequent veto by President Clinton. I hope that some Senators will have had a change of heart since then and will vote to override the veto. This is a horrible procedure. The Senator from New York, Mr. Moynihan, has likened it to infanticide. Remember that these are ``late-term'' abortions, meaning they take place during or after the 5th month of pregnancy. A fully developed fetus is brought down the birth canal, feet first, and then delivered, all but the head. Then the abortionist takes a pair of scissors, inserts them in the back of the baby's neck, and collapses the brain, and the baby is delivered: dead. I would note the American Medical Association, representing thousands of doctors, believes the ban is justified and that there is no room in medicine for this procedure. The overwhelming majority of the American people and Missourians are rightly revolted by this. Some states have banned the procedure, and the state of Missouri has come very close to banning it. Few other issues have generated so much mail and so many phone calls to my office. People feel very very strongly about banning this procedure. And it is easy to see why. And, the partial birth abortion ban has passed in both the House and the Senate by large majorities. In fact, the issue would be settled if President Clinton hadn't vetoed the bill last year, against the wishes of an overwhelming number of Americans. Rarely have I seen a President, like this one, who is willing to ignore the wishes of the overwhelming majority of the American people. The overwhelming majority is opposed to this hideous procedure. I have been asked why we are holding this vote in the Senate, when we are likely to fall short of what is needed to override the veto? We are holding this vote today because the President made a terrible mistake in vetoing the bill. It is up to Congress--it is up to Congress on this issue to listen to the people, to try to reverse it. Tomorrow we will have the opportunity to correct the President's mistake. We are going to work on it. I ask our constituents and the constituents of other Senators who may be undecided to let them know how important overriding this veto is. I hope--I sincerely, honestly, and devoutly hope--that we will muster the necessary votes to override the veto tomorrow. I thank the Chair. I particularly thank my colleague from Pennsylvania.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to vote for cloture so that the Senate may proceed to consideration of S. 1981, The Truth In Employment Act. As an original cosponsor of the bill, I applaud Senator Hutchinson for his efforts to restore balance to our federal labor laws. S. 1981 would prohibit the controversial practice of some unions called ``salting,'' while maintaining the right of all workers to choose whether or not to be represented by a union. ``Salting'' is a controversial tactic that typically involves a union instructing its agents to apply for jobs with non-union employers. If these agents, or ``salts,'' are not hired, then the union immediately files unfair labor practice charges with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) alleging discriminatory hiring. If the salt is hired, he or she attempts to convince the other employees to join the union, tries to generate unfair labor practices, and initiates complaints with other federal agencies like OSHA and EPA. Some unions have made it clear that if organizing is unsuccessful, then the goal is to drive non-union companies out of business to lessen competition for unionized businesses. S. 1981 would amend the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) to ensure that no employer is required to hire an applicant or retain an employee whose primary purpose is to disrupt the workplace through harassment, increased costs, and frivolous complaints at the direction of a union or other employer. Last Congress, the Committee on Small Business received testimony on salting and the use of such campaigns by some unions to harass and intimidate non-union employers and employees. So one denies that unions have the legal right to organize non-union workers. The problem arises when a union directs its members and business agents to gain access to a workplace not only to organize, but to harass. In the situations I have heard about in Missouri and around the country, salting campaigns involve abuse of the NLRB's procedures in an effort to put small companies out of business. For instance, over a two-year period, the NLRB at the instigation of the unions filed 48 unfair labor practice charges against a small construction contractor in Missouri. Although 47 of the charges were later thrown out by NLRB and one settled for a few hundred dollars, the employer was forced to incur $150,000 in legal fees to mount its defense. During this period, the union never sought a representational election so that employees could vote for or against joining the union. Salting campaigns can also include destruction of property, tampering with equipment, and general harassment of the non-union workforce by the union salts applying to the companies with the intention of disrupting the workplace or producing NLRB charges. As Chairman of the Committee on Small Business, I am sensitive to the concerns raised by small businesses about the effects our laws and regulations have on their ability to operate. S. 1981 provides a common sense solution to a nonsensical situation. While I support the right of workers to organize, S. 1981 would restore the balance intended between the rights of workers and of employers. Under S. 1981, only employees and applicants seeking work in good faith would be entitled to the protections provided under the NLRA. In 1995, the Supreme Court ruled that current law does not distinguish union salts from employees engaged in traditional organizing activities protected under the NLRA. S. 1981 does not overturn the Court's decision, but would amend the law to recognize the distinction between salting activities to cause economic harm to the employer versus legitimate organizing. S. 1981 retains the prohibition on employers' discriminating against bona fide employee applicants exercising their protected rights under the NLRA. I believe S. 1981 would restore the balance intended. On March 26, 1998, language identical to S. 1981 passed the House of Representatives as part of H.R. 3246, the Fairness for Small Business and Employees Act of 1998. While the House bill passed by a narrow 202- 200 vote, it is time the Senate gave full and careful consideration to this issue. I urge my colleagues to join me in voting for cloture.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to Hannibal-LaGrange College in Hannibal, Missouri. On September 15, 1998, the Hannibal-LaGrange College will celebrate its 140th anniversary. This is especially significant considering the college's first seventy years were spent in LaGrange and the second seventy have been spent in Hannibal. Hannibal-LaGrange College offers an excellent liberal arts education and throughout the years has grown, not only in number, but in opportunities available for students. Today the college offers more than thirty areas of study, night programs for working adults, eight intercollegiate sports teams and four traveling performance groups. I commend Hannibal-LaGrange College staff and students for their dedication and perseverance throughout the college's many years of existence and hope they continue to enrich the Hannibal community for years to come.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Madam President, it is a great honor and with pleasure that I introduce this resolution for myself, Mr. Ashcroft, the Senator from California, and others who may wish to join us. Yesterday, I was on this floor describing a very difficult predicament that Major League baseball was encountering. It seemed, as of early yesterday morning, that the Internal Revenue Service might say that a fan who caught a historic home run ball hit by Mark McGwire and turned it back to him might be liable for $150,000 or more in gift taxes on that ball. We pointed out that that made no sense. I am proud to say that we had bipartisan support for that proposition, Madam President. There are very few things that have brought this Chamber together more than that one simple proposition. I was very pleased yesterday afternoon to have a call from Commissioner Rossotti of the IRS, who understood the magnitude of the problem this could cause. He advised me that he has issued a release from the IRS saying that, while resolving gift tax issues is as difficult as figuring out the infield fly rule, it made sense that we congratulate a fan who returns the baseball rather than hit him with taxes. That is particularly good news to Deni Allen, a 22-year-old marketing representative from Ozark, MO, Mike Davidson, a 28-year-old St. Louis native, and Tim Forneris, a 22-year-old from Collinsville, IL, a member of the St. Louis grounds crew. They all just wanted to give Mark McGwire the baseball and didn't want to be taxed on it. Thanks to the support of this body and the action of the Commissioner, they will not be taxed. I am very pleased with that. I was also pleased to join many friends and colleagues last night in rooting for the historic home run hit by Mark McGwire. Mark McGwire's achievements are there for all to see on television, or to read about in the sports page, because this is one tremendous athlete. He hit home run ball No. 62 in his 144th game of the season. The purpose of our resolution is to recognize that historic contribution to baseball. But I also want to just spend a minute on Mark McGwire, the person. I have in my hand a copy of Sports Illustrated, which features a picture of Mark McGwire and his son, Matt McGwire. The article is entitled ``One Cool Dad.'' I think a lot of people who watched Mark McGwire in the year he has been in St. Louis, and probably before that in California, know that he is a dedicated father and he is a community leader. He has shown his willingness to serve his community by his generosity. This man is a great role model for young people in our country today, and the way he approached this record-setting mark, with due recognition for Roger Maris--also a tremendous athlete, one I greatly respected, who held the record prior to him--reflects extremely well on Mr. McGwire. I hope that I will have many cosponsors who will join in this resolution. I see several colleagues on the floor who want to discuss it, but suffice it to say that Mark McGwire has made a historic contribution to baseball. He has brought the country together. The only thing we are talking about in Missouri is Mark McGwire, not a lot of the other problems. His dedication to leadership and family values, his spirit of community contribution and leadership mark him as an outstanding gentleman who I trust all of us in this body are willing to recognize. Mrs. BOXER addressed the Chair.

Mr. BOND. I thank the Chair, and I thank all of my colleagues for their courtesy in allowing me to proceed. Mr. LIEBERMAN addressed the Chair.

Mr. BOND. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, and that any statements relating to the resolution be printed in the Record.

Mr. BOND. Madam President, the Senator from North Dakota, Mr. Conrad, wants to be added as a cosponsor to this resolution and to note that Roger Maris, who was a great hero in St. Louis, was a North Dakotan. We are very proud of the Maris family. We extend our very best wishes to Sammy Sosa, and we hope he gets into the sixties. If there are other Senators asking to add their names to the resolution, I would be happy to do that. May I add the Presiding Officer, the Senator from Maine, Ms. Collins, the Senator from Utah, Senator Bennett, and I believe the Senator from Connecticut, as cosponsors.

Mr. BOND. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Res. 273.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to the Covenant House in St. Louis, Missouri on its 25th Anniversary. Over the years, Covenant House has been an important and integral part of the low-moderate income housing community for the elderly. The Anniversary celebration will take place on September 13, with special honorees Harvey and Wilma Gerstein. The Gersteins have dedicated a great deal of their lives to the development of quality housing for the elderly. Harvey was the first- ever President of the Covenant House and still serves on the Board of Directors. Wilma is a member of the Board and serves as Chair of the Volunteer Committee. Covenant House is publicly financed and has 434 units of housing to serve its 484 elderly residents. With the continuing need for more establishments like the Covenant House, they founded the Community Aging Corporation. This Corporation provides a variety of social services to guarantee safety for the elderly in an independent setting. It is a great privilege to honor this high caliber living community and its special honorees. Dedication to one's community has become an increasingly rare quality in our society. The St. Louis community is lucky to have such a facility and I want to express my sincere appreciation to everyone who makes the Covenant House excel.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I rise today as a proud St. Louis Cardinals baseball fan. I have been a St. Louis Cardinals fan a lot longer than I have been a U.S. Senator, and I have never been more proud of the team, nor of the city and the State which supports that team. This weekend we saw the fabulous Mark McGwire hit home runs 60 and 61. And it was truly electrifying, not only for the people who were in the stands and watched the huge home runs--and when Mark McGwire hits a home run generally it is huge. He bounced one off of the dining room of the Stadium Club and it dropped back down beneath. There used to be a time when people didn't even think somebody could hit the Stadium Club. He has hit balls so far in Bush Stadium that they automatically start measuring them. The announcer of the Cardinal baseball games, the fabulous Jack Buck, talks about calling air traffic control to warn about it. There are a couple of things that I think need to be mentioned. No. 1, Mark McGwire is the kind of fine human being whom we need as a role model for our young people today, when the national spirit is sagging and we are talking about scandals. Here is a man, the first thing he did when he came to St. Louis was make a significant donation to the St. Louis Children's Hospital. He is a man who worships his son. When he crossed the plate after hitting his 61st home run, he picked up his 10-year-old son. There were some who were worried that the son might be in danger because of his enthusiasm. But Mark McGwire is truly an American hero. I would say also the same thing for Sammy Sosa, who was in the outfield with the Cubs when that 61st went out. Sammy Sosa is a class ballplayer, one we can be proud of. I will tell you something else that Missouri and the Midwest and America can be proud of, the young men who caught the home runs 60 and 61. When they were asked, ``Are you going to sell it for a million dollars?'' They said, ``No, we are going to give it back to Mark McGwire.'' And this selfless act, giving the ball back to the guy who hit it so he could give it to Cooperstown, epitomizes the spirit. The signs in the stadium said ``Baseball City U.S.A.'' St. Louis is very proud of being Baseball City and everybody who comes in there is proud of it, and they are proud of the spirit of the fans who are there. But you have to know, the Grinch appears. Today's New York Times, classic spot for the Grinch to appear: ``Fan Snaring Number 62 Faces Big Tax Bite.'' Now, get a life. The IRS spokesman has confirmed that the person who gives the ball back to Mark McGwire might be facing a gift tax of $150,000. The young man who caught number 60 is just out of college and he works in the promotion department of the Rams. The guy who caught number 61 is the catering manager who had to go to work at 4:30 this morning. They are going to have to pay $150,000? Now, that is about as ludicrous as anything I have seen. If the IRS wants to know why they are the most feared, disliked agency in town, this is the classic example. The New York Times interviewed a spokesman for the IRS who said: ``I can confirm your understanding of how the gift tax works. The giver of the gift is required to file a gift tax return. We'd have to take a look at all the circumstances: the value of the gift and who owns the baseball.'' I am asking my colleagues to join me in a letter to the Commissioner of the IRS. We come here as Democrats and Republicans, but I know there is a strong, bipartisan enthusiasm for the support of baseball. And for the Commission to tolerate somebody saying that a fan who gives the ball back to Mark McGwire could owe a $150,000 gift tax is outrageous. The IRS needs to lighten up. The fact that the Tax Code could allow for such a ridiculous thing is one thing. We are going to be tackling the issue of tax reform in Congress. We have done much on the Taxpayer Relief Act. We have made strides. The new Commissioner has talked about making the IRS a consumer-friendly agency, but it is absolutely ridiculous that the IRS would seriously consider imposing a tax on a generous fan who happens to catch the historic ball and return it. Get a life. Surely there are baseball fans among the clever lawyers and accountants at the IRS who can devise reasons why this good deed should go unpunished. My staff and I are available to work with them. I think we can find a way to take care of it. But if the IRS wants to know what their problems are, they have to look no further than this threat. I have to tell you that if you do not think people are paying attention, our e-mail has been running, our fax machine; the calls are coming in. Dean Pfeiffer of Lee's Summit said: What a better issue to use to highlight the need for tax reform. How can anyone defend a tax system that penalizes such a selfless act? Scot George said: This tax on this person is as unAmerican as Saddam Hussein. I urge you to act swiftly against the IRS on this matter. Mr. President, I warn you, there is a revolution brewing. There may not be enough agents to collect a gift tax from somebody who returns the 62nd baseball back to Mark McGwire. I do have a letter here to Commissioner Rossotti asking him to review this situation and clarify it so that when the fan catches the ball--we know he is going to be surrounded by security. The security is very tight to make sure he is not physically abused. And it is a jungle out there when people are going for the ball. We have security to protect him. We want to keep the IRS agents off of him. I say to my colleagues, if they wish to join me in signing this letter to the Commissioner to call this serious matter to his attention, I will have it today and it will be available for them to do so. I think that the time has come to say that a fan who catches a historic home run ball and gives it back to the guy who hit it should not be stuck by the IRS. I thank the Chair and yield the floor. Mr. GRASSLEY addressed the Chair.