Thad Cochran

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, at the request of the majority leader, I announce today that the Senate will be in morning business during which Senators may speak. There will be no rollcall votes during today's session of the Senate. On Monday, the majority leader hopes that the Senate will be able to begin debate on the concurrent budget resolution. Senators will be notified as soon as any agreements are reached. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be recognized for a period not to exceed 15 minutes.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Madam President, I took time to comment and read some excerpts because in my view this is excellent work, and Senator Lugar ought to be strongly commended for his leadership not only in chairing this traffic force on these important issues but in his work on the Foreign Relations Committee in connection with NATO enlargement, United States-Russia relations which are the subject of this work. Madam President, I am pleased to cosponsor Senate Concurrent Resolution 5, which was introduced by Senator Roth, supporting the expansion of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, because I believe the NATO alliance will be strengthened by including new members and that its capacity to contribute to stability and freedom will be enhanced by such expansion. Senate Concurrent Resolution 5 specifically mentions four nations: Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic, and Slovenia, which should be considered for membership in the alliance, but I do not think the consideration of the Foreign Relations Committee should be limited to those countries. Serious consideration should also be given, in my opinion, to Romania, and maybe to others as well. The Romanian Government has a record of cooperation with the United States and Western nations. During the Persian Gulf crisis, for example, Romania supported U.N. resolutions imposing sanctions against Iraq and voted to authorize the United States and other nations to enforce the sanctions and liberate Kuwait. In 1993, Romania supported continuation of a 30-year U.N. embargo against Cuba, and its military forces participated in the U.N. action in Angola in 1995. Romania also supported the U.N. trade embargo against the former Yugoslavia, and following the Dayton accords, it deployed a 200-troop battalion to assist in the NATO-led IFOR mission. Romania has participated in many Partnership for Peace exercises and was the first nation to sign the Partnership for Peace framework document in 1994. The Romanian Government has sought entry into several Western economic and security alliances. In 1993, Romania became an associate member of the European Union, and in 1995, it submitted an application to become a full member of the EU. In 1994, Romania became a member of the Council of Europe. The people of Romania strongly support joining the NATO alliance. A recent European Commission poll of 20 Eastern and Central European nations shows a higher percentage of Romanians favoring membership in NATO than any other prospective new member's citizenry. Since the fall of Romania's Communist government in 1989, the people of Romania have made great progress to achieve the goal of democracy, by showing respect for the rule of law, moving to a free market economy, and imposing civilian control over the military. By the end of 1996, Romania had completed a round of elections at all levels of Government, including both Parliamentary and Presidential elections. Observers from the Council of Europe classified the November Presidential elections ``reasonably fair and transparent,'' and it should be noted that they resulted in the first peaceful transfer of power since 1937. The current political situation is particularly remarkable when compared with the regime which held power in 1989. In addition to strengthening the elements common to democracies worldwide, the Romanians have directly confronted and worked to abate both internal and external ethnic conflicts. In March of this year, the Prime Minister outlined steps the Government will take to ease domestic ethnic tensions. In an effort to discourage ethnic conflict with the Hungarians living in Romania, the Government negotiated and signed a treaty with Hungary. The ruling party coalition includes the party most closely associated with ethnic Hungarians. I understand also that the Romanians are nearing the end of treaty negotiations with Ukraine over remaining border issues. Both of these cases demonstrate a willingness to settle disputes with its neighbors in a peaceful way. NATO Secretary General Solana has cited the programs that Romania, among other nations, has made toward resolving outstanding bilateral differences. Including Romania in NATO would enhance European security. Romania's military forces are among the largest in Europe. Of the countries currently being considered for NATO membership, only Romania and Poland have army, navy, and air force capabilities. On the day their Minister of Defense was sworn in, he declared that one of his administration's highest priorities would be to prepare Romania's military for interoperability with existing NATO structures. As a result, Romanians have undertaken strenuous efforts to update their military equipment and improve their ability to operate in concert with the forces of other nations. Perhaps the most concerted efforts of the Romanian people have been devoted to improving their economy. The results of the last election demonstrated a preference for leaders who favor privatization, freer markets, and a continuation of reform. Within 3 weeks of the decisive Presidential election, senior representatives from the International Monetary Fund, the European Union, and the World Bank traveled to Bucharest to finalize the details of a comprehensive reform package aimed at reducing inflation, cutting the deficit, and speeding privatization. This plan for reform--released in February--will be challenging for the Romanian Government and its people over the next few years, and the Government has planned certain countermeasures during the transition, such as a strengthening of the welfare program in anticipation of temporary unemployment. However, it appears that Romania is committed to this economic plan. In August 1996, the United States granted MFN status to Romania, and this year our Department of State reported that 80 percent of Romanian farming and 70 percent of retail sales are being generated by private enterprises. This spring the International Monetary Fund announced a $400 million loan to Romania. To supplement this IMF assistance and support the Government's reforms, the European Commission has pledged $140 million. Indicators such as these all offer assurance to foreign investors, whose contributions are important to the growth and stability of Romania's economy. Madam President, I am impressed and encouraged by the progress Romania has made, and I urge serious consideration of Romania for inclusion in NATO. I hope the Foreign Relations Committee will conduct a full and careful review of Romania's political, economic, and military strengths when it considers legislation on NATO expansion. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I am pleased the administration has decided not to contest condition 9 in the resolution of ratification now before the Senate. That condition makes the advice and consent of the Senate a condition precedent to the addition of parties to the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. Any agreement between the administration and the Government of Russia or other states that were part of the Soviet Union which purports to enlarge the ABM Treaty by adding new parties must be submitted to the United States Senate and a resolution of ratification approved by the Senate before it will have the force and effect of law. There are important reasons why it is necessary for the Senate to insist on its constitutional role in treaty making in this resolution. The administration has announced its intent not to submit a memorandum of understanding on succession to the Senate for advice and consent to ratification, and it purports to transform the ABM Treaty from a bilateral agreement into a multilateral accord. The addition of new parties to the ABM Treaty clearly would have serious national security implications for the United States. It would make it much more difficult and time consuming to negotiate other changes in the treaty that may be considered necessary in the future to protect our security interests. Unless the Senate insists on fulfilling its advice and consent responsibilities with respect to the ABM Treaty, there may be a mistaken view taken by the administration that a demarcation amendment being negotiated now with Russia could likewise be the subject of an executive agreement without the benefit of Senate ratification. I am concerned that by our inaction the Senate could be forfeiting its constitutional role in the making of treaties. It should be clear that no treaty or material change in a treaty can be entered into by our government without the consent of the Senate. That is what the Constitution says, and that is what condition 9 says, and that is what the Senate says today as it provides advice and consent to ratification of the amendments to the Conventional Armed Forces in Europe Treaty.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, Federal employees have enjoyed flexible work schedules since 1978. It is time to give private sector employees the same options. Today's work rules are too inflexible, and this legislation changes that to meet the needs of today's working families. The bill provides employees with several options in determining their work schedules. First, workers would have the option of paid flexible leave. An employee might choose to work 35 hours one week and 45 hours the next, and still receive a full paycheck. Second, an employee could set 2-week schedules totaling 80 hours in any combination. This would not change the 40-hour work week, as some have said. The Family Friendly Workplace Act simply adds a section to the Fair Labor Standards Act to create options for employees who want flexible work schedules. In addition, this cannot be forced upon an employee. It must be agreed to by the employee and the employer. Third, employees could choose to take time and a half off instead of overtime. Up to 240 hours of comptime could be banked. Employees would also have the option of cashing out accrued hours for overtime pay at a later date. No employee would be required to participate in any of these programs, and coercion or intimidation by the employer with respect to participation is prohibited. Strict penalties in this bill ensure that these arrangements will be voluntary. Let me reiterate that all of these options are 100 percent voluntary for workers. Nothing would change for employees who want to work a standard schedule. Employers would still have to pay time and a half for any overtime hours put in by an employee in any week, if that is what the employee wants. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, in 1960 just 39 percent of women who had children between the ages of 6 and 17 were in the work force. Today, 76 percent of mothers with school-age children are working. This increase of working families is not compatible with the one-size-fits-all workplace laws enacted in the 1930's. I urge my colleagues to support giving working families the opportunity to balance their work and family obligations by supporting this legislation.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. That is my understanding as well. Addressing the emergency drinking water needs of rural communities is one of the purposes of this funding.

Mr. COCHRAN. I would be happy to engage in a colloquy with my colleague from South Dakota.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I would simply like to state that I think the Senator from Alaska ought to be consulted. He is due to return to the floor very soon. I hope the Senator would withhold seeking the unanimous consent request until he returns.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

Mr. COCHRAN

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

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I send to the desk an amendment to make technical and clarifying changes to title II, chapter 1 of the bill.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the amendment was agreed to, and I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, this amendment, as stated, makes technical and clarifying changes to the agriculture title to the supplemental appropriations bill. The changes have been approved by the ranking Democrat on the committee, Mr. Bumpers, and the amendment has been cleared on both sides of the aisle.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Yes. I want to praise Senator Ford, too. But we set aside this time for debate on the resolution. We had 2 hours in morning business and we will have additional morning business time, I am sure, later. I hope we could debate the resolution, but I will be happy to yield to the distinguished Senator from Ohio.

Mr. COCHRAN. I am happy to yield to my distinguished chairman.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I think we should make it clear at the outset that those of us who are supporting this resolution as reported by the Rules Committee favor looking very carefully at our current campaign laws. The Federal Election Campaign Act sets out some very strict rules and guidelines and laws with respect to how our Federal election campaigns ought to be conducted. Some of us agree that those laws can be improved and are in favor of making changes. For example, I think one of the clear deficiencies in current law is the failure to require disclosure from all of those who spend money in the Federal election campaign process. There is no law against participating. We like to have full participation by all American citizens, by all of those who are eligible to vote in our country, and we need to continue to examine the process to see if we are doing a good enough job of trying to get everybody's involvement in the process. So there are a lot of things that we can do to improve the system. But I hope that our friends who are urging immediate vote on a single proposal, certainly ought to allow a full debate to occur and a free exchange of ideas. This Committee on Rules has had a number of hearings under the leadership of the distinguished Senator from Virginia on this subject. And in this resolution there is a provision that further campaign reform issues will be examined by the Rules Committee, in the context of this resolution on this investigation. Having said that, I think we do need to support, though, the passage of this resolution now so investigation can move forward. The Governmental Affairs Committee is charged under this resolution with responsibility of conducting an investigation into illegal activities surrounding the 1996 election campaigns. We do not single out the President's reelection campaign. We say the campaigns that were conducted in 1996, the challenge of the Republican candidate, the campaigns of all Members of Congress, the campaigns of those Senators who were up in the last cycle--all are to be the subject of the investigation by the Governmental Affairs Committee into illegal activities. Further, if any Senator is found to have engaged in illegal activity, that is to be directly referred to the Ethics Committee for prompt attention and review. What are these facts that support and are the basis for the resolution? I think it is important for us to look at what the facts are, to look at what the allegations are, some of the charges that have been made. One of the individuals who was mentioned by the Senator from Utah is John Huang. It is said by reports that he raised more than $3.4 million for the Democratic National Committee. Where did this money come from? That is a fair question. That is a very legitimate question, and it ought to be answered by this investigation. John Huang was given a security clearance while he was still working for a private enterprise, the Lippo Group, and before he started to work at the Department of Commerce. A legitimate inquiry by this investigation committee is: Why did he get a security clearance before starting a job with the Department of Commerce? And he kept his security clearance, even after he left the Department of Commerce and went to work for the Democratic National Committee. Another legitimate inquiry is: Why did someone who is a full-time fundraiser for the Democratic National Committee need a security clearance? Or why was he permitted to have a security clearance? During his tenure with the Commerce Department and at the Democratic National Committee, he had several visits with officials of the Embassy of the People's Republic of China. A legitimate inquiry: What were the purposes of these visits? Which Chinese officials at the Embassy did he visit and why? Another person who was mentioned by Senator Hatch, as involved in the reports and who was involved actively in the election campaign of 1996, is Johnny Chung. Johnny Chung is said to have donated a total of $366,000 to the Democratic National Committee. A legitimate inquiry: Where did Chung get this money? Another reported fact: Johnny Chung visited the White House more than 50 times, despite the fact that the National Security Council staff had issued a memo describing him as a hustler, and warning officials at the White House of that. Why did Johnny Chung have such free access to the White House? That is a legitimate inquiry. Who did he see when he went to the White House on these occasions, and for what purpose? One day, during a radio address by the President of the United States, Johnny Chung brought six Chinese officials with him to be spectators, and to witness the President's radio address, 2 days after giving a $50,000 check to a senior White House official to pass on to the Democratic National Committee. Charlie Trie is another person who has been mentioned today. Charlie Trie was a fundraiser for the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton's legal defense fund. He is said to have raised more than $600,000. What were the sources of these donations? What did he expect in return, if anything? Charlie Trie visited the White House more than 23 times. Who did he see when he was there? What were the purposes of his visits? Charlie Trie arranged to have Wang Jun, a Chinese arms dealer, attend a White House event with the President. These are legitimate subjects of inquiry into an investigation into possible illegal conduct in connection with the 1996 Presidential election campaign. It seems to me that these are not only questionable activities that raise questions about purposes of fundraising, but connections with a foreign government which was very actively involved in developing new trade relations with our country, in testing our relationship with other countries in that region of the world, and just this past weekend there were new revelations in connection with the fact that the Chinese Government was said, by our own Federal Bureau of Investigation, to be targeting Members of Congress, to influence for the purpose of enhancing China's position with respect to legislation and national policy here in the United States. The question that is legitimate for us to undertake to answer in this investigation is what connection do these associates of the Democratic National Committee or the President--John Huang, Charlie Trie, Johnny Chung, and others--have with this effort by the Chinese, if any? These are legitimate inquiries. Has there been a revelation or a discussion or a briefing at the White House by the FBI on these same subjects? And when did those briefings occur? Before these people were given free access to the White House? Or later? Or when? Did these activities on the part of the Chinese Government become common knowledge at the White House? If they did, who knew about it? Somebody is bound to have known about it. You don't have this kind of seemingly unlimited access with high-level officials in our administration without somebody knowing why they were there. What were their interests? One, of course, was a Department of Commerce official interested in trade, organizing trade missions all around the country. But not only that, Mr. President, let me show you a chart, for the purpose of information for Senators, reflecting information that may be close as a circle of interest. Here we have the three persons I was talking about where there is clear evidence of a lot of fundraising activity, a lot of access with the White House and with top officials in the administration, one working at the Department of Commerce. This is John Huang, who was former top U.S. Lippo executive. Lippo is the Indonesian conglomerate already described by Senator Hatch and others. He was a top Democratic National Committee fundraiser. He had a top-secret security clearance at Commerce--even before, we have now learned--and had almost unlimited White House access. Johnny Chung visited the White House at least 50 times, brought several Communist Party officials, Chinese Government officials, to the White House, and maintains business relationships in China. Charlie Trie, Little Rock restaurateur, has visited the White House from 20 to 30 times; owns a home and restaurant in Beijing. All three participated in very productive fundraising activities for the Democratic National Committee or the President's legal expense fund. Approximately $4.5 million was raised by these three individuals for the Democratic National Committee. The Democratic National Committee said it is returning $2.2 million of those contributions. For the President's legal expense fund, Charlie Trie raised $639,000, all now ruled by the lawyers as returnable and should be returned. Then look at this. These are interesting connections as well. Does this form a link, the link to China that gets the foreign government involved in our election process? It seems to me clearly to indicate a reason to go forward immediately with the passage of this resolution and to go forward with this investigation to find out what the facts are. But here are what some of the allegations are in the reported facts that we can verify with an investigation. Wang Jun, the foreign arms dealer who was brought to the White House, chairman of Poly Technologies, a Chinese arms manufacturer. He is also chairman of CITIC, which is the largest state-run business in China. He visited the White House on February 6, 1996, as a guest of Charlie Trie. Ng Lap Seng, a member of CPPCC. This is the Chinese Government's national advisory board. He has multiple business interests in China, Hong Kong, and Macao. He is partners with Charlie Trie in San Kin Yip International Trading Co. And the Lippo Group, which was discussed in some detail by Senator Hatch. Mochtar and James Riady are the family members who have large interests, if not controlling interests, in the Lippo Group. Lippo has vast business interests in China, business partners with China Resources, a Chinese Government-owned entity. The CP Group, this is the largest foreign investor in China, $2 billion investment, 130 joint ventures. Chairman Dhanin serves as economic adviser to the Chinese Government. Dhanin visited with President Clinton in the White House on June 18, 1996, arranged by Pauline Kanchanalak through John Huang. The connections are with Huang, Chung, and Trie with investors, leading industrialists in China, in Indonesia, all with Chinese ties, all with very big stakes in the outcome of Government policies here in the United States and legislation here in the United States, and, apparently, Members of Congress were selected to be supported or encouraged or lobbied, or whatever happened, and we don't know what happened. We don't know if anything happened, but we need to find out what steps were taken to try to influence decisions in this Government by the foreign government. The question about whether passing a bill to reform campaign finance law cures all that, of course, begs the question. That is not the question, and it is certainly not the answer. The question is, What are the illegal activities that are involved in these transactions, if any? That is not only an appropriate area for inquiry by this U.S. Senate, it is mandatory, it is a duty, it is a mandatory responsibility, it is a duty we have. So I urge my colleagues to adopt this resolution. It is a product of an effort to try to resolve differences that some on the other side of the aisle have had with the effort that we initiated in the Governmental Affairs Committee to put together a resolution to define scope and a budget and a process. But I have confidence, Mr. President, in the chairman and the ranking Democratic member, Senator Thompson and Senator Glenn, who are totally dedicated, in my view, to a fair but full inquiry of the allegations that are apparent and are begging to be investigated so that we can find out what the facts are. If laws need to be changed, we can recommend changes in the law. If we simply need to disclose whether people are innocent of the charges that have been made against them, that is an important part of the responsibility, too. To clear those whose names may have been tarnished by published reports that we have seen in the newspapers and heard in the broadcast media, that is part of the obligation of this committee as well, which I think will be taken very, very seriously. So I am hopeful that the Senate will approve the resolution, Mr. President. I congratulate the chairman for his leadership in this. Mr. WARNER addressed the Chair.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Madam President, first, I commend the distinguished Senator from Utah for his great leadership on the floor of the Senate in support of this resolution to require a balanced budget. Let me just say, we have heard Senators come to the floor and point out that this puts in jeopardy the Social Security beneficiaries of America. We have heard others claim that this amendment forces us to consider investments in capital spending the same as operating expenses, as a matter of budget policy. We have heard one thing after another used as excuses for voting against this resolution. But let me say, I am for protecting Social Security beneficiaries. I am for doing whatever we need to do to help ensure that those who depend on Social Security can be confident that they are going to get the benefits to which they are entitled, whether this resolution passes or not. And for budget policy, you just have to look at the plain language of this resolution. It says: The Congress shall enforce and implement this article by appropriate legislation which may rely on estimates of outlays and receipts. We are not giving away the power to decide budget policy and mechanics and whether you have a capital budget or another kind of a budget. The point is, this is national policy, if this passes, that we will live within our means. It is just as simple as that and just as nonscary as that. Mr. HATCH addressed the Chair.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation to reauthorize seasonal base plans for Federal milk marketing orders. This program encourages dairy farmers to stabilize their milk production seasonally. This results in more stable production in the fall and winter, when there is an economic disincentive for dairy farmers to produce milk, and thereby ensures stable milk prices to consumers. Mr. President, this is a matter of fairness. Seasonal base plans were instituted under the Agricultural Act of 1933. Currently, seasonal base plans are included in five Federal milk marketing orders that affect producers in 25 States. Without extension of this authority expeditiously, dairy producers in those five orders who adjusted their production last fall will receive lower average prices while those who made no adjustments will receive higher average prices. This is not a new issue to my colleagues. In fact, during consideration of the fiscal year 1997 Agriculture Appropriations Act, the Senate approved the extension of seasonal base plan authority until the year 2002. The 1996 farm bill requires the Secretary of Agriculture to submit a reform plan for Federal milk marketing orders by 1999 and this bill reauthorizes the base excess plans until 1999. This will ensure that the market environment the Secretary was directed to reform exists until he has a chance to submit his plan. I hope my colleagues will support this legislation.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation to reauthorize seasonal base plans for Federal milk marketing orders. This program encourages dairy farmers to stabilize their milk production seasonally. This results in more stable production in the fall and winter, when there is an economic disincentive for dairy farmers to produce milk, and thereby ensures stable milk prices to consumers. Mr. President, this is a matter of fairness. Seasonal base plans were instituted under the Agricultural Act of 1933. Currently, seasonal base plans are included in five Federal milk marketing orders that affect producers in 25 States. Without extension of this authority expeditiously, dairy producers in those five orders who adjusted their production last fall will receive lower average prices while those who made no adjustments will receive higher average prices. This is not a new issue to my colleagues. In fact, during consideration of the fiscal year 1997 Agriculture Appropriations Act, the Senate approved the extension of seasonal base plan authority until the year 2002. The 1996 farm bill requires the Secretary of Agriculture to submit a reform plan for Federal milk marketing orders by 1999 and this bill reauthorizes the base excess plans until 1999. This will ensure that the market environment the Secretary was directed to reform exists until he has a chance to submit his plan. I hope my colleagues will support this legislation.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, let me add a few brief words of comment in support of the resolutions that were adopted earlier. As we wrap up this session of the 104th Congress, I am constrained to commend, in a very sincere way, the work that has been done by my distinguished colleague, who I serve with, from my State of Mississippi, Trent Lott. As he has taken the reins of majority leader and discharged the duties of that important office, I have been very proud of him, and our entire State has been proud of him, in the way he has managed these challenges, handled this job in good grace, with a good sense of humor, with a keen insight into how to get things done in the U.S. Congress, and with a great deal of integrity. He has reflected credit on the U.S. Senate and on the State of Mississippi, and I congratulate him very sincerely. I thank him for the honor of serving with him as his colleague from our State. Mr. LOTT addressed the Chair.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I thank my friend and colleague from Georgia for yielding me this time. I join him in commending the distinguished Senator from Montana for his remarks. Our former colleague has proposed a very important new plan to deal with what has to be the most serious challenge that our governments-- Federal, State, and local--face today, the epidemic of crime and violence in our society. This plan has meat to it. It has substance to it. It is thoughtful. If we will embrace it and join Bob Dole in seeing that it is enacted and administered in the way it is proposed, I think we will get results. It is time we turned the country around, turned the country around from ever-increasing drug abuse and violent crime to an era when people assume responsibilities for their own actions and they are held accountable for their own actions, whatever their age, and that they are treated in a way that deters action in the future that is a menace to innocent society members. In our society we have a number of efforts that are underway to try to deal with the core problems. There is a wonderful program called Character Counts. In Ocean Springs, MS, during the week of October 13- 19, the schools will have special programs to observe the importance of good character in not only students, but faculty, administration officials, and the communities at large across America. We need to restore America to the place where we have been looked up to as an example for the rest of the world in terms of community spirit, recognition of what is right and wrong, a country that stands for democracy and principles of freedom that have been an inspiration to many countries all over the world. What this program suggests is there are six essential elements or core pillars to good character: trustworthiness, respect, responsibility, caring, citizenship, and fairness. These are important and indispensable individual traits if we are to have a successful, free society. It is on that basis and on that premise that I think Bob Dole establishes this five-point plan of action. An essential part of this is holding juveniles accountable for drug abuse, for criminal acts, and for other violations that put the safety and security of others in jeopardy. Something has to be done about it. Something is being done about it, but not enough. We need to do better. We need stronger leadership, a better example of leadership at the top. That is a part of this, too. An example is that we have seen the abuse of drugs go up by 105 percent for teenagers between the ages of 12-17 from 1992 to 1995. Before that time, drug use was going in the other direction. It was going down. Now it has turned and is going up again. We have to ask why. What does this lead to? A third of all juvenile criminals are under the influence of drugs at the time of their criminal offense. That is what happens. There are consequences for everybody for the failure to exert good, commonsense, strong, committed leadership in this area. I traveled one day with the sheriff of Hinds County, MS. He told me, as we looked firsthand at some of the problems in the largest populated county in my State, he said public enemy No. 1 in the State of Mississippi is crack cocaine. I am sure that is the case in many, many, other towns and communities and cities throughout this country. What do we do? We have a White House that cut the programs to deal with this. They cut the Office of Drug Control Policy by 83 percent. They cut the number of drug agents. The U.S. attorneys used to be challenged by the President and the Attorney General to do something about those who are committing offenses with guns. There was an Operation Triggerlock, you remember, an effort to go out on the streets and get those who are using guns to commit violent acts and crimes and lock them up, put an end to it. Take the guns away from them. What is being done now? The arrests for that kind of behavior are down considerably in this administration. I think we need to turn it around. I think the five-point program Bob Dole has recommended is just what we need. We need to make the fight against drugs a top national priority again. We need to support his effort to create 1,000 new community-based antidrug coalitions. There is another part of this plan that strikes me as being very important. We need to have the Federal Government assisting, supporting, helping States and local communities deal with this problem, not imposing arbitrary new, hard-to-follow regulations that are expensive, that make it more difficult to operate prisons, that do a variety of things that really undercut the efforts being made by law enforcement at the State and local level. He suggests that we assist the States in keeping violent criminals behind bars completing their sentences. There is another part--holding juveniles accountable for their actions. The distinguished Senator from Georgia mentioned that. Youth violence is on the rise. Mr. President, 35 percent of all violent crimes are committed by those who are younger than 20 years of age. What Bob Dole is recommending and what we are suggesting is a good idea is to revise the Federal juvenile justice system to hold juveniles accountable. The Senator from Tennessee, Fred Thompson, is chairman of the Juvenile Justice Subcommittee here in the Senate. He recommended a new approach to try to find out what programs at the local level are working, support them with Federal assistance and initiatives that reward those for following these paths and these new procedures, and to do something about those who commit crimes as juveniles; consider treating them as adults in certain circumstances. No longer coddle the juvenile just because he is younger, because some are more dangerous than adults. That is what has been overlooked. This administration has done absolutely nothing about that, absolutely nothing. The program that he is suggesting will authorize new funds to assist in the investigation and apprehension of juvenile offenders, collect and distribute juvenile records to help better deal with this problem, and authorize new funds to be spent on prevention programs that involve parents and community based groups. That example I cited a while ago, the Character Counts Program, is a good example of something that could be done on the prevention side. We are not talking about punishing everybody in an arbitrary or cruel way. We are talking about a balanced approach to doing something more likely to be successful in this area. One thing that I am convinced Bob Dole will do, in accordance with the plan that he proposed, is that he will end the interference by Federal judges and Federal agencies into the proper administration of State prisons. It is about time. There is also a part of the program that deals with keeping guns out of the hands of criminals. We have heard about the National Instant Check Program. We had that as part of the crime bill. He wants to make it a top priority in order to prevent criminals from purchasing any type of gun. There is a procedure for it. He will, as President, instruct the Attorney General to target violent crime by making maximum use of Federal law to get dangerous gun using criminals off the streets and into prison. That is reminiscent of Operation Triggerlock--I assume that is exactly what we will have reinstituted again--which has been abandoned and turned down and discontinued by this President. There was an emphasis on the U.S. attorneys going after those who commit crimes using guns. There has been a noticeable dropoff in prosecutions for those crimes by this administration. In conclusion, what does this action plan do? It provides a sound, sensible, thoughtful blueprint for coordinated Federal and State efforts to combat violent crime and reverse the current trends in the use of drugs that have led to so much violence in our society. Mr. COVERDELL addressed the Chair.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleague in honoring our friend, the gentleman from Mississippi, Sonny Montgomery, who is retiring from the House of Representatives at the end of this Congress. We have joined in sponsoring this bill to name the VA medical center in Jackson, MS, the G.V. (Sonny) Montgomery Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center. Throughout his career, as a senior member of the House National Security Committee and as chairman of the Veterans' Affairs Committee, Sonny has demonstrated genuine concern for the health, education, and well-being of our Nation's veterans. He firmly believes that we should treat veterans with dignity and compassion, and he has worked hard as chairman of the Veterans' Affairs Committee to enact programs and provide facilities to meet that obligation. Sonny's concern for and attention to the men and women of our Armed Forces is firmly rooted in his own experiences, having served in the Army and Army National Guard for a total of 38 years. Sonny served in World War II and during the Korean War. As a dedicated member of the Mississippi Army National Guard, he was promoted to the rank of major general before his retirement in 1981. Sonny's political career began as a member of the Mississippi State Senate from Lauderdale County. He served with distinction for 10 years, from 1956-1966. In 1966, he ran for and won the seat in Congress from the Third District of Mississippi. Sonny has proven to be a very capable, productive, and popular Representative. He was overwhelmingly reelected each term since the 90th Congress. During that 30-year period of service he has earned the reputation of a champion of national defense and veterans' issues, and he often is referred to by his colleagues as ``Mr. Veteran'' or ``Mr. National Guard.'' When Sonny was elected to Congress in 1966, American soldiers were fighting in the war in Vietnam. He demonstrated his concern for those who were involved in that dangerous and deadly region by spending Christmas each year in Vietnam with the soldiers. On these trips, Sonny would carry blank cards with him and when he ran into young soldiers from Mississippi, he would ask them to write the names and addresses of their families on these cards. When Sonny returned home he would take the time to call each soldier's family to let them know that he had seen their son or daughter and relay any stories or news that might interest them. Today, people still thank Sonny for these phone calls. In 1975 he was appointed chairman of the House Select Committee on Missing Persons in Southeast Asia. In 1977, President Carter named him to the Woodstock Commission, which traveled to Hanoi to investigate further, those Americans missing in action. More recently, Sonny was a member of the delegation that brought back the first returned remains of United States personnel missing in North Korea during the Korean war. Sonny Montgomery stands as an example of a true patriot, and for this he has been recognized by his colleagues many times. In 1984, the Speaker of the House asked that he lead the House contingent to the commemoration of the 40th Anniversary of the D-day Invasion at Normandy, a particularly appropriate designation because Sonny fought in the European theater during this war. In 1988, when the reciting of the Pledge of Allegiance was instituted as daily practice by the House of Representatives, Sonny was asked by the Speaker to be the first Member to lead this body in the Pledge. Throughout our time together as members of our State's congressional delegation, I have had the opportunity to observe Sonny in many situations. A most recent instance was during the last round of base closure and realignment. Two of the bases in his district were considered for closure, one of which had been on the closure list in two previous rounds. Sonny was most persuasive and successful in convincing the Base Closure Commission that Naval Air Station Meridian and Columbus Air Force Base are essential to the pilot training in both of those services. Sonny was willing to do everything he could to keep these bases open. Today, these bases remain open, largely due to the efforts of Sonny Montgomery. As a senior member of the House Armed Services Committee, now named the National Security Committee, Sonny Montgomery has been a tremendous influence on our national defense policy. He has consistently supported the maintenance of a strong force. Sonny was one of seven Democrats who in early 1994 paid a visit to President Clinton to insist on increased defense spending by his administration, particularly in the area of military pay, and to urge him to reduce nondefense spending by the Department of Defense. Sonny has always considered the protection of our freedom to be the highest priority of our Government, and he has done his best to ensure our national security. Because of Sonny Montgomery, the National Guard and Reserves are different services than they were 25 years ago. As a member of the Mississippi Army National Guard Sonny saw untapped potential in the Guard and Reserve forces, and as a senior member of the National Security Committee, he has strengthened our reserve component forces in significant ways. Over and over again, Sonny insisted that in order for the Guard and Reserves to be truly ready reserve forces, they must have first-line equipment, top facilities, and more serious training. As we saw in the gulf war, our Guard and Reserves have now been transformed into an essential component of our total forces. In addition, Sonny has always emphasized the need to keep the missions of each Guard unit relevant. Recently, Sonny negotiated with officials at the Pentagon in order to reassign the duties of a National Guard battalion in east Mississippi, which might have been considered for closure. Instead, this battalion will be the first Guard unit in the Nation to be equipped with and train on the high-technology Avenger air defense system, a key weapon in Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm. Our active forces will be better supported by contributions from National Guard units in the future because of Sonny Montgomery. Another high priority for him has been the recruitment and retention of soldiers; and out of this concern came the GI bill which bears his name. Sonny considers this legislation to be his greatest accomplishment. Under the Montgomery GI bill, active duty, National Guard, and Reserve personnel are entitled to educational assistance benefits which would enable them to pursue their educational goals while serving our country. Since being passed into law in 1985, approximately 2 million military personnel have participated in the program, and over 550,000 have already attended schools with its assistance. The Montgomery GI bill has significantly improved recruiting efforts for all of the services, and it has provided much- needed training to veterans and retirees preparing to enter the work force. In addition to protecting our national security, Sonny has consistently sought proper recognition and benefits for veterans. In the 100th Congress, Sonny fought to have the Secretary of Veterans Affairs elevated to a Cabinet-level position. When Sonny saw a need to improve the review of veterans' claims, he sponsored a bill to establish the Court of Veterans' Appeals in order to ensure the complete judicial review of each claim. Within a month, this bill was signed into law, and right away veterans saw needed changes in the claims process. Also, he has worked to streamline the services offered at regional service centers and hospitals, aiming toward providing, in effect, one-stop shopping for our veterans. During the last Congress, Sonny authored legislation to extend compensation to our most recent veterans, those who fought in the Persian Gulf war. The Veterans' Persian Gulf War Benefits Act, now law, requires the VA to give priority to veterans suffering from undiagnosed illnesses after their service in the Persian Gulf region. The bill also established new research and outreach programs to further the identification of this disease. This legislation is just another demonstration of his belief that we have a moral obligation to care for and compensate those who have suffered disabling injuries during their service to our country. While in the Army and for his efforts in service to military personnel and veterans of our country, Sonny has received many awards, including the Legion of Merit, Meritorious Service Medal, Combat Infantry Badge, Army Commendation Medal, a Bronze Star for Valor, and Mississippi Magnolia Cross Award, and the Harry S. Truman Award, which is the highest award given by the National Guard Association of the United States. In addition, he has been recognized by the American Red Cross, the Veterans of Foreign Wars, the Reserve Officers Association of the United States, and AMVETS of World War II. He is past president of the Mississippi National Guard Association, and he remains an active member of the American Legion and VFW Post 79 in Meridian, MS. Veterans' organizations across the country are saddened to see Sonny retire. Above all of Sonny's legislative accomplishments, he must be recognized and appreciated for his patience, congeniality, and compassion. Having maintained so many friendships in both parties, Sonny has often been called to be a mediator. He has been on good terms with Republican and Democrat leaders in Congress and Presidents of both parties throughout four decades, and his friendship with former President Bush goes back to their days as freshmen in the House. His peers regard him as a respected friend, who is wholly dedicated to his purpose in office. A small example of his loyalty is evidenced by the number of hours he has logged in the Speaker's chair, a duty many consider drudgery, but something that Sonny has viewed as an opportunity to serve his fellow Members. I will miss his good counsel and true friendship. Mississippi's Third District and the entire Nation will miss his strong leadership and clear vision. Members like Sonny are rare, and his leaving signals the end of an era for southern Democrats, and the House of Representatives as well. I am pleased to join my colleague, Senator Lott, in offering S. 1669, a bill to name the Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Jackson, MS, for Sonny Montgomery, and I urge all of my colleagues to support the renaming of this facility.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation to provide regulatory relief to small-and medium-sized financial institutions and protect the availability of student loans. In the Higher Education Amendments of 1992, Congress required financial institutions participating in the Federal Family Education Loan [EFEL] Program to audit their student loan portfolios. Unfortunately, this change did not take into account the impact this audit requirement would have on lenders with small student loan portfolios. These small lending institutions earn only a few thousand dollars annually, while the audit costs as much or more. As a result of this prohibitively expensive and unnecessary audit requirement, many lenders are selling off their portfolios and leaving the FFEL Program altogether. The Department of Education has indicated they do not have the authority to waive the audit requirement. Further, the Department has informed those with loan portfolios of less than $10 million that, while they must perform the audits annually, the audit results shall be submitted to the Department only upon request. Thus, much of the time and money spent on these audits will be wasted. The inspector general indicated in its semiannual report that they were concerned that the costs of legislatively required annual audits may outweigh the benefits. The inspector general has recommended that the Department take steps to establish in legislation a threshold for requiring these audits. My legislation would eliminate the lender audit on institutions with portfolios equaling $10 million or less. Without the change in current law lending institutions will continue to sell off their portfolios, leave the FFEL Program, and reduce the opportunities for our Nations' students. I urge my colleagues to support this much needed reform.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation to provide regulatory relief to small-and medium-sized financial institutions and protect the availability of student loans. In the Higher Education Amendments of 1992, Congress required financial institutions participating in the Federal Family Education Loan [EFEL] Program to audit their student loan portfolios. Unfortunately, this change did not take into account the impact this audit requirement would have on lenders with small student loan portfolios. These small lending institutions earn only a few thousand dollars annually, while the audit costs as much or more. As a result of this prohibitively expensive and unnecessary audit requirement, many lenders are selling off their portfolios and leaving the FFEL Program altogether. The Department of Education has indicated they do not have the authority to waive the audit requirement. Further, the Department has informed those with loan portfolios of less than $10 million that, while they must perform the audits annually, the audit results shall be submitted to the Department only upon request. Thus, much of the time and money spent on these audits will be wasted. The inspector general indicated in its semiannual report that they were concerned that the costs of legislatively required annual audits may outweigh the benefits. The inspector general has recommended that the Department take steps to establish in legislation a threshold for requiring these audits. My legislation would eliminate the lender audit on institutions with portfolios equaling $10 million or less. Without the change in current law lending institutions will continue to sell off their portfolios, leave the FFEL Program, and reduce the opportunities for our Nations' students. I urge my colleagues to support this much needed reform.