Ben Campbell

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, as my colleagues know, the Oklahoma City bombing trial of Timothy McVeigh has concluded in Denver. The jury found McVeigh guilty on all 11 counts against him, and he has been sentenced to death. Now that these proceedings are over, I take this opportunity to call to the attention of my colleagues the outstanding service of Chief Judge Richard Matsch who presided over the Oklahoma City bombing trial at a time when many of us here in this body are considering the appointment process for Federal judges. His leadership has provided many Americans a renewed faith in the judicial process. His example of fair, firm leadership is an outstanding model we should consider for future Federal judicial appointments. Many members of the legal profession and the media predicted that the Oklahoma City bombing trial would last 4 months. Under Judge Matsch's calm, competent direction, the trial concluded in only 2 months. Judge Matsch has an impressive legal career. He was associate editor of the law review at the University of Michigan School of Law. After law school, he joined the U.S. Army and became an intelligence officer. When he left the Army, he moved to Denver where he was in private practice. Judge Matsch went on to become a city attorney, a Federal prosecutor, and a bankruptcy judge before President Nixon nominated him to the Federal bench in 1974. In 1994 he was elevated to chief judge. Judge Richard Matsch has earned the admiration of his colleagues and lawyers who have appeared before him. Lawyers and colleagues from the bench praised the choice of Matsch to preside over the trial noting that he has the appropriate judicial temperament. One attorney who has argued before him said poetically, Judge Matsch ``is better than indoor plumbing.'' In light of the skillful and professional way Judge Matsch handled the proceedings of the McVeigh trial, I urge my colleagues to join me in recognizing the contributions of Judge Matsch to our justice system and commending him for his firm, swift justice in such a tragic case. He has touched the lives of many Americans with his outstanding service, and has renewed the faith in all of us that justice can be served. I thank the Chair, and I yield the floor.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs and the House Committee on Resources will meet on Wednesday, June 18, 1997, at 10:30 a.m. to conduct a joint hearing on S. 569/H.R. 1082, to amend the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978. The joint hearing will be held in room 106 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. Those wishing additional information should contact the Committee on Indian Affairs at 224-2251. committee on energy and natural resources, subcommittee on national parks, historic preservation, and recreation

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, today I am voting in favor of the Supplemental Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 1997. I commend our colleagues, the chairmen of the Senate and House Appropriations Committees, Senator Stevens and Congressman Livingston, for their determination, hard work, and leadership on this important bill. And, as a member of the Senate-House Conference Committee, I appreciate the cooperative efforts of my counterpart, Congressman Kolbe, the chairman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Treasury, Postal Service and General Government. I also appreciate the valuable work of my colleague, Senator Kohl, who serves as the ranking member of the Treasury and General Government Subcommittee. This bill includes much needed assistance to our fellow Americans who have been hard hit by natural disasters. I am also pleased that the conferees agreed to include two of my provisions which are vital to my home State of Colorado. The first provision includes $1.95 million to support law enforcement efforts during the Denver Summit of Eight which is occurring later this month. This historic economic summit, which includes Russia for the first time as an active participant, will draw the leaders of the world's leading economies and thousands of other participants and guests. The funding which this supplemental includes will reimburse our police officers who are on the frontlines in providing the necessary security for the Summit of Eight. The second provision delays the implementation by the Health Care Financing Administration [HCFA] of a Medicare Competitive Pricing Demonstration project in Denver. The project, originally set to begin in January 1998, was ill-conceived in its design and had the potential to disrupt and reduce benefits for over 100,000 Medicare beneficiaries. My colleagues and I are all committed to successfully testing competitive pricing as an alternative reimbursement mechanism for Medicare risk contractors. It is for that very reason I sought a delay and appreciated the resounding support of my Senate and House colleagues. In light of the importance of this supplemental appropriations bill, I urge my colleagues to support its passage. I thank the Chair and yield the floor.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. This appeared this morning, and is a story about seven people slain in violence in the last 36 hours in Washington, DC, four or more wounded in just that same 36-hour period. And I would point out that this is a city that has the tightest gun control laws in the Nation, so tight in fact that not a Senator or Congressman, not a Supreme Court Justice, for that matter, can carry a concealed weapon. It seems like only the bad guys can carry them in this town. I do ask unanimous consent that Senator Hatch be added as an original cosponsor to this bill and it be printed in the Record.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, today I am pleased to be joined by the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Senator Hatch and Senator Craig as original cosponsors of this legislation. This bill would both authorize States to recognize each other's concealed weapons laws and would exempt qualified current and former law enforcement officers from State laws prohibiting the carrying of concealed firearms. This legislation is designed to support the rights of States and to facilitate the right of law-abiding citizens as well as law enforcement officers to protect themselves, their families, and their property. The language of this bill is similar to a provision in S. 3, the Omnibus Crime Control Act of 1997, introduced earlier this year by the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Senator Hatch. In light of the importance of this provision to law-abiding gunowners and law enforcement officers, I am introducing this freestanding bill today for the Senate's consideration and prompt action. This bill allows States to enter into agreements known as compacts to recognize the concealed weapons laws of those States included in the compacts. This is not a Federal mandate; it is strictly voluntary for those States interested in this approach. States would also be allowed to include provisions which best meet their needs, such as special provisions for law enforcement personnel. This legislation would allow anyone possessing a valid permit to carry a concealed firearm in their respective State to also carry one in another State, provided that the States have entered into a compact agreement which recognizes the host State's right-to-carry laws. This is needed if you want to protect the security individuals enjoy in their own State when they travel or simply cross State lines to avoid a crazy quilt of differing laws. I use my own experience in Colorado as a former deputy sheriff and as a person who just lives 9 miles from the New Mexico border and within an hour's drive of both Arizona and Utah as a person who is caught in this kind of crazy quilt. I have always been a law-abiding citizen. I have a permit to carry a gun in Colorado, but if I go south just 5 minutes into New Mexico, I have to comply with a different standard, and this bill would correct this different standard. Currently, a Federal standard governs the conduct of nonresidents in those States that do not have a right-to-carry statute. Many of us in this body have always strived to protect the interests of States and communities by allowing them to make important decisions on how their affairs should be conducted. We are taking to the floor almost every day to talk about mandating certain things to the States. This bill would allow States to decide for themselves. Specifically, it allows that the law of each State govern conduct within that State where the State has a right-to-carry statute, and States determine through a compact agreement which out-of-State right- to-carry statute will be recognized. To date, 31 States have passed legislation making it legal to carry concealed weapons. These State laws enable citizens of those States to exercise their right to protect themselves, their families, and their property. Applicants, of course, must be law-abiding citizens and pass their State's firearm training requirements. In my State of Colorado, the State legislature has passed a bill which puts into place statewide uniform standards for concealed weapons permits. The second major provision of this bill would allow qualified current and former law enforcement officers who are carrying appropriate written identification of that status to be exempt from State laws that prohibit the carrying of concealed weapons. This provision sets forth a checklist of stringent criteria that law enforcement officers must meet in order to qualify for this exemption status. Exempting qualified current and former law enforcement officers from State laws prohibiting the carrying of concealed weapons, I believe, would add additional forces to our law enforcement community in our unwavering fight against crime. I share the view of the Judiciary Committee chairman, Senator Hatch, as reflected in his legislation, that the need to establish greater national uniformity concerning the entitlement of active and retired law enforcement officers to carry weapons across State lines is paramount. That is why I have included this provision in this bill. To our friends who do not believe in the right to bear arms, I recommend reading this morning's Washington Post. I ask unanimous consent that this article be printed in the Record.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. This appeared this morning, and is a story about seven people slain in violence in the last 36 hours in Washington, DC, four or more wounded in just that same 36-hour period. And I would point out that this is a city that has the tightest gun control laws in the Nation, so tight in fact that not a Senator or Congressman, not a Supreme Court Justice, for that matter, can carry a concealed weapon. It seems like only the bad guys can carry them in this town. I do ask unanimous consent that Senator Hatch be added as an original cosponsor to this bill and it be printed in the Record.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, today I am pleased to be joined by the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Senator Hatch and Senator Craig as original cosponsors of this legislation. This bill would both authorize States to recognize each other's concealed weapons laws and would exempt qualified current and former law enforcement officers from State laws prohibiting the carrying of concealed firearms. This legislation is designed to support the rights of States and to facilitate the right of law-abiding citizens as well as law enforcement officers to protect themselves, their families, and their property. The language of this bill is similar to a provision in S. 3, the Omnibus Crime Control Act of 1997, introduced earlier this year by the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Senator Hatch. In light of the importance of this provision to law-abiding gunowners and law enforcement officers, I am introducing this freestanding bill today for the Senate's consideration and prompt action. This bill allows States to enter into agreements known as compacts to recognize the concealed weapons laws of those States included in the compacts. This is not a Federal mandate; it is strictly voluntary for those States interested in this approach. States would also be allowed to include provisions which best meet their needs, such as special provisions for law enforcement personnel. This legislation would allow anyone possessing a valid permit to carry a concealed firearm in their respective State to also carry one in another State, provided that the States have entered into a compact agreement which recognizes the host State's right-to-carry laws. This is needed if you want to protect the security individuals enjoy in their own State when they travel or simply cross State lines to avoid a crazy quilt of differing laws. I use my own experience in Colorado as a former deputy sheriff and as a person who just lives 9 miles from the New Mexico border and within an hour's drive of both Arizona and Utah as a person who is caught in this kind of crazy quilt. I have always been a law-abiding citizen. I have a permit to carry a gun in Colorado, but if I go south just 5 minutes into New Mexico, I have to comply with a different standard, and this bill would correct this different standard. Currently, a Federal standard governs the conduct of nonresidents in those States that do not have a right-to-carry statute. Many of us in this body have always strived to protect the interests of States and communities by allowing them to make important decisions on how their affairs should be conducted. We are taking to the floor almost every day to talk about mandating certain things to the States. This bill would allow States to decide for themselves. Specifically, it allows that the law of each State govern conduct within that State where the State has a right-to-carry statute, and States determine through a compact agreement which out-of-State right- to-carry statute will be recognized. To date, 31 States have passed legislation making it legal to carry concealed weapons. These State laws enable citizens of those States to exercise their right to protect themselves, their families, and their property. Applicants, of course, must be law-abiding citizens and pass their State's firearm training requirements. In my State of Colorado, the State legislature has passed a bill which puts into place statewide uniform standards for concealed weapons permits. The second major provision of this bill would allow qualified current and former law enforcement officers who are carrying appropriate written identification of that status to be exempt from State laws that prohibit the carrying of concealed weapons. This provision sets forth a checklist of stringent criteria that law enforcement officers must meet in order to qualify for this exemption status. Exempting qualified current and former law enforcement officers from State laws prohibiting the carrying of concealed weapons, I believe, would add additional forces to our law enforcement community in our unwavering fight against crime. I share the view of the Judiciary Committee chairman, Senator Hatch, as reflected in his legislation, that the need to establish greater national uniformity concerning the entitlement of active and retired law enforcement officers to carry weapons across State lines is paramount. That is why I have included this provision in this bill. To our friends who do not believe in the right to bear arms, I recommend reading this morning's Washington Post. I ask unanimous consent that this article be printed in the Record.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, today I am privileged to honor my friend and colleague, the distinguished Senator from South Carolina, Strom Thurmond. Today we salute Senator Thurmond, who becomes the Senate's longest serving Member. It only seems fitting that I should be allowed to speak in his honor today. Several years ago our roles were reversed, and the distinguished Senator was thanking me. Now I would like to return the honor and thank him for his years of leadership. When Senator Thurmond was jostled in the subway 2 years ago, I used my years of police training to come to his aid and help the police to handcuff his assailant. Fortunately, no one was hurt. The incident led to a friendship between the Senator and me that I very much enjoy. Now we are all here to recognize the achievements of Senator Thurmond and commend his years of dedicated leadership and service. The senior Senator from South Carolina has used his skill and knowledge to serve the Senate and provide direction for over 43 years. Senator Thurmond has provided strong leadership in this institution, both on the floor and in committee. He has drawn from his own personal knowledge from his decorated service in World War II to contribute to and lead the Armed Services Committee and the Veterans' Affairs Committee. In 1942, Senator Thurmond joined the U.S. Army, and was among those brave young men of the 82d Airborne Division who landed in Normandy on D-day. For this service, he was awarded 5 Battle Stars. After earning 18 decorations for outstanding service in World War II, Senator Thurmond has maintained his dedication to war veterans throughout his years in the Senate. Senator Thurmond represents a wealth of institutional knowledge and history. Senator Thurmond's tenure has spanned a number of tumultuous decades, from the end of World War II, through the turmoil of the Vietnam war, to the end of the cold war, to this year, when the Congress finally agreed to a balanced budget. Through it all he provided the strong leadership which we are here to honor today. It gives me great pleasure to recognize our esteemed colleague as he becomes our longest serving U.S. Senator. Congratulations, Strom Thurmond, on making history as well as being a major part of our Nation's history. Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, today I take this opportunity to call my colleagues' attention to a historic event which occurred today in Statuary Hall, just down the hall from this chamber--the unveiling of Colorado's statue of Jack Swigert. I commend and applaud the efforts of all those Coloradans who helped to bring the Jack Swigert statue to Washington and Statuary Hall. The inclusion of this statue would not be possible without the efforts of many Coloradans, who I would like to thank for their tireless efforts. Among the individuals who worked on this project, the members of the Jack Swigert Memorial Commission should be mentioned for their dedication. Holly Coors, Marleen Fish, Don Friedman, Dennis Gallagher, Virginia Swigert, and Carl Williams all worked tirelessly under the chairmanship of Hal Shroyer. Has has spent 10 years on this project, and I am happy that he can see his goal achieved today. The Arapahoe County Republican Men's Club also stands out for its large contribution. Members lobbied the State legislature and donated substantial amounts of time and money in an effort to commission the statue. Of equal importance to the effort was Veterans of Foreign Wars Chapter 11229. It was commissioned soley for the purpose of persuading the State legislature to create the statue of Mr. Swigert and put the initiative on the ballot. Mr. Swigert was a lifelong member of VFW Post No. 1, which is the oldest VFW in the Nation founded after the Spanish- American War. Due to the dedicated efforts of these individuals and the many others involved in this project, Jack Swigert will be remembered and honored as a true American hero with this statue we dedicate to him today. And, his statue will represent Colorado with honor and distinction here in the U.S. Capitol for generations to come. I thank the Chair and I yield the floor.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, today I introduce the Native American Financial Services Organization Act of 1996 [NAFSO]. This bill, based on a similar measure I introduced in the last Congress, seeks to provide new opportunity and hope for native American families by addressing the serious lack of private capital on Indian reservations. Having access to banking services is more than just a convenience. It means being able to get a loan to fix a leaky roof. It means getting the money to buy computers to start a small business. It means having enough money to send your son or daughter to college. It means buying your own home. Too often, these dreams never become a reality for Indian families. Many opportunities and services most of America takes for granted are not available in Indian country. Native Americans can't simply walk into a local bank to open a checking account or get a loan for a new house because for the most part, these institutions are nowhere near Indian reservations. NAFSO is not about new Government programs or bureaucracy. NAFSO is about supporting private banks that will not only provide basic services, but take the time to educate people, to bring them into the mainstream of financial services and give them a chance to build a home or start a business. NAFSO gives native Americans the same kind of access to banking services that other Americans enjoy. By eliminating provisions dealing with the secondary mortgage market, this version of NAFSO allows the organization to focus where the rubber meets the road. Working in conjunction with the community development financial institutions fund, NAFSO's primary role is to expand the availability of basic banking services through the creation and support of Native American Financial Institutions [NAFI's]. This provides the services that families need the most--checking accounts, mortgages, and other basic banking services. NAFSO will also play a crucial role in assisting NAFI's by providing them with much-needed technical assistance and developing specialized assistance to overcome barriers to lending on reservations. The organization will also work with the secondary market and other important financial mechanisms to identify barriers to private lending and make recommendations about how banks, Tribes, and government can do more to help this process. NAFSO does more than support new lending institutions or existing Indian-oriented banks and begins to address the historical barriers to private banking in Indian country. The trust status of reservation land and the inability to transfer title are serious concerns of bankers that need to be overcome and understood. Equally as challenging is the need to overcome stereotypes about Indian families and their social or economic condition. Often, banks decide Indians are not a good credit risk without ever having gone to the reservation. By providing information and interested in becoming more involved in Indian country, NAFSO can foster a new understanding of the real challenges we face. It can eliminate some of these misconceptions and myths and bring the private market and Indian communities together in ways never thought possible before. I had hoped that we would be assisted in this process by a report by the community development financial institutions fund at the Department of Treasury on Indian banking issues. Regrettably, work on that report, which was due almost 9 months ago, has not yet begun. Nevertheless, I feel that we should not delay our work. We need to concentrate now on finding real solutions to the economic, social and cultural challenges facing tribes and native American families. Mr. President, most people agree that Government cannot be the solution to all of this great Nation's problems. We can fix the Government programs, we can make them more efficient, but now we need to get the private sector involved in the challenges facing Indian country. The road to economic independence for all native American communities is a long one, but this bill is a big step in the right direction. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, today I would like to co-sponsor the Indian Tribal Government Unemployment Compensation Act Tax Relief Amendments of 1997 introduced by Senator McCain. The Federal Unemployment Tax Act of 1935 [FUTA] is a joint Federal-State tax system which imposes on each employer a tax on wages paid to their employees. These taxes are used to provide unemployment insurance to out-of-work citizens. The Federal portion of the tax can range up to 6.2 percent on wages paid, and the State portion ranges from near zero to 9 percent of wages paid. Indian tribes from around the country have contacted me expressing a great deal of confusion with the FUTA tax system and the difficulties they are having in planning as a result of the varying interpretations given FUTA by the IRS and the Labor Department. This problem is national in scope and experienced by tribes in the Great Lakes region such as the Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians and the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians, and by tribes in my own State of Colorado--the Ute Mountain Ute and the Souther Ute tribes. The FUTA encourages States to undertake their own unemployment insurance programs by permitting employers to take the State unemployment insurance taxes they have paid and use them to offset their Federal unemployment insurance tax bill. This legislation is necessary to clarify the status of tribal governments under the FUTA and the Internal Revenue Code. As independent sovereign entities, Indian tribal governments should be afforded the same tax treatment, in this instance with regard to FUTA, as other governments--Federal, State, and local. Indian tribal governments are legitimate governments and, in fact, are one in four sovereign governments mentioned in the U.S. Constitution; the others being foreign nations, the several states, and the Federal Government. This is critical because FUTA treats private, commercial employers differently than it does foreign, State and local government employers. Private employers are subject to both State and Federal unemployment insurance taxes. In brief, the FUTA exempts foreign, Federal, State, and local government employers from the 0.8 percent Federal unemployment tax; and exempts foreign and Federal Government employers from the State unemployment insurance tax. FUTA allows state and local government employers to pay a favorable, lower State unemployment insurance taxes, and for tax purposes treats tax-exempt charitable organizations the same as State and local governments. The problem is that the FUTA does not expressly include Indian tribal government within the ``government employer'' category it has created for State and local government employers. As a result tribal governments across the country have been subjected to widely differing interpretations of the FUTA statute, with inconsistent results. Some tribes's good faith interpretation of the statute led them to believe that they, as units of government, were immune from the Federal tax. These tribes face large tax liabilities as a direct result of the way the act is being applied. Other tribes, again in good faith, did not participate in State unemployment insurance programs. In these instances, employees of tribal governments, both Indian and non-Indian, have been denied unemployment insurance benefits, pointing to the lack of participation by the tribes. Not surprisingly, the agencies charged with administering the tax and labor laws have not arrived at a consensus on the FUTA issue. For the past several years, various Internal Revenue Service field offices have interpreted the FUTA in different ways. The varying interpretations have resulted in differences in benefits availability for tribal employees, Indians as well as non-Indians, and differing degrees of tax liability for tribal governments themselves. The bottom line is that for Federal FUTA tax purposes, the treatment for tribes often depends on where they are located. Absent explicit recognition from Congress clarifying the status of tribal governments, this is a problem that will go on. Because State governments, the IRS, and the U.S. Labor Department cannot seem to agree on the status of Indian tribal governments under the FUTA, the time is right for the Congress to act and to clarify this issue so that tribal members can secure benefits they are entitled to and the tribes will have certainty and predictability in their employment and hiring decisions. Tribal government employers will benefit from this measure by the uniform application of the FUTA statute. The increased certainty that it will provide to tribal employers, their employees, and separated employees will enhance the tribal work environment, reduce litigation, and provide assurances to all parties involved. This bill would require that Indian tribal government employers receive the same treatment as Federal, State, and local governments and tax-exempt organizations receive for FUTA purposes. The Joint Tax Committee has been requested to estimate the revenue impact of this measure. Similar estimates performed in 1995 indicated the impacts to be minor. The development of tribal economies is a critical element in encouraging tribal self-sufficiency and political self-determination. Increasing the ability of tribal government employers to attract and retain the best skilled employees is one of my main objectives as chairman of the Indian Affairs Committee. If the confusion and lack of certainty that has plagued tribal governments continues, employment with an Indian tribe will be increasingly unattractive, and tribes will suffer. By providing equitable FUTA treatment to tribal government employers, this legislation will assist in the long-term growth and stability of tribal economies and tribal governments. I urge my colleagues to join in supporting this crucial measure. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that additional material be printed in the Record.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, today I introduce the Native American Financial Services Organization Act of 1996 [NAFSO]. This bill, based on a similar measure I introduced in the last Congress, seeks to provide new opportunity and hope for native American families by addressing the serious lack of private capital on Indian reservations. Having access to banking services is more than just a convenience. It means being able to get a loan to fix a leaky roof. It means getting the money to buy computers to start a small business. It means having enough money to send your son or daughter to college. It means buying your own home. Too often, these dreams never become a reality for Indian families. Many opportunities and services most of America takes for granted are not available in Indian country. Native Americans can't simply walk into a local bank to open a checking account or get a loan for a new house because for the most part, these institutions are nowhere near Indian reservations. NAFSO is not about new Government programs or bureaucracy. NAFSO is about supporting private banks that will not only provide basic services, but take the time to educate people, to bring them into the mainstream of financial services and give them a chance to build a home or start a business. NAFSO gives native Americans the same kind of access to banking services that other Americans enjoy. By eliminating provisions dealing with the secondary mortgage market, this version of NAFSO allows the organization to focus where the rubber meets the road. Working in conjunction with the community development financial institutions fund, NAFSO's primary role is to expand the availability of basic banking services through the creation and support of Native American Financial Institutions [NAFI's]. This provides the services that families need the most--checking accounts, mortgages, and other basic banking services. NAFSO will also play a crucial role in assisting NAFI's by providing them with much-needed technical assistance and developing specialized assistance to overcome barriers to lending on reservations. The organization will also work with the secondary market and other important financial mechanisms to identify barriers to private lending and make recommendations about how banks, Tribes, and government can do more to help this process. NAFSO does more than support new lending institutions or existing Indian-oriented banks and begins to address the historical barriers to private banking in Indian country. The trust status of reservation land and the inability to transfer title are serious concerns of bankers that need to be overcome and understood. Equally as challenging is the need to overcome stereotypes about Indian families and their social or economic condition. Often, banks decide Indians are not a good credit risk without ever having gone to the reservation. By providing information and interested in becoming more involved in Indian country, NAFSO can foster a new understanding of the real challenges we face. It can eliminate some of these misconceptions and myths and bring the private market and Indian communities together in ways never thought possible before. I had hoped that we would be assisted in this process by a report by the community development financial institutions fund at the Department of Treasury on Indian banking issues. Regrettably, work on that report, which was due almost 9 months ago, has not yet begun. Nevertheless, I feel that we should not delay our work. We need to concentrate now on finding real solutions to the economic, social and cultural challenges facing tribes and native American families. Mr. President, most people agree that Government cannot be the solution to all of this great Nation's problems. We can fix the Government programs, we can make them more efficient, but now we need to get the private sector involved in the challenges facing Indian country. The road to economic independence for all native American communities is a long one, but this bill is a big step in the right direction. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, today I would like to co-sponsor the Indian Tribal Government Unemployment Compensation Act Tax Relief Amendments of 1997 introduced by Senator McCain. The Federal Unemployment Tax Act of 1935 [FUTA] is a joint Federal-State tax system which imposes on each employer a tax on wages paid to their employees. These taxes are used to provide unemployment insurance to out-of-work citizens. The Federal portion of the tax can range up to 6.2 percent on wages paid, and the State portion ranges from near zero to 9 percent of wages paid. Indian tribes from around the country have contacted me expressing a great deal of confusion with the FUTA tax system and the difficulties they are having in planning as a result of the varying interpretations given FUTA by the IRS and the Labor Department. This problem is national in scope and experienced by tribes in the Great Lakes region such as the Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians and the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians, and by tribes in my own State of Colorado--the Ute Mountain Ute and the Souther Ute tribes. The FUTA encourages States to undertake their own unemployment insurance programs by permitting employers to take the State unemployment insurance taxes they have paid and use them to offset their Federal unemployment insurance tax bill. This legislation is necessary to clarify the status of tribal governments under the FUTA and the Internal Revenue Code. As independent sovereign entities, Indian tribal governments should be afforded the same tax treatment, in this instance with regard to FUTA, as other governments--Federal, State, and local. Indian tribal governments are legitimate governments and, in fact, are one in four sovereign governments mentioned in the U.S. Constitution; the others being foreign nations, the several states, and the Federal Government. This is critical because FUTA treats private, commercial employers differently than it does foreign, State and local government employers. Private employers are subject to both State and Federal unemployment insurance taxes. In brief, the FUTA exempts foreign, Federal, State, and local government employers from the 0.8 percent Federal unemployment tax; and exempts foreign and Federal Government employers from the State unemployment insurance tax. FUTA allows state and local government employers to pay a favorable, lower State unemployment insurance taxes, and for tax purposes treats tax-exempt charitable organizations the same as State and local governments. The problem is that the FUTA does not expressly include Indian tribal government within the ``government employer'' category it has created for State and local government employers. As a result tribal governments across the country have been subjected to widely differing interpretations of the FUTA statute, with inconsistent results. Some tribes's good faith interpretation of the statute led them to believe that they, as units of government, were immune from the Federal tax. These tribes face large tax liabilities as a direct result of the way the act is being applied. Other tribes, again in good faith, did not participate in State unemployment insurance programs. In these instances, employees of tribal governments, both Indian and non-Indian, have been denied unemployment insurance benefits, pointing to the lack of participation by the tribes. Not surprisingly, the agencies charged with administering the tax and labor laws have not arrived at a consensus on the FUTA issue. For the past several years, various Internal Revenue Service field offices have interpreted the FUTA in different ways. The varying interpretations have resulted in differences in benefits availability for tribal employees, Indians as well as non-Indians, and differing degrees of tax liability for tribal governments themselves. The bottom line is that for Federal FUTA tax purposes, the treatment for tribes often depends on where they are located. Absent explicit recognition from Congress clarifying the status of tribal governments, this is a problem that will go on. Because State governments, the IRS, and the U.S. Labor Department cannot seem to agree on the status of Indian tribal governments under the FUTA, the time is right for the Congress to act and to clarify this issue so that tribal members can secure benefits they are entitled to and the tribes will have certainty and predictability in their employment and hiring decisions. Tribal government employers will benefit from this measure by the uniform application of the FUTA statute. The increased certainty that it will provide to tribal employers, their employees, and separated employees will enhance the tribal work environment, reduce litigation, and provide assurances to all parties involved. This bill would require that Indian tribal government employers receive the same treatment as Federal, State, and local governments and tax-exempt organizations receive for FUTA purposes. The Joint Tax Committee has been requested to estimate the revenue impact of this measure. Similar estimates performed in 1995 indicated the impacts to be minor. The development of tribal economies is a critical element in encouraging tribal self-sufficiency and political self-determination. Increasing the ability of tribal government employers to attract and retain the best skilled employees is one of my main objectives as chairman of the Indian Affairs Committee. If the confusion and lack of certainty that has plagued tribal governments continues, employment with an Indian tribe will be increasingly unattractive, and tribes will suffer. By providing equitable FUTA treatment to tribal government employers, this legislation will assist in the long-term growth and stability of tribal economies and tribal governments. I urge my colleagues to join in supporting this crucial measure. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that additional material be printed in the Record.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, with the approach of Memorial Day, we are reminded of the millions of American men and women who have dedicated and sacrificed their lives in service to the U.S. Armed Forces. And for far too many, it is a day to remember those service members who have yet to return home from the wars they valiantly fought many years ago. During the last Congress, we passed the Missing Service Personnel Act. Specifically, this bill created a framework of accountability within the Department of Defense to establish the status and location of our missing Armed Forces personnel. Until this legislation was introduced in 1995, the procedures for handling missing service personnel had remained unchanged for more than 50 years. This legislation improved procedures for reviewing POW/MIA cases and protected the missing service member from being declared dead solely based on the passage of time. Gathering 47 cosponsors in the Senate and achieving unanimous passage in the House, the bill became law in February 1996. However, an amendment to the 1997 Defense Authorization Conference Report repealed its strongest provisions. Today, I am introducing The Missing Persons Authorities Improvement Act of 1997 in an effort to restore not only those lost provisions but to also offer a sense of accountability for our missing service personnel and their loved ones. A companion bill has already been introduced in the House of Representatives by Congressman Ben Gilman of New York. One major provision to be restored requires that military unit commanders report and initiate a search within 48 hours from the time a person has been deemed missing. Right now, a soldier can be missing for up to ten days before a report and search must be made. Another restored provision protects civilian defense employees and contractors who become missing as a result of hostile action. These civilians who serve with, or accompany the Armed Forces in the field under orders and place their lives in danger, should be entitled to the same protection that is given to uniformed soldiers. This bill also includes a provision which requires that if remains are recovered and are not identifiable through visual means, certification must be made by a forensic scientist that the remains recovered are, in fact, the missing person. In the past, hasty and speculative conclusions have often lead to misidentification and ultimately, undue emotional hardship for MIA families. It is our obligation to take full advantage of our current technological capabilities and provide the families of missing service personnel with certain, respectful closure in every case possible. As a veteran who served in Korea, I am especially proud to also include an additional provision that calls for the establishment of personnel files for Korean conflict cases. Under this provision, if any new information is discovered that indicates that the soldier may not have been killed during the Korean War, a new case must be opened or an existing one must be reviewed. There are currently some 8,000 of my Korean war colleagues who have never been accounted for. The recent efforts by the many families of Korean War MIA's to learn the fate of their loved ones only reinforce the necessity for this provision. These families deserve our respect and attention. This legislation is supported by numerous veterans' service organizations such as the American Legion, the Disabled American Veterans, the Korean and Cold War Families Association, and the National League of POW/MIA Families. This bill asks the Department of Defense only to make the best possible effort to recover and return our missing personnel. It is the least we owe our soldiers, past and present, who endanger their lives in defense of our country. It is the very least we owe the families who have and will endure the pain and uncertainty of a loved one left unaccounted for at a time of war. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be printed in the Record. I also ask unanimous consent that Senator Ford be included as an original cosponsor to this legislation.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, today I, along with Senators Inouye and Domenici, introduce legislation which will reform the existing Native American Pass-Through Program administered by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention [OJJDP], within the Department of Justice, and will create a grant program that will provide direct funding to eligible tribes for the purpose of addressing juvenile justice needs in Indian country. Juvenile delinquency is an enormous problem faced by both State and tribal governments. A February 1997 report, issued by OJJDP, indicated that law enforcement agencies around the country made an estimated 2.7 million arrests in 1995 of persons under age 18. This accounted for 18 percent of all arrests made during that year. OJJDP also reported that while the total number of juvenile arrests for violent crimes decreased in 1995, the total number of arrests is considerably higher than they were in 1992 and 67 percent higher than the 1986 level. Unfortunately, there are no complete and accurate sets of statistics available on the rate of juvenile delinquency among the American Indian and Alaskan Native population as a whole. In spite of this, I think it is fair and accurate to say that the threat of an increased rate of juvenile delinquency is great in Indian country due to the large and growing population of Indian youth under the age of 18. In fact, in a hearing conducted by the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs on April 8, a representative of the Department of Justice stated that ``while violent crime is falling in American cities, it is rising on American Indian reservations.'' Despite this, there are still about half as many police officers in Indian country on a per capita basis. Currently, tribal governments which perform law enforcement functions are eligible to receive grants through the Native American Pass-Through Program, established through the 1988 amendments to the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974. Under this program, States must make available to tribes a minimum amount of funding based, in part, upon the ratio of the number of Indian juveniles within a State's boundaries compared to the total number of juveniles within that State. This funding may go toward a variety of juvenile delinquency prevention, control, or reduction efforts. Based upon the comments of representatives of tribal governments, State advisory groups, the National Coalition for Juvenile Justice, and State governments, it has become clear to me that the Pass-Through Program is simply not meeting the needs of tribes. First, the minimum amount of funding each State must make available to tribes is, on average, so minimal that it fails to appropriately address the needs of the tribes. While many States do award grants in excess of the requirement, the amounts tribes receive are often too small to initiate a program of any magnitude. In addition, many tribes do not even apply for these grants, because the cost of preparing a grant application would exceed the amount of funds awarded. More importantly, the Pass- Through Program exists in conflict with the Federal-tribal government- to-government relationship, by requiring tribal governments to depend upon the States. If a State chooses not to participate in the program or does not meet certain requirements, tribes located within that State's boundaries will not receive funds under the act. Because of these and other concerns raised by tribes and juvenile justice officials, I am introducing the Indian Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Improvement Act. This proposal seeks to eliminate the Native American Pass-Through Program and replace it with a discretionary grant program that will provide direct Federal grants to Indian tribes. Consistent with the Pass-Through Program, these funds will be used to plan and develop programs to prevent and reduce juvenile crime as well as to improve the tribal government's juvenile justice system. More specifically, this legislation will require tribes to submit program plans as part of their grant application to the Administrator of OJJDP. Tribes must comply with certain core requirements in order to demonstrate an ability to administer and account for the quality of the juvenile justice programs. Finally, this legislation includes a reporting requirement similar to the one mandated in the Indian Self- Determination Act. On the administrative side, the legislation directs OJJDP to take into account certain important factors when awarding grants such as a tribe's available resources and the population of Indian youth who reside within the tribe's jurisdiction. It is also important to note that this legislation in no way prevents tribes from entering into cooperative agreements with States or units of local government. Tribes are still able to enter into these agreements and apply for State funding should they desire to do so. The prevention, control, and reduction of juvenile delinquency should be one of the top priorities of this Nation. With this legislation, we have the opportunity to provide a better mechanism to deliver funds to tribes for the purpose of addressing juvenile justice needs, a much better mechanism than we currently have. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, with the approach of Memorial Day, we are reminded of the millions of American men and women who have dedicated and sacrificed their lives in service to the U.S. Armed Forces. And for far too many, it is a day to remember those service members who have yet to return home from the wars they valiantly fought many years ago. During the last Congress, we passed the Missing Service Personnel Act. Specifically, this bill created a framework of accountability within the Department of Defense to establish the status and location of our missing Armed Forces personnel. Until this legislation was introduced in 1995, the procedures for handling missing service personnel had remained unchanged for more than 50 years. This legislation improved procedures for reviewing POW/MIA cases and protected the missing service member from being declared dead solely based on the passage of time. Gathering 47 cosponsors in the Senate and achieving unanimous passage in the House, the bill became law in February 1996. However, an amendment to the 1997 Defense Authorization Conference Report repealed its strongest provisions. Today, I am introducing The Missing Persons Authorities Improvement Act of 1997 in an effort to restore not only those lost provisions but to also offer a sense of accountability for our missing service personnel and their loved ones. A companion bill has already been introduced in the House of Representatives by Congressman Ben Gilman of New York. One major provision to be restored requires that military unit commanders report and initiate a search within 48 hours from the time a person has been deemed missing. Right now, a soldier can be missing for up to ten days before a report and search must be made. Another restored provision protects civilian defense employees and contractors who become missing as a result of hostile action. These civilians who serve with, or accompany the Armed Forces in the field under orders and place their lives in danger, should be entitled to the same protection that is given to uniformed soldiers. This bill also includes a provision which requires that if remains are recovered and are not identifiable through visual means, certification must be made by a forensic scientist that the remains recovered are, in fact, the missing person. In the past, hasty and speculative conclusions have often lead to misidentification and ultimately, undue emotional hardship for MIA families. It is our obligation to take full advantage of our current technological capabilities and provide the families of missing service personnel with certain, respectful closure in every case possible. As a veteran who served in Korea, I am especially proud to also include an additional provision that calls for the establishment of personnel files for Korean conflict cases. Under this provision, if any new information is discovered that indicates that the soldier may not have been killed during the Korean War, a new case must be opened or an existing one must be reviewed. There are currently some 8,000 of my Korean war colleagues who have never been accounted for. The recent efforts by the many families of Korean War MIA's to learn the fate of their loved ones only reinforce the necessity for this provision. These families deserve our respect and attention. This legislation is supported by numerous veterans' service organizations such as the American Legion, the Disabled American Veterans, the Korean and Cold War Families Association, and the National League of POW/MIA Families. This bill asks the Department of Defense only to make the best possible effort to recover and return our missing personnel. It is the least we owe our soldiers, past and present, who endanger their lives in defense of our country. It is the very least we owe the families who have and will endure the pain and uncertainty of a loved one left unaccounted for at a time of war. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be printed in the Record. I also ask unanimous consent that Senator Ford be included as an original cosponsor to this legislation.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, today I want to call my colleagues' attention to an important issue facing the Western Slope of my home State of Colorado; namely, the lack of quality and reliable air service. I have long been concerned about this problem facing the residents and the business community in western Colorado. I have received hundreds of complaints from constituents up and down the Western Slope and have experienced many of these problems myself. For example, on numerous occasions I have found myself waiting for a delayed flight for several hours only to find out later on that the flight had been canceled. On one occasion, the pilot showed up only to announce that he was not certified to fly the plane. To address this issue, I held a field hearing on Wednesday, April 2, in Grand Junction, CO, to hear testimony firsthand from citizens and representatives of the business community. Witnesses at the hearing included representatives from the airlines industry, consumers as well as the business community. The testimony presented reflected the deep concern among business leaders and consumers in western Colorado about the lack of adequate air service. Many of the witnesses testified to the lack of competition in air service in western Colorado after deregulation. They further stressed that their concerns center around late arrivals, canceled flights, discontinuation of service, over booked flights, inadequate aircraft that cannot handle passenger baggage, inadequate safety procedures, inconvenient schedules and costs and high turnover of pilots. Because of the importance of this testimony, I wrote to the acting administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration, Mr. Barry Valentine, on April 18, requesting the FAA's review of this material and requested a report from the FAA on ways in which air service can be improved on the Western Slope and how the witnesses' concerns can be addressed. I also provided a complete set of this testimony to the Senate Aviation Subcommittee, so it can be used in future subcommittee work on commuter air service. For the benefit of my colleagues, I ask unanimous consent that a copy of the witness list be printed in the Record following my remarks. The PRESIDING OFFICER, without objection, it is so ordered. (See exhibit 1.)

Mr. CAMPBELL. I am more concerned now than ever about the quality of air service in Colorado, and I look forward to working with my colleagues on improving air service in this important region of our country. Exhibit 1 list of witnesses present at the hearing Mr. Greg Walcher, President of Club 20. Mr. Benard Buescher, Colorado Transportation Commissioner. Mr. John Frew, President and CEO of Colorado Ski Country

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, today I, along with Senators Inouye and Domenici, introduce legislation which will reform the existing Native American Pass-Through Program administered by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention [OJJDP], within the Department of Justice, and will create a grant program that will provide direct funding to eligible tribes for the purpose of addressing juvenile justice needs in Indian country. Juvenile delinquency is an enormous problem faced by both State and tribal governments. A February 1997 report, issued by OJJDP, indicated that law enforcement agencies around the country made an estimated 2.7 million arrests in 1995 of persons under age 18. This accounted for 18 percent of all arrests made during that year. OJJDP also reported that while the total number of juvenile arrests for violent crimes decreased in 1995, the total number of arrests is considerably higher than they were in 1992 and 67 percent higher than the 1986 level. Unfortunately, there are no complete and accurate sets of statistics available on the rate of juvenile delinquency among the American Indian and Alaskan Native population as a whole. In spite of this, I think it is fair and accurate to say that the threat of an increased rate of juvenile delinquency is great in Indian country due to the large and growing population of Indian youth under the age of 18. In fact, in a hearing conducted by the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs on April 8, a representative of the Department of Justice stated that ``while violent crime is falling in American cities, it is rising on American Indian reservations.'' Despite this, there are still about half as many police officers in Indian country on a per capita basis. Currently, tribal governments which perform law enforcement functions are eligible to receive grants through the Native American Pass-Through Program, established through the 1988 amendments to the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974. Under this program, States must make available to tribes a minimum amount of funding based, in part, upon the ratio of the number of Indian juveniles within a State's boundaries compared to the total number of juveniles within that State. This funding may go toward a variety of juvenile delinquency prevention, control, or reduction efforts. Based upon the comments of representatives of tribal governments, State advisory groups, the National Coalition for Juvenile Justice, and State governments, it has become clear to me that the Pass-Through Program is simply not meeting the needs of tribes. First, the minimum amount of funding each State must make available to tribes is, on average, so minimal that it fails to appropriately address the needs of the tribes. While many States do award grants in excess of the requirement, the amounts tribes receive are often too small to initiate a program of any magnitude. In addition, many tribes do not even apply for these grants, because the cost of preparing a grant application would exceed the amount of funds awarded. More importantly, the Pass- Through Program exists in conflict with the Federal-tribal government- to-government relationship, by requiring tribal governments to depend upon the States. If a State chooses not to participate in the program or does not meet certain requirements, tribes located within that State's boundaries will not receive funds under the act. Because of these and other concerns raised by tribes and juvenile justice officials, I am introducing the Indian Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Improvement Act. This proposal seeks to eliminate the Native American Pass-Through Program and replace it with a discretionary grant program that will provide direct Federal grants to Indian tribes. Consistent with the Pass-Through Program, these funds will be used to plan and develop programs to prevent and reduce juvenile crime as well as to improve the tribal government's juvenile justice system. More specifically, this legislation will require tribes to submit program plans as part of their grant application to the Administrator of OJJDP. Tribes must comply with certain core requirements in order to demonstrate an ability to administer and account for the quality of the juvenile justice programs. Finally, this legislation includes a reporting requirement similar to the one mandated in the Indian Self- Determination Act. On the administrative side, the legislation directs OJJDP to take into account certain important factors when awarding grants such as a tribe's available resources and the population of Indian youth who reside within the tribe's jurisdiction. It is also important to note that this legislation in no way prevents tribes from entering into cooperative agreements with States or units of local government. Tribes are still able to enter into these agreements and apply for State funding should they desire to do so. The prevention, control, and reduction of juvenile delinquency should be one of the top priorities of this Nation. With this legislation, we have the opportunity to provide a better mechanism to deliver funds to tribes for the purpose of addressing juvenile justice needs, a much better mechanism than we currently have. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. I thank the Chair. We in the Chamber may agree or not agree with our colleague from Pennsylvania, but, frankly, I know of no one who would ever question his commitment to his beliefs or the ability to take on a tough, difficult, emotional issue such as we face today. It is an issue to which there probably is no universal right answer in the eyes of our fellow Americans. I know that many people have very strong opinions, sometimes driven by religion, by culture, by their own experiences, and perhaps I am no different than they are, but I do wish to commend the Senator from Pennsylvania for bringing this to the floor. I wish to speak for a few moments about this extremely emotional and difficult issue of partial-birth abortion. As the Senators from California know--they are not on the floor. I had hoped they would be. But as they know, I have defined myself over the years as pro-choice and have supported their efforts in protecting the rights of women in almost every debate in the last 10 years which I have known Senator Boxer and in the last 5 that I have known Senator Feinstein. In fact, I, like them, have had a 100 percent voting record for NARAL. Last year, I voted with them in opposition to the ban, this ban. I have always believed that all the laws in the world will not prevent a woman from aborting an unwanted fetus. Efforts to prevent it I think simply drive it underground. In fact, I saw that in graphic results years ago on a couple of occasions when I was a policeman in California prior to Roe versus Wade. Last year, before the override of the President's veto of the bill came about, I listened very carefully to those who hold very strong views on both sides of the issue. I think I learned a great deal from conversations with the medical community about this procedure and its implications. I am certainly not an expert, not a doctor, as is our previous speaker, but I think like most Americans I respect doctors and listen to their views very carefully when it deals with health. Certainly I will never suffer the tragic decision a woman has to make when she decides whether to terminate or not to terminate a pregnancy. But it did become clear to me that the procedure which would be banned is inflicted on a fetus so far along in its development that it is an infant, not a fetus, in the eyes of a layman like me. We are subject, of course, to very emotional debate, charts and graphs that are very explicit and tragic when we look at them, but we have to make a decision based on conscience, and last year I thought I did. When the vote, however, to override came about, I found myself confined to a hospital bed in the little town of Cortez, CO, as a result of an injury I sustained in a vehicle accident. I was there for a week. I watched C-Span, as so many Americans do. I had a chance to talk to the doctors who were involved in operating on me when I was in the hospital. And in watching the dedicated health professionals in that hospital working so hard day and night to save lives, as the days went by, it became increasingly clear to me that a vote to override the veto also represented an effort to save lives and not take lives. I had the opportunity to speak candidly to several of the doctors in that hospital as well as our doctor colleague here and a number of others about how this procedure is done and how often it is used. Mr. President, each of us has to make our own decisions based on our own frame of reference with our own conscience as our guide, and so it was with me last year. And although I was in the hospital, I did send a statement to be read into the Record by Senator Dan Coats, our colleague from Indiana, that I would have, had I been here at the time, changed my position and voted to override the President's veto. In recent testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, a key witness on this issue, Dr. Ron Fitzsimmons, another physician whose opinion I respect, stated that this procedure is performed more often than he had originally testified, which supports what other doctors had told me. In light of this evidence and the evidence indicating that this procedure is only one among several options that women may elect to protect the life and health of the mother, this year I intend to support my colleague from Pennsylvania and support this ban. Now, I probably will not be alone among my colleagues in changing my view on this, and I am certainly aware that any time a Senator changes his mind, even if it is based on new evidence, he opens the door to all kinds of accusations of flip-flopping, being in someone's pockets, selling out, and all the other ludicrous charges that are immediately levied against him or her when he finds new evidence and does change his mind. I can live with that. What I cannot live with is not voting my conscience and will, therefore, vote in support of the Senator from Pennsylvania. I thank the Chair. I yield the floor.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs will meet on Wednesday, May 21, 1997, at 9:30 a.m. in room 485, Russell Senate Building to conduct an oversight hearing on programs designed to assist native American veterans. Those wishing additional information should contact the Committee on Indian Affairs at 224-2251. committee on agriculture, nutrition, and forestry

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs will meet on Tuesday, May 13, 1997, at 10:30 a.m. in room 485, Russell Senate Office Building to conduct an oversight hearing on Public Law 102-477, the Indian Employment, Training and Related Services Demonstration Act of 1992. 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, I would like to take the time today to commend an amazing young woman from my home State of Colorado. Linda Espinosa is a very special person. Not only has she been named the valedictorian of her school in Colorado Springs, but she is also one of only six people each year to be awarded the Junior Achievement Award by Amway Corp. This achievement is even more significant because the award is given to outstanding individuals who have excelled in a particular area, despite suffering from hardship or disability. Linda's triumph has been overcoming deafness to lead her class at the Colorado School for the Deaf and Blind. I admire Linda's determination and scholarship, and ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing her accomplishment. I wish Linda the best of luck in her future endeavors. We can all learn a lesson in perseverance from this courageous young woman. Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, today I join my colleague from Colorado, Senator Wayne Allard, in supporting adoption of House Concurrent Resolution 25, which authorizes the placement of the statue of Jack Swigert in Statuary Hall of the U.S. Capitol. This important resolution was submitted by our colleague, Congressman Dan Schaefer, in the House of Representatives, who is the dean of our delegation. The inclusion of this statue would not be possible without the efforts of many Coloradans, who I would like to thank for their dedicated efforts. Among these groups, the Arapahoe County Republican Men's Club stands out for its large contribution. Club members lobbied the state legislature and donated substantial amounts of money in an effort to commission the statue. Also a key supporter of this effort was Veterans of Foreign Wars Chapter 11229. This chapter was commissioned solely for the purpose of persuading the state legislature to create the statue of Mr. Swigert and put the initiative on the ballot. Mr. Swigert was a lifelong member of VFW Post #1, which is the oldest VFW in the nation, founded after the Spanish-American War. Among the many individuals who worked on this honor, Mr. Hal Schroyer, who lives north of Denver, should be mentioned for 10 years of work on this project. Mr. Swigert was an extraordinary individual, even before his flight in the Apollo 13 spacecraft, made famous by the movie in 1996 that my colleague mentioned. Jack learned to fly at age 16, while attending Denver East High School, and was on the move ever since. Jack served in the Air Force in Korea, where he flew jet fighters. Even after his plane crashed into a radar unit on a Korean airstrip, Jack continued to fly. After leaving the service, he was a test pilot to 10 years. He kept busy, earning two master's degrees as a followup to his 1953 mechanical engineering degree. What Jack is best remembered for though, is his fateful aborted trip to the moon in 1970, as part of the Apollo 13 mission. Jack joined the crew at the last minute, after his colleague, Thomas Mattingly, was exposed to German Measles and could not make the trip. He had no idea just how exciting this trip would become when he started. After an oxygen tank exploded, the three-member crew used all their knowledge and ingenuity to bring the disabled ship home safely. Because of their quick thinking and grace under extreme pressure, all three members, Jack Haise, James Lovell and Jack Swigert returned safely to Earth. Following his service with NASA, Swigert put his extensive aeronautical expertise to use as the executive director of the House Committee on Science and Technology. He held the position until 1977, when he decided to run for the U.S. Senate. He was defeated by his friend William Armstrong in the primary and returned to private industry as the vice president for two prominent Denver companies. In 1982, Jack made a successful bid for a House seat, even after learning that he had cancer. Jack's courageous battle was an effort to prove that, to use his words, ``technology and commitment can overcome any challenge.'' Unfortunately, Jack did not win his battle with bone cancer, and, in December 1982, a month after winning the election, Jack passed away. Jack Swigert will be remembered and honored with this statue we dedicate to him as a true American hero. And, his statue will represent Colorado with honor and distinction here in the U.S. Capitol for years to come. To my knowledge, this will be the first space age statue to be included. With my colleague from Colorado, I urge my colleagues to support passage of this important resolution. I yield the floor.