Ben Campbell

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. I thank the Chair. (The remarks of Mr. Campbell and Mr. Allard pertaining to the submission of S. Res. 166 and S. Res. 167 are located in today's Record under ``Submission of Concurrent and Senate Resolutions.'')

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for 8 minutes as in morning business, to be followed immediately by my colleague, Senator Allard, for 8 minutes.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, by way of legislation, I offer my support to the city of La Junta, Colorado, for its innovative and impressive response to the challenges facing the Lower Arkansas Valley. City officials have seized a unique opportunity to alleviate La Junta's housing crisis, expand the local Head Start program and increase access to child care, and solve Otero Junior College's dormitory problems. The city of La Junta, in conjunction with Otero Junior College, has proposed to take over the recently closed La Junta Air Base family housing site. Until one year ago, when it was farmed out to a civilian defense contractor, the Air Force's test range for its bomber pilots was housed in La Junta. Since then, several federal agencies have expressed interest in the site, but none has asserted their formal desire to reuse the facility. Further, taxpayers are spending nearly $100,000 annually to maintain an empty facility, while the city and residents of La Junta are losing out on a significant supplement to the local tax base. The reuse plan I am endorsing provides for a self-sustaining and revenue generating housing and local services site, which is a well developed and cooperative solution to some very real local concerns. Given the lack of any formal initiative on the part of a federal agency, which would be given priority consideration, I support the efforts of the city. Our college, Congressman Bob Schaffer, representing Colorado's 4th congressional district, has introduced legislation in the House of Representatives to convey the unused Air Force housing facility to the city of La Junta. Today, I am introducing a companion measure in the Senate. It is my hope that this bill will be referred to the appropriate committee and receive expedited consideration through next year's authorizing and appropriations process.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, by way of legislation, I offer my support to the city of La Junta, Colorado, for its innovative and impressive response to the challenges facing the Lower Arkansas Valley. City officials have seized a unique opportunity to alleviate La Junta's housing crisis, expand the local Head Start program and increase access to child care, and solve Otero Junior College's dormitory problems. The city of La Junta, in conjunction with Otero Junior College, has proposed to take over the recently closed La Junta Air Base family housing site. Until one year ago, when it was farmed out to a civilian defense contractor, the Air Force's test range for its bomber pilots was housed in La Junta. Since then, several federal agencies have expressed interest in the site, but none has asserted their formal desire to reuse the facility. Further, taxpayers are spending nearly $100,000 annually to maintain an empty facility, while the city and residents of La Junta are losing out on a significant supplement to the local tax base. The reuse plan I am endorsing provides for a self-sustaining and revenue generating housing and local services site, which is a well developed and cooperative solution to some very real local concerns. Given the lack of any formal initiative on the part of a federal agency, which would be given priority consideration, I support the efforts of the city. Our college, Congressman Bob Schaffer, representing Colorado's 4th congressional district, has introduced legislation in the House of Representatives to convey the unused Air Force housing facility to the city of La Junta. Today, I am introducing a companion measure in the Senate. It is my hope that this bill will be referred to the appropriate committee and receive expedited consideration through next year's authorizing and appropriations process.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, today I intend to vote in favor of the Defense Department authorization conference report which contains critical funding for our Armed Forces. This legislation authorizes $268.2 billion in budget authority, the spending level recommended in the concurrent resolution on the budget. I also am pleased that the Senate and House conferees agreed to include provisions from two bills I introduced earlier this year. Section 1082 of the DOD conference report authorizes the flying of the POW/MIA flag over military installations, memorials and post offices around the nation and at other appropriate places of significance on Armed Forces Day, Memorial Day, Flag Day, Independence Day, Veterans Day, and National POW/MIA Recognition Day. This provision reflects in large part the language of S.528 which I introduced on April 9, 1997. The United States has fought in many wars, and thousands of Americans who served in those wars were captured by the enemy or listed missing in action. In 20th century wars alone, more than 147,000 Americans were captured and became prisoners of war; of that number more than 15,000 died while in captivity. When we add to this number those who are still missing in action, we realize that more can be done to honor their commitment to duty, honor, and country. The display of the POW/MIA flag would be a forceful reminder that we care not only for them, but for their families who personally carry with them the burden of sacrifice. We want them to know that they do not stand alone, that we stand with them and beside them, as they remember the loyalty and devotion of those who served. This section provides that support. The DOD conference report also contains important provisions to strengthen how the Defense Department tracks and accounts for our missing in action. To address this issue, the DOD Conference Report includes the following provisions. These provisions are based on S. 755, which I introduced on May 15, 1997. Civilian contract employees who accompany armed forces in the field are now covered under all DOD POW/MIA search and recovery policies. The theater component commander is now involved in the initial assessment of a missing person's status, where as before, the initial handling of the situation originated with the Secretary of Defense in Washington, DC. A new file must be opened and reviewed if any new information surfaces concerning the status, living or dead, of an MIA. A status review board, when making a determination of death must now provide a description of the location of the body, if recovered, and if the body is not identifiable, a certification by a forensic pathologist. DOD may also have input by other specialists of appropriate medical sciences. Personnel files will now be established for Korean conflict cases upon receipt of new information. Families of MIAs will now have more open communication with counsel appointed to investigate the missing person. Last summer, a United States forensics team returned what are believed to be the remains of four American Korean war soldiers who have been missing for nearly half a century. The following day, news reports then indicated that recently declassified Air Force documents show that the Department of Defense had knowledge of POW's in Korea after the Korean war. These events clearly reinforce the necessity for these provisions as thousands of POW and MIA's still remain unaccounted for. I believe that the provisions adopted by the Senate-House conference and included in the legislation we consider today will go a long way to help the families of our servicemen and women missing in action and will strengthen Defense Department policies for the future.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I am pleased to submit today, along with many of my colleagues, a Senate resolution that designates the month of November 1997, as ``American Indian Heritage Month.'' I feel it is appropriate and deserving to honor American Indians and Alaska Natives, as the original inhabitants of the land that now constitutes the United States, with this November designation as Congress has done for the past 7 years. American Indians and Alaska Natives have left an indelible imprint on many aspects of our everyday life that we often take for granted. The arts, education, science, medicine, industry, and government are areas that have been influenced by American Indian and Alaska Native people. Many of the healing remedies that we use today were obtained from practices already in use by Indian people. Mr. President, many of the basic principles of democracy in our Constitution can be traced to ideologies already in use by Indian tribal governments including such doctrines of freedom of speech and separation of powers. Our Founding Fathers benefited greatly from assistance given to them by Indian tribes in the early stages of establishing our Nation. Our respect for the preservation of natural resources, reverence for our elders, and adherence to tradition, were developed, in part, through contact with American Indians and Alaska Natives. American Indian and Alaska Native people have proudly served and dedicated their lives in the military defense of our country in wartime and in peace. In fact, their participation rate in the Armed Forces far outstrips the rates of all other groups in this Nation. They gave their lives in defense of this Nation even before they were allowed to be citizens in 1924. Many of the words in our language have been borrowed from native languages, including many of the names of the rivers, cities, and States across our Nation. Indian arts and crafts have also made a distinct impression on our heritage. It is my hope that by designating the month of November 1997, as ``American Indian Heritage Month,'' it will encourage self-esteem, pride, and self awareness in American Indians and Alaska Natives of all ages. Many schools, organizations, Federal, State, and local governments also plan activities and programs to celebrate the achievements of American Indians and Alaska Natives. November is a special time in the history of the United States; we celebrate the Thanksgiving holiday by remembering the American Indians and English settlers as they enjoyed the bounty of their harvest and the promise of new kinships. That is why, this is an appropriate time of the year for this designation. Therefore, I ask for the support of my colleagues for this special tribute of this country, and urge the Senate to pass this resolution.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, as we debate whether to proceed to the consideration of S. 1269, and on the larger question whether to provide the administration with fast-track authority, we have heard a number of arguments for and against this issue. As the debate continues, I suppose we will hear some things repeated over and over from different colleagues. I don't know a Senator, though--I think I can honestly say I don't know a Senator in this body who does not want to do what is best for American workers, American families, American farmers, American consumers, and the Nation at large. I think most of us, certainly me, certainly Senator Dorgan, believe that we are protrade. We believe that international trade is important. We know that we would like to see a time when there are very few barriers, very few tariffs, very few quotas--if any. I know, as many of my colleagues do, that if we had no barriers whatsoever, American manufacturers, farmers, producers could compete with anyone and in fact win in that competition on a level playing field. It seems ironic to me that we will go through this effort on legislation that, if it ultimately does pass both the House and Senate, will limit the deliberative and representative processes that are now at the heart of the legislative branch of Government. Essentially, fast track provides the administration with the assurance that any trade agreement it negotiates will come to Congress as a privileged piece of legislation. That means Congress must consider a trade agreement within 90 days of when the administration formally submits it to this body. In addition, there will be no hearings, no markups. The enacting bill will go to the floors of both the House and the Senate where debate is limited to 20 hours and no amendments are allowed. Mr. President, 20 hours of debate is not very long for an important issue such as international trade, when you consider there are 100 Senators whose States are heavily impacted by an extensive agreement, such as NAFTA was. It seems even more ludicrous to believe that the 20 hours of debate in the other body, the House, with 435 Members, would provide a fair hearing. That would come out to about 3 minutes per Member, as I understand it. Finally, after the debate is finished, the House and the Senate would only be able to vote ``yes'' or ``no'' on the entire agreement. For such an agreement, such as NAFTA, that translates into a vote on a document of about 1,000 pages long with no public input whatsoever. Fast-track authority is truly a unique procedure. If this authority is granted to the administration, Congress is essentially giving the President powers that I believe are supposed to be reserved for this body in our Constitution. First, it allows the President to control the agenda and determine when trade agreements are considered. More important, and second, it gives the President the authority to actually write the legislation upon which Congress will act. Added on top of this is the fact that I, as just one Member of the Senate, would not be allowed to offer any amendments on the final enacting bill, whether I liked it or disliked it. I am sure many of our colleagues have not yet decided how they will vote, and I certainly can count as well as anybody, and I think probably the tide might be going against us. But I for one do not believe we were elected to be rubber stamps for the administration, and on fast track that simply reduces this body to rubberstamp status. Article I, section 8, of the Constitution of the United States of America provides Congress with the authority to regulate commerce with foreign nations. The Constitution also gives the President the authority to negotiate with foreign countries. So let's not be misled when people say the President needs fast-track authority in order to negotiate. He can do that at any time. This is simply not true. Fast- track authority gives the President additional powers which our Founding Fathers had reserved solely for the Congress. I don't believe most of us are isolationists. I believe in free trade. In fact, in this day and age I think we all understand and agree that free trade is an important direction to go. But, quite frankly, I think many us do not support these pell-mell rushes to judgment. We get tired of the old argument that anyone who opposes fast track must be a protectionist and that the opponents of fast track are trying to hinder free trade. I have to tell you, if it got right down to who we are supposed to protect, whether it's the CEO's of multinational corporations or foreign-owned corporations or American corporations and American jobs, I would have to plead guilty that I prefer to protect our jobs and our corporations and our country. But these kinds of claims sound like something from a tabloid, designed to stir the emotions of the American public. I think, more important, when we talk about free trade we also have to link it to what is fair. We often hear that bandied around--fair trade. Like many of my colleagues, I am sorely disappointed in some of our past trade agreements that this country has entered into because I don't think they were, basically, fair to us. Before we continue to offer this extraordinary power to the administration, I think Congress has a responsibility to review past policies. Senator Dorgan has done a marvelous job. I think he has done it very well, pointing out the trade deficit, as an example. With every trade agreement we have made under fast track in the past, the trade deficit has actually gone up for America and not down. We got the worst end of every single agreement that was negotiated under fast track. For those who argue that if we fail to grant fast-track authority to the President, other countries will refuse to negotiate with the United States and the United States won't even be allowed to sit at the negotiating table, that is absolutely ludicrous. This is the largest economy in the world. There will always be a place at the table for any international agreements. Let's consider that fast track has been used only five times. Yet without it, the Clinton administration, as an example, has successfully negotiated 198 agreements. I think that speaks for itself whether fast track is needed. We are an economic powerhouse. The world knows that. It is in the best interests of other countries throughout the world to negotiate with us. That is evidenced by the 198 agreements that our trade representatives are so proud of that did not need fast track. So we really ought to do away with these scare tactics that are kind of designed to stampede us like sheep to voting for something in the last waning days of Congress without giving it a slow, deliberative understanding of what we are going to do and what we are going to put in place. Supporters say we need the agreements so we don't get bogged down in Congress and load it with amendments. I understand this is a slow process, and we are often accused of taking too much time. We often do add many things to the amendments. But I think most of those amendments are done in good faith. But if we are sent here to try to deal with good, fair trade agreements, I don't think there is a big problem. I don't think we should have to worry about it that much without fast track. The bottom line is we are here to represent this Nation and our own constituents from the States from which we were elected. I know my constituents did not vote for me to send me here to this great institution to give away their voice, to not let them be involved in it. I think most Senators feel the same way. We didn't get elected to represent Mexico or Chile or Japan or some other country. We got elected primarily to represent this Nation and our own States. I realize that this debate over granting fast-track authority to the administration is not to be a critique of NAFTA. But if fast track has been used only five times, then we have no choice but to bring up NAFTA if we are going to consider the merits of fast track. Just about 4 years ago, Congress passed NAFTA implementing legislation, and that was an over-1,000-page document. It was hailed as a major achievement that would create jobs and not cost jobs in America. I concede that NAFTA has benefited several segments of our society. There is no question about that. But I think, looking at it in toto, it has cost more than it has gained. Jobs is the perfect example. In October, 1993, I sent a letter with several other Senators to the U.S. Trade Representative, Mickey Kantor, in which I asked about the potential loss of jobs and what the administration planned to do about displaced workers. In his response to me in November, 1993, Mr. Kantor replied that ``NAFTA would account for no more than 400,000 jobs lost over 15 years.'' I quote that directly from his letter. Perhaps those 400,000 jobs aren't important to some people--unless it's your job or unless it's the breadwinner of your household. Then it becomes very important. While I heard a whole number of figures on the number of jobs created by NAFTA used as evidence of NAFTA's success, many of those figures seem to discuss jobs that have been created basically as a result of increased U.S. growth that would have happened with or without NAFTA. Many of them dealt with the service industry jobs, too, but not hard, well-paying manufacturing jobs. I know that we need to increase our exports, and I think that we are trying to do that. We need to look at that in balance, about our imports, too. The Economic Policy Institute did just that. According to the Institute's recently released study, 394,835 jobs have been lost as a result of NAFTA. That was a net loss of jobs. I don't hardly consider that a success in our negotiating deals with foreign countries. I believe we simply cannot have a strong nation if we do not have a strong manufacturing base. Those jobs that left primarily were manufacturing jobs. If, Heaven forbid, we should get into some major international conflict, there is simply no way we are going to field strong military might from America if we have to import all of our parts for our apparatus from foreign countries. In effect, we might ask the question: Did it help workers anywhere? In my opinion it certainly didn't help the workers in Mexico under the NAFTA that we did pass. The maquiladora factories that sprang up overnight across the border are still paying poor wages, a dollar an hour or less in most jobs. Many of the workers live in substandard housing. Their children drink contaminated water. There is still a high incidence of sickness among those children. So it didn't help workers on our side of the border, and it didn't help workers on the other side of the border either. The problem is, we are coming close, now, to our targeted adjournment date, perhaps this Friday. And to meet that date, we may be forced to consider fast track within a more limited amount of time than we should to be dealing with this issue. But I think Senators will do the right thing. They will do what they can. Those of us who disagree with it, as he does, certainly commend Senator Dorgan for the leadership role he has taken. I believe it is time America stopped being referred to around the world as ``Uncle Sucker'' and return to that status that we had at one time being Uncle Sam, a nation of proud workers, manufacturing good-quality material for the rest of the world. I yield the remainder of my time. Several Senators addressed the Chair.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs will meet at 9:15 a.m. on Tuesday, November 4, 1997, in room 485 of the Russell Senate Building to mark up the following: H.R. 976, the Mississippi Sioux Tribe Judgment Fund Distribution Act of 1997; and the nomination of B. Kevin Gover, to be Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs, Department of the Interior. Those wishing additional information should contact the Committee on Indian Affairs at 224-2251. committee on energy and natural resources

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs' scheduled markup on H.R. 976, the Mississippi Sioux Tribe Judgment Fund Distribution Act of 1997 on Monday, November 3, 1997, at 10 a.m. in room 485 of the Russell Senate Office Building has been rescheduled for Tuesday, November 4, 1997, at 9:15 a.m. Those wishing additional information should contact the Committee on Indian Affairs at 224-2251. committee on indian affairs

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, today I join my colleagues in supporting the Kyl-Archer ``Medicare Beneficiaries Freedom To Contract Act.'' When I first discovered that the version of this summer's Balanced Budget Act that was signed into law included such a drastic deviation from Congress' intent, which was to allow Medicare beneficiaries the choice to go outside the Medicare system for care, I was outraged. We agreed to ensure this freedom, not strangle it by kicking doctors out of the Medicare system for seeing Medicare patients on a private contract basis. By excluding physicians from Medicare for 2 years as a punishment for entering into a private contract, the law offers seniors a choice in one breath and takes it away in the next. If beneficiaries choose to pay for care out of their own pocket, that is their right. In no way does that constitute a criminal act. It is not an appropriate role for the Federal Government to be telling people how they can spend the money in their wallet--we already do enough of that with their tax dollars. The claims made for instituting such a restrictive law are unfounded. The assertion that seniors of significant means will be siphoned out of the system, creating an increased burden on the Medicare trust fund, makes several false assumptions. First, income and population statistics produced by the Social Security Administration indicate that nearly two-thirds of this country's over-65 population live at or near the poverty level, with less than 20 percent seniors earning more than $75,000 a year. Given that, it is doubtful that we'll see a wave of seniors rushing to contract privately and disrupting the Medicare system. Those same statistics also deflate the argument that droves of doctors will begin denying care unless patients agree to privately contract at a higher rate. The patients aren't there, leaving physicians strongly dependent--as they are now--on Medicare clients. Therefore, there is no threat of a two-tiered system of care, with only the wealthy having access to the best care. It is just not economically sound or feasible for a significant number of doctors to establish a ``new tier'' of medicine. The concerns about rampant fraud and abuse resulting from private contracting seem to disregard some very compelling facts. For example, over the last 2 years, Congress has implemented strict penalties for Medicare fraud and abuse, including thousands of dollars in fines and jail time. We have seen people go to jail for committing Medicare fraud. I have medical professionals contacting me regularly because they are so fearful of inadvertently misbilling Medicare and winding up in jail or out of business. More importantly, however, Medicare beneficiaries are copied on all bills that Medicare pays for services they've received. If a doctor double-bills Medicare for services that a beneficiary has already paid for out of their pocket, that senior would be dialing Medicare's 1-800 fraud number faster than you or I could blink. Finally, Senator Kyl's bill would allow patients to terminate contracts at virtually anytime, which will force physicians who are interested in private contracting to offer services at reasonable and competitive rates. Consumers would finally be playing a role in the Medicare market. Choice and competition have emerged as the most viable and fair solutions for saving the Medicare Program and ensuring quality, affordable healthcare for generations of Medicare beneficiaries to come. This bill embodies those very concepts. Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs will meet on Monday, November 3, 1997, at 10 a.m. in room 485 of the Russell Senate Office Building, to conduct a markup on H.R. 976, the Mississippi Sioux Tribe Judgment Fund Distribution Act of 1997, followed by a hearing on H.R. 1604, to provide for the division, use, and distribution of judgment funds of the Ottawa and Chippewa Indians of Michigan. Those wishing additional information should contact the Committee on Indian Affairs at 224-2251.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I take this opportunity to state for the record that there is a misprint in the Congressional Record of October 23, 1997, at page S11068. Due to a clerical error, my name is inadvertently listed as filing amendment No. 1425, which was filed by our colleague from Florida, Senator Graham. In addition, the name of our colleague from Illinois, Senator Moseley-Braun, was inadvertently not listed as an original cosponsor to amendment No. 1424.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs will meet on Thursday, October 30, 1997, at 9:30 a.m. in room 485 of the Russell Senate Office Building to conduct a hearing on the nomination of B. Kevin Gover to be Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs, Department of the Interior. Those wishing additional information should contact the Committee on Indian Affairs at 224-2251.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs will meet on Wednesday, October 29, 1997, at 9:30 a.m. in room 106 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building to conduct a hearing on S. 1077, a bill to amend the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. Those wishing additional information should contact the Committee on Indian Affairs at 224-2251. committee on indian affairs

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs will meet on Thursday, October 23, 1997, at 9 a.m. in room 485 of the Russell Senate Office Building to conduct a markup on S. 109, to provide Federal housing assistance to native Hawaiians; S. 156, the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe Infrastructure Trust Fund Act; S. 1079, to permit the leasing of mineral rights within the boundaries of the Ft. Berthold Reservation; and H.R. 79, the Hoopa Valley Reservation South Boundary Adjustment Act. Those wishing additional information should contact the Committee on Indian Affairs at 224-2251. committee on indian affairs

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, this morning the Senate Appropriations Committee, on which I serve, held an important hearing on the topic of NATO expansion. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and Secretary of Defense William Cohen testified at this hearing. I feel that it is fitting at this time to keep in mind one of our recently retired colleagues who has played such a pivotal role in advancing the cause of NATO expansion. I am referring to my good friend from Colorado, Senator Hank Brown. Few people have played a more crucial or steadfast role for the cause of NATO expansion than Senator Brown. He started his efforts after Stalin's notorious Iron Curtain crumbled and never let up. His devotion and successes in advancing NATO expansion has made Hank Brown a warmly regarded household name throughout Central Europe, including the three countries that have been invited to join NATO in this first round of expansion, Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic. In fact, in the fall of 1996, the people of Poland showed their highest regards for Senator Brown by awarding him Honorary Polish citizenship in the name of the historic capital of Poland, Krakow. This is one of Poland's most prestigious honors. To this day, only two other Americans have received this honor, President Ronald Reagan and President George Bush. I recall a moving speech that Senator Mikulski--who sits on the Appropriations Committee with me--gave right here on the Senate Floor just after the Brown NATO Expansion Amendment passed last fall. Senator Mikulski said that her mother had just placed a picture of Hank Brown in a place of honor on her fireplace mantle at home. I hope it is still there. This is but one illustration of how the debate over NATO expansion transcends party lines. Senator Hank Brown has been one of the most effective advocates of securing freedom and peace for the people of Europe. We appreciated his valuable leadership in the Senate on the cause of NATO expansion. His legacy continues as the Senate proceeds with its consideration of this issue of great importance to the national security interests of the United States.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce legislation which amends the Indian Employment, Training, and Related Services Demonstration Act of 1992 (P.L. 102-477). The current Act has proven successful and represents one of the few programs that works for Indian country. I want to thank Senator Murkowski for his work on his own ``477'' bill that takes aim at the specific problems experienced by Alaska natives in administering the 477 program. I am pleased to co- sponsor his and that he is co-sponsoring my legislation. It is my hope that together we can develop amendments that will clarify and strengthen the program for American Indians and Alaska natives and lead to better training programs and higher job placements. The main reason for the success of the 477 program is that it relies on the tribes themselves to make the key decisions involving the design and implementation of employment training and related matters. This program puts tribes, not federal bureaucrats, in the driver's seat. The Act empowers tribal governments to consolidate formula funds they receive for employment training and education services into one program--which in turn enables tribes to streamline services provided, while cutting administrative time and costs. The Act does contain certain limitations and in practice tribes have faced a few roadblocks. This bill removes these limitations, expands programs affected by the Act, and broadens permissible job creation activities. The unemployment problem in Indian country is well-documented. Tribes currently suffer from a national unemployment rate of approximately 52%, with some like the Oglala Sioux Tribe suffer from a rate of 95%. In comparison, the national unemployment rate is 6%. The lack of employment opportunities in Indian country has exacerbated an already-poor health situation, and has lead to grinding social problems such as crime, domestic abuse, and alcohol and drug abuse. While gaming has aided a few tribal economies over the past decade, the great majority of tribes continue to struggle with joblessness and poverty. Gaming is not the long term solution to the goal of tribal self-determination and economic self-sufficiency. Diverse job creation is. The Indian Employment, Training, and Related Services Demonstration Act provides tribes with a valuable tool in combating reservation unemployment. Indian tribes, like many American communities, are struggling to comply with the work requirements of the new welfare reform law. By focusing on job creation as a necessary component to any employment training program, tribes can add a new weapon in their battle against joblessness and poverty. One of the more consistent obstacles to greater success with the Act is the Bureau of Indian Affairs management of the program. To remedy this problem, the bill transfers lead agency responsibilities from the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) to the Office of Self-Governance (OSG), both agencies contained within the Department of the Interior. On May 13, 1997, the Committee on Indian Affairs conducted an oversight hearing to discuss the progress made by tribes under the Act. Tribe after tribe testified and revealed that this program is working, and working well. Tribes participating in the program testified that the program has reduced the federal paperwork burden associated with applying for related programs by as much as 96%, reduced administration time and costs of delivering job training services to tribal customers while enhancing the quality of services rendered. Most importantly, witnesses indicated great increases in job placements for tribal members. One of the reasons for the success of this program is that it is voluntary. It is not another imposition, by the federal government, of what we think will work for them. I would like to highlight the fact that this Demonstration Act has cost the federal government nothing--- the attraction of the program is in streamlining paperwork and other administrative burdens and operating primarily at the local level. The philosophy of the program is similar to that of the Self-Governance model under which tribes, under contract with the United States, manage services and programs formerly provided by the federal government. The witnesses at the May hearing discussed problems that they have had with the lead agency, the BIA. Of the four tribal participants testifying, all expressed dissatisfaction with the BIA. One testified that ``the Bureau of Indian Affairs has been the biggest obstacle to the implementation of P.L. 102-477.'' 20 tribal applicants representing more than 175 tribes currently participate in this demonstration, yet the BIA states that it has only two full-time employees committed to working on this program, and that number is in dispute. Additionally, all tribal witnesses reported significant delays in receiving programs funds consolidated under their approved plans. Reasons for the delays ranged from deliberate withholding to poor accounting procedures on the part of the BIA. The May hearing, as well as subsequent meetings held with the Tribal Working Group for the Demonstration Act, have made clear that there is a consensus among participating tribes that the OSG should undertake this program. The bill proposes to transfer authority to the OSG because that office has a proven track record in working with tribes to consolidate programs and services and to achieve more effective delivery to tribal members. If this Congress is serious about encouraging self-determination and self-sufficiency, we must provide tribes with the tools they need to further these goals. Reservation economic development and job creation go hand-in-hand and we cannot ignore this basic fact. The current Act has gone far in permitting tribes to do more with less, as the quality of training and education services has risen with increased job placements. These amendments take the next logical step, which is to encourage job creation and make the promise of the program a reality for those that want to work and want to be productive and want to improve their lives and the lives of their families. With that, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that additional material be printed in the Record.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, in 1996 the Congress enacted historic legislation involving the financing, construction, and maintenance of housing for Indian people. With the enactment of the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996 (NAHASDA), Indian housing is no longer solely in the province of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). With NAHASDA tribes have the opportunity to develop and implement housing plans that meet their needs and values, and can do so in a way that is more efficient. I am hopeful that the success achieved by tribes participating in the Indian Self-Determination and Education Act and the Self- Governance Act programs can be duplicated in the housing arena with the implementation of NAHASDA. The Act requires that funds for Indian housing be provided to Indian tribes in block grants with monitoring and oversight appropriately provided by HUD. By empowering the tribes themselves and decreasing tribal reliance on the federal bureaucracy, this Act is consistent with principles of tribal self-determination and self-sufficiency that have been the hallmark of federal Indian policy for nearly thirty years. By the terms of the Act, NAHASDA becomes effective October 1, 1997. This will mean sweeping changes in the way housing is built and financed in Indian country. It is my hope that we can build on the NAHASDA model and encourage related initiatives such as banking, business development, and infrastructure construction. Even though NAHASDA has yet to be implemented, both HUD and the tribes agree that there are sections in the Act that need clarification. The bill I am introducing, the ``Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act Amendments of 1997'', provides the required clarification and changes that will help tribes and HUD in achieving a smoother transition from the old housing regime to the new framework of NAHASDA. The proposed amendments contained in this bill are partly the result of a hearing held by the Committee on Indian Affairs in March, 1997, which focused on the management of Indian housing under the old HUD- dominated regime. Tribal leaders, Indian housing experts, and federal officials testified about funding problems and other matters, including the proper level of oversight and monitoring. The focus of the hearing was constructive and with an eye toward encouraging a better managed and more efficient Indian housing system. After auditing Indian housing programs from around the nation, and after reviewing HUD's monitoring and enforcement provisions, HUD's Inspector General testified as to perceived problems in the old housing regime and the NAHASDA framework. The IG's testimony included her opinion that clarifications were needed in the NAHASDA including minor changes to the Act's enforcement provisions. My goal as Chairman of the Committee on Indian Affairs is to ensure that housing funds are used properly and within the bounds permitted by law. I also want to ensure that, consistent with federal obligations to Indian tribes, tribal members are properly housed and living in decent conditions. I am confident that with the implementation of NAHASDA, tribes will be able to better design and implement their own housing plans and in the process will be able to provide better housing to their members. In making the transition from dominating the housing realm to monitoring the activities of the tribes, HUD needs guidance from the Committee as to its proper role and responsibilities under the Act. The Act, and the amendments I am proposing today, will go a long way in making sure that the management problems that were associated with the old, HUD-dominated housing system will not be part of NAHASDA. I ask unanimous consent that a copy of the bill be printed in the Record, and urge my colleagues to join me in enacting these reasonable amendments.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, in 1996 the Congress enacted historic legislation involving the financing, construction, and maintenance of housing for Indian people. With the enactment of the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996 (NAHASDA), Indian housing is no longer solely in the province of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). With NAHASDA tribes have the opportunity to develop and implement housing plans that meet their needs and values, and can do so in a way that is more efficient. I am hopeful that the success achieved by tribes participating in the Indian Self-Determination and Education Act and the Self- Governance Act programs can be duplicated in the housing arena with the implementation of NAHASDA. The Act requires that funds for Indian housing be provided to Indian tribes in block grants with monitoring and oversight appropriately provided by HUD. By empowering the tribes themselves and decreasing tribal reliance on the federal bureaucracy, this Act is consistent with principles of tribal self-determination and self-sufficiency that have been the hallmark of federal Indian policy for nearly thirty years. By the terms of the Act, NAHASDA becomes effective October 1, 1997. This will mean sweeping changes in the way housing is built and financed in Indian country. It is my hope that we can build on the NAHASDA model and encourage related initiatives such as banking, business development, and infrastructure construction. Even though NAHASDA has yet to be implemented, both HUD and the tribes agree that there are sections in the Act that need clarification. The bill I am introducing, the ``Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act Amendments of 1997'', provides the required clarification and changes that will help tribes and HUD in achieving a smoother transition from the old housing regime to the new framework of NAHASDA. The proposed amendments contained in this bill are partly the result of a hearing held by the Committee on Indian Affairs in March, 1997, which focused on the management of Indian housing under the old HUD- dominated regime. Tribal leaders, Indian housing experts, and federal officials testified about funding problems and other matters, including the proper level of oversight and monitoring. The focus of the hearing was constructive and with an eye toward encouraging a better managed and more efficient Indian housing system. After auditing Indian housing programs from around the nation, and after reviewing HUD's monitoring and enforcement provisions, HUD's Inspector General testified as to perceived problems in the old housing regime and the NAHASDA framework. The IG's testimony included her opinion that clarifications were needed in the NAHASDA including minor changes to the Act's enforcement provisions. My goal as Chairman of the Committee on Indian Affairs is to ensure that housing funds are used properly and within the bounds permitted by law. I also want to ensure that, consistent with federal obligations to Indian tribes, tribal members are properly housed and living in decent conditions. I am confident that with the implementation of NAHASDA, tribes will be able to better design and implement their own housing plans and in the process will be able to provide better housing to their members. In making the transition from dominating the housing realm to monitoring the activities of the tribes, HUD needs guidance from the Committee as to its proper role and responsibilities under the Act. The Act, and the amendments I am proposing today, will go a long way in making sure that the management problems that were associated with the old, HUD-dominated housing system will not be part of NAHASDA. I ask unanimous consent that a copy of the bill be printed in the Record, and urge my colleagues to join me in enacting these reasonable amendments.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs will meet on Monday, October 20, 1997 at 10:00 a.m. in room 485 of the Russell Senate Office Building to conduct a Hearing on H.R. 79, Hoopa Valley Reservation South Boundary Adjustment Act; and S. 156, Lower Brule Sioux Tribe Infrastructure Development Trust Fund Act. Those wishing additional information should contact the Committee on Indian Affairs at 224-2251. committee on indian affairs

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs will meet on Tuesday, October 21, 1997 at 10:00 a.m. in room 485 of the Russell Senate Office Building to conduct a Hearing on H.R. 700, the Agua Caliente Equalization Act; and H.R. 976, the Mississippi Sioux Judgment Fund Distribution Act. Those wishing additional information should contact the Committee on Indian Affairs at 224-2251. committee on energy and natural resources

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce legislation which amends the Indian Employment, Training, and Related Services Demonstration Act of 1992 (P.L. 102-477). The current Act has proven successful and represents one of the few programs that works for Indian country. I want to thank Senator Murkowski for his work on his own ``477'' bill that takes aim at the specific problems experienced by Alaska natives in administering the 477 program. I am pleased to co- sponsor his and that he is co-sponsoring my legislation. It is my hope that together we can develop amendments that will clarify and strengthen the program for American Indians and Alaska natives and lead to better training programs and higher job placements. The main reason for the success of the 477 program is that it relies on the tribes themselves to make the key decisions involving the design and implementation of employment training and related matters. This program puts tribes, not federal bureaucrats, in the driver's seat. The Act empowers tribal governments to consolidate formula funds they receive for employment training and education services into one program--which in turn enables tribes to streamline services provided, while cutting administrative time and costs. The Act does contain certain limitations and in practice tribes have faced a few roadblocks. This bill removes these limitations, expands programs affected by the Act, and broadens permissible job creation activities. The unemployment problem in Indian country is well-documented. Tribes currently suffer from a national unemployment rate of approximately 52%, with some like the Oglala Sioux Tribe suffer from a rate of 95%. In comparison, the national unemployment rate is 6%. The lack of employment opportunities in Indian country has exacerbated an already-poor health situation, and has lead to grinding social problems such as crime, domestic abuse, and alcohol and drug abuse. While gaming has aided a few tribal economies over the past decade, the great majority of tribes continue to struggle with joblessness and poverty. Gaming is not the long term solution to the goal of tribal self-determination and economic self-sufficiency. Diverse job creation is. The Indian Employment, Training, and Related Services Demonstration Act provides tribes with a valuable tool in combating reservation unemployment. Indian tribes, like many American communities, are struggling to comply with the work requirements of the new welfare reform law. By focusing on job creation as a necessary component to any employment training program, tribes can add a new weapon in their battle against joblessness and poverty. One of the more consistent obstacles to greater success with the Act is the Bureau of Indian Affairs management of the program. To remedy this problem, the bill transfers lead agency responsibilities from the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) to the Office of Self-Governance (OSG), both agencies contained within the Department of the Interior. On May 13, 1997, the Committee on Indian Affairs conducted an oversight hearing to discuss the progress made by tribes under the Act. Tribe after tribe testified and revealed that this program is working, and working well. Tribes participating in the program testified that the program has reduced the federal paperwork burden associated with applying for related programs by as much as 96%, reduced administration time and costs of delivering job training services to tribal customers while enhancing the quality of services rendered. Most importantly, witnesses indicated great increases in job placements for tribal members. One of the reasons for the success of this program is that it is voluntary. It is not another imposition, by the federal government, of what we think will work for them. I would like to highlight the fact that this Demonstration Act has cost the federal government nothing--- the attraction of the program is in streamlining paperwork and other administrative burdens and operating primarily at the local level. The philosophy of the program is similar to that of the Self-Governance model under which tribes, under contract with the United States, manage services and programs formerly provided by the federal government. The witnesses at the May hearing discussed problems that they have had with the lead agency, the BIA. Of the four tribal participants testifying, all expressed dissatisfaction with the BIA. One testified that ``the Bureau of Indian Affairs has been the biggest obstacle to the implementation of P.L. 102-477.'' 20 tribal applicants representing more than 175 tribes currently participate in this demonstration, yet the BIA states that it has only two full-time employees committed to working on this program, and that number is in dispute. Additionally, all tribal witnesses reported significant delays in receiving programs funds consolidated under their approved plans. Reasons for the delays ranged from deliberate withholding to poor accounting procedures on the part of the BIA. The May hearing, as well as subsequent meetings held with the Tribal Working Group for the Demonstration Act, have made clear that there is a consensus among participating tribes that the OSG should undertake this program. The bill proposes to transfer authority to the OSG because that office has a proven track record in working with tribes to consolidate programs and services and to achieve more effective delivery to tribal members. If this Congress is serious about encouraging self-determination and self-sufficiency, we must provide tribes with the tools they need to further these goals. Reservation economic development and job creation go hand-in-hand and we cannot ignore this basic fact. The current Act has gone far in permitting tribes to do more with less, as the quality of training and education services has risen with increased job placements. These amendments take the next logical step, which is to encourage job creation and make the promise of the program a reality for those that want to work and want to be productive and want to improve their lives and the lives of their families. With that, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that additional material be printed in the Record.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, last week the Senate passed the Treasury and general Government appropriations bill for fiscal year 1998. Included in the final conference report to that bill was language regarding the Tip Reporting Alternative Commitment Program [TRAC]. TRAC is a voluntary agreement entered into by the Internal Revenue Service and restaurant employers across the country. Under TRAC, employers agree to better educate their employees on tip reporting and also to monitor the tips received by employees. Developed just a few short years ago, TRAC is seen as a way to combat the instances of underreporting and nonreporting of tips. However, it has come to the attention of many in Congress that the IRS may be using the threat of an audit to compel restaurant owners to enter into this agreement. While the IRS does have the authority to perform audits, I do not feel it is appropriate for this agency to be utilizing this right as a means of intimidation. The report language pertaining to TRAC, which I ask unanimous consent be printed in the Record, states that the IRS ``should ensure compliance with tip reporting by stressing its customer service role while working with restaurant owners.'' The legislation I am introducing today would simply put some teeth into this report language. All my bill does is prohibit the IRS from using the threat of making an examination or issuing a summons to compel a restaurant owner to enter into TRAC. It does not limit the IRS' authority to perform such functions. It simply prohibits the agency from using these tools as a means of forcing compliance. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Thank you, Mr. President.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, this morning the Senate will consider the Treasury-Postal appropriations conference report. Under the order, there will be 60 minutes of debate followed by a vote on the adoption of the conference report. Therefore, Senators can expect a rollcall vote at approximately 11 a.m. or earlier if debate time is yielded back. Following that vote, the Senate will resume consideration of the D.C. appropriations bill. It is the intention of the majority leader to finish action on this measure today. As a reminder to all Members, in observance of Rosh Hashanah, no rollcall votes will occur this week after 1 p.m. today. All Senators' cooperation will be appreciated in allowing the Senate to conclude action on the D.C. appropriations bill and any available appropriations conference reports.