J. Cleland

Mr. CLELAND

Mr. CLELAND. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Massachusetts, Senator Kerry and the Senator from Missouri, Mr. Bond, for their continuing leadership on behalf of small businesses. The legislation before the Senate, S. 3412, contains many important programs that will enable small businesses to continue to be a vital part of the nation's economy. This omnibus small business legislation is the result of bipartisan commitment to a number of worthy goals. Today I wish to address specifically two important initiatives that I proposed earlier in this session: the disaster mitigation pilot program and the Small Business Administration Women's Business Center authorization. I am extremely pleased that both are included in this bill. On June 11, 1998, Senator Kerry and I introduced the S. 2157, the Women's Business Center Authorization bill. There was broad bipartisan support for this initiative, with seventeen cosponsors. I was especially pleased when Senator Bond included an increased authorization for women's business centers in the pending bill. Funding for these important centers is increased from $8 million to $12 million in fiscal year 1999 and thereafter. The women's business center legislation, simply stated, recognizes the outstanding contributions that women's business centers have made to women entrepreneurs across the Nation. These centers are the only organization, nationally, which focus exclusively on entrepreneurial training for women. Increased funding will allow for new centers and subcenters to be established and for continued funding for existing centers, including the on-line women's business center. Increased funding would achieve the goal of expanding centers to all 50 States. On March 26, 1998, I introduced a disaster mitigation pilot program, S. 1869. This legislation would permit SBA to establish a pilot program (using up to $15 million of existing disaster funds) to provide small businesses with low interest, long-term disaster loans to finance preventive measures before a disaster hits. In response to the increasing costs and personal devastation caused by disasters, the Administration has launched an approach to emergency management that moves away from the current reliance on response and recovery to one that emphasizes preparedness. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has already established administratively a program to assist disaster- prone communities, one in every state, in developing strategies to avoid the crippling effects of natural disasters. My proposal would allow the SBA to begin a pilot program that would be limited to small businesses within those communities which are eligible to receive disaster loans after a disaster has been declared. Currently, SBA disaster loans may only be used to repair or replace existing protective devices that are destroyed or damaged by a disaster. In connection with repairs, funds may also be used to install new mitigation devices that will prevent future damage. My legislation is necessary to authorize SBA to establish this pilot program to provide mitigation loans prior to the occurrence of a disaster. Mr. President, I believe that this disaster mitigation program will address two areas of need for our small businesses--reducing the cost of recovery from a disaster and reducing future disaster costs for small businesses. It also addresses the opportunity for small businesses to contract work during a period when market forces haven't driven up the prices for these services, thereby ultimately reducing the cost of disaster assistance to the taxpayers. I thank my colleagues on the Small Business Committee for including both of these initiatives, which I think will serve the needs of so many, in this bipartisan legislation. I look forward to its prompt enactment. Thank you, Mr. President.

Mr. CLELAND

Mr. CLELAND. Mr. President, as designated by the Senate, September 14-20, 1998, is celebrated as National Historically Black Colleges and Universities Week. I am pleased to take this opportunity to recognize the achievements of these fine institutions of higher education and to pay a special tribute to the ten Historically Black Colleges and Universities located in my home State of Georgia. The 104 historically black institutions of higher learning throughout the United States are cornerstones of African-American education and play an integral role in the lives of African-Americans and in American history. Historically Black Colleges and Universities have set a high standard for providing quality instruction and valuable, lifelong experiences to students. Though sometimes faced with adversity, historically black colleges and institutions have provided students with the opportunity to broaden their horizons and to reach their fullest potential. As I have mentioned, my state of Georgia has the privilege of being served by ten of these fine institutions: Albany State University, Clark Atlanta State University, Fort Valley State University, Interdenominational Theological Center, Morehouse College, The Morehouse School of Medicine, Morris Brown College, Paine College, Savannah State University, and Spelman College. Albany State University, the previous Albany Bible and Manual Training Institute, Georgia Normal and Agricultural College and Albany State College, was ranked by U.S. News and World Report among the top colleges and universities in the South in September 1997. In a recent special report to Black Issues In Higher Education Magazine (July 9, 1998), ASU was ranked among the top 100 producers of degrees for African Americans in three key areas--education, health professions, and computer information Science. Clark Atlanta State University is a comprehensive, private, urban, coeducational institution of higher education with a predominantly African American heritage. It offers undergraduate, graduate, and professional degrees as well as non-degree programs to students of diverse racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic backgrounds. U.S. News and World report lists Clark Atlanta among the best universities in the United States in its 1996 ``America's Best Colleges'' guide. Fort Valley State University, founded in 1890, is a public, state and land-grant co-educational liberal arts institution located in central Georgia's Peach County. The Georgia Board of Regents designated Fort Valley State as a fully accredited University on June 12, 1996, continuing in its leadership role as the only senior college or university in the University System with a mission in all four disciplines--academics, research, extension and service. Interdenominational Theological Center, established in 1958, maintains its position as the nucleus of theological education for African Americans in the world. Six historic African American seminaries comprise ITC. They are: Gammon Theological Seminary (United Methodist), Charles H. Mason Theological Seminary (Church of God in Christ), Morehouse School of Religion (Baptist), Phillips School of Theology (Christian Methodist Episcopal), Johnson C. Smith Theological Seminary (Presbyterian Church USA) and Turner Theological Seminary (African Methodist Episcopal). Morehouse College, founded in 1867 as the Augusta Institute, is a small, liberal arts college with an international reputation for producing leaders who have influenced national and world history. The institution is best known for the work of graduates such as Nobel Peace Prize laureate Martin Luther King Jr., former Secretary of Health and Human Services Louis Sullivan, MacArthur Fellow Donald Hopkins, Olympian Edwin Moses, filmmaker Spike Lee, and a number of Congressmen, federal judges, and college presidents. These alumni, and a long list of other Morehouse men from one generation to the next, have translated the College's commitment to excellence in scholarship, leadership, and service into extraordinary contributions to their professions, their communities, the nation, and the world. The Morehouse School of Medicine became independent of Morehouse College in 1981. The Morehouse School of Medicine is a predominantly black institution established to recruit and train minority and other students as physicians and biomedical scientists committed to the primary health care needs of the underserved and is fully accredited by the Liaison Committee on Medical Education and the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools. Morris Brown College, founded in 1867, is a private, coeducational liberal arts college engaged in teaching and research in the arts, humanities, education, social and natural sciences. The College is committed to developing, through strong academic, continuing education and cultural enrichment programs, the skills needed to function as a literate citizen in society for persons of all socio-economic status. Paine College, founded in 1880, has a history tied to the history of the Christian Methodist Episcopal Church and the United Methodist Church. The College was founded to establish an educational institute to train Black ministers and teachers. Throughout its history, Paine has been a distinctively Christian college. It has maintained deep concern for the quest for truth and has been resolute in blending knowledge with values and personal commitment. Paine has been historically dedicated to the preparation of holistic persons for responsible life in society. Savannah State University, founded in 1890, is the oldest public historically black college in the state of Georgia. SSU offers 26 undergraduate and graduate degrees in three schools--the College of Business Administration, the College of Liberal Arts and Social Sciences and the College of Sciences and Technology. Special programs at SSU include the Marine Sciences program and the Naval Reserve Officers Training Corps. Spelman College was founded in 1881 as the Atlanta Baptist Female Seminary to increase educational opportunities for Black women in Atlanta. Spelman's mission is to help students to think objectively, critically and creatively within a moral framework and to use their talents to solve problems that are ever present in a rapidly changing and complex environment. The extraordinary contributions of historically black colleges and universities in educating students and in enriching our communities cannot be overstated. They are a valuable national resource which are being rightly honored for their exemplary tradition in higher education. Mr. President, please join me and our colleagues in congratulating and celebrating a rich legacy and tradition of the excellence, determination, strength, and perseverance of historically black colleges and universities.

Mr. CLELAND

Mr. CLELAND. Mr. President, I rise today to honor Mayor Robert L. Albritten of Dawson, Georgia on receiving the 1998 American Hometown Leadership Award, which is the only national award that recognizes leaders from small communities whose community service exhibits the highest standards of dedication, ability, creativity and leadership. Mayor Albritten was nominated by Dawson's Better Hometown Task Force and chosen from a field of 400 national leaders for his pacesetting efforts to save jobs at Almark Mills, a local textile plant employing 250 people that shut its doors last Fall leaving Dawson on the brink of a major unemployment problem. Faced with a potential devastating blow to the town of 5,000 people and following days of feverish brainstorming, late-night phone calls and hours-long meetings with community leaders, rural development experts and a local accountant, Mayor Albritten and other community leaders emerged with an audacious plan-- the plant would become a cooperative, in which each worker would be an owner, and all would have a say and a financial stake in the running of the plant. However, Mayor Albritten was not satisfied with just creating jobs, he also set out to better the lives of all of those living in Dawson. He changed the city seal to read ``The City of Dawson, Committed to a Better Quality of Life for All.'' Mayor Robert Albritten has been an innovator and leader, and his determination is truly commendable. He has devoted countless hours of his time and energy to improve the town of Dawson and to better the lives of all of its citizens, never hesitating to help in any way he could. He has not only led the people of Dawson, but he has inspired them. His efforts have also been recognized by having the Robert L. Albritten Neighborhood Community Center named in his honor. In addition to his endless work on behalf of the citizens of Dawson, Mayor Albritten continues his work as a funeral service practitioner. He and his wife Arna have three daughters, Andrea, Alisha and Ariana. Mr. President, I ask that you join me and our colleagues in recognizing and honoring Mayor Robert L. Albritten for his remarkable achievements and accomplishments as a citizen and as a leader which have culminated with his selection as the 1998 American Hometown Leadership recipient. Mayor Albritten is truly a remarkable man and a first-rate American richly deserving of such an honor.

Mr. CLELAND

Mr. CLELAND. Mr. President, I rise today to honor the 1998 Richard B. Russell Public Service Award recipient, Herbert Mabry of Sandy Springs, Georgia. Herb is a man who truly defines public service. Over the years, he has been actively involved in serving the people in many capacities, including his own campaign for public office. The Richard B. Russell Award is given each year to an individual who truly ``raises the bar'' for us all and goes the extra mile for his or her community and state. The honor is bestowed upon an individual who works tirelessly to promote the ideals of the State of Georgia and who strengthens and shapes our State for the future. Senator Russell understood that public service and political involvement is a tool of citizenship, and this year's honoree is a man who believes that being an active public servant defines citizenship. Herb has been the President of the Georgia State AFL-CIO since 1972, and has truly defined and shaped the labor movement throughout Georgia during the past several decades. He is also very involved in other organizations including the Georgia Labor Committee, the Georgia Trade Union Council for Histradut, the AFL-CIO Appalachian Council, the Georgia Democratic Party and the Fulton County Personnel Board. He has been a member of Carpenter's Local Union #225 since 1950 and served as its President for the past 25 years. He also serves as the President of the Southeastern Regional Council of Carpenters. Herb Mabry is a native of Fulton County, Georgia. He and his wife Colleen have six children and 11 grandchildren. Mr. President, I ask that you join me and our colleagues in honoring Herbert Mabry's innumerable contributions and unselfish and inspiring hard work and dedication to the State of Georgia and our Nation. Herb personifies the definition of a true and loyal American and sets the standard for all citizens to live by.

Mr. CLELAND

Mr. CLELAND. Mr. President, there have been a series of recent cases in which courts have ruled against one of law enforcement's most effective anti-drug tools--asset forfeiture. Just consider: Law enforcement agents at an airport found almost $50,000 wrapped inside a pair of jeans. A drug dog responded positively to the presence of narcotics on the money, and the traveler, when confronted by the agents, produced a fake driver's license and offered other false evidence. United States v. $49,576.00 in U.S. Currency, l16 F.3d 425 (9th Cir. 1997). In another instance, narcotics agents found $30,000 wrapped in bundles and stashed under the seat of a car. Despite the courier's demonstrably false explanation of the source of the money, the court nevertheless found insufficient evidence to establish probable cause for forfeiture. United States v. U.S. Currency, $30,060.00, 39 F.3d 1039 (9th Cir. 1994). These are but two in a series of cases in which the courts found circumstantial evidence sufficient to establish that the money was derived from some form of criminal activity, but insufficient to establish that the illegal activity involved drug trafficking. The courts therefore ruled that the money seized was not subject to forfeiture, and the proceeds were returned to the trafficker. See also United States v. $13,570.00 in U.S. Currency, 1997 WL 722947 (E.D. La. 1997) (seizure of cash at airport lacked probable cause despite dog sniff, evasive answers, fake ID, courier profile, and prior drug arrest); United States v. $14,876.00 in U.S. Currency, 1997 WL 722942 (E.D. La. 1997) (same); United States v. $40,000 in U.S. Currency, 999 F. Supp. 234 (D.P.R. 1998) (dog sniff, drug courier profile, quantity of currency and evasive answers are not sufficient to establish probable cause where government fails to establish any connection between claimant and any drug trafficker). Mr. President, these court decisions are coming at a time when drug sales in this country are generating $60 billion in illegal proceeds every year. Most of this drug money finds its way to drug kingpins in Mexico and Colombia. And the drugs find their way to Americans of all ages and walks of life. The consequences are devastating. Substance abuse is now the single largest preventable cause of death in this country, with illegal drugs and alcohol killing 120,000 Americans each year. It's an enemy that respects neither class nor age group. High school athletes, runaways, soccer players, gang members, and class valedictorians use and sell drugs. Nationwide, the percentage of teens reporting illegal drug use has doubled over the last 5 years. And now the National Household Survey on Drug Abuse reports that teen drug use rose in 1997, led by increasing marijuana smoking among teenagers who view it as a low-risk ``soft drug.'' It is no wonder that in survey after survey, Americans are reporting that illegal drugs top their list of national concerns. In recent testimony before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, a top official at the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) painted a chilling portrait of the powerful threat to the United States posed by international drug organizations. He said, and I quote, ``These individuals, from headquarters located outside the U.S., influence the choices that many Americans make about where to live, or where they send their children to school. The drugs, and the attendant violence which accompanies the drug trade, have reached into every American community and, in essence, have robbed many Americans of the dreams they once cherished.'' These organized crime leaders are sophisticated and possess the power that comes with unlimited resources. Because they are worth billions of dollars, these drug lords have at their disposal some of the world's most technically advanced airplanes, boats, radar, and communications equipment. They possess weapons in quantities that, DEA testified, ``rival the capabilities of some legitimate governments.'' These drug kingpins send thousands of couriers into the United States who answer to them on a daily basis via faxes, cellular phones, or pagers. Since the disruption of the notorious Cali cartel leadership, we know that traffickers from Mexico have joined together with Colombian traffickers in an emerging alliance which has largely taken over U.S. heroin distribution from Asian organizations and is now producing some of the world's most potent heroin. The manufacture of the vast majority of cocaine in South America is still under the control of the Colombian cartels, which use commercial maritime vessels, containerized cargo and private aircraft to transport the cocaine from their laboratories in the jungles of southeast Colombia through Mexico and the Caribbean into U.S. border points of entry. In fact, 50 to 60 percent of all the cocaine, as well as 25 percent of the heroin and 80 percent or more of the meth coming into the United States, are transported into our country through the U.S.-Mexico border. The DEA testified that the influence of Colombian trafficking organizations in the Caribbean is ``overwhelming.'' Several Colombian drug syndicates have set up command and control bases in Puerto Rico and the Dominican Republic and use the Caribbean Basin to ferry tons of cocaine into the United States each year. According to the DEA, seizures of 500 to 2,000 kilos of cocaine in the Caribbean are now commonplace. Unlike the monopoly-like rule of the Cali cartel, many of the new Colombian cartels have chosen to franchise a large portion of their wholesale heroin and cocaine operations. As a result, criminals from the Dominican Republic have now become the dominant force in the wholesale cocaine and heroin trade on the East Coast of the United States. In addition to heroin and cocain, methamphetamine has become a growing threat within our borders. Methamphetamine trafficking, which until recently had been stopped west of the Mississippi River, is aggressively moving eastward and is now rapidly challenging cocaine as the primary focus of illegal drug trafficking in Georgia and other eastern seaboard States. According to the DEA Atlanta Field Division, Washington may soon declare Atlanta the meth capital of the Southeast. During February alone, DEA seized almost 90 pounds of methamphetamine in metropolitan Atlanta. Ten pounds of the drug was seized from passengers on buses originating in Texas and California. Acting on a tip, DEA agents found another 25 pounds stashed in hidden compartments in a vehicle. And law enforcement agents apprehended two Los Angeles passengers at Hartsfield Airport who had smuggled 20 pounds of meth into the State. These drugs are being ferried into my State by couriers employed by Mexican trafficking organizations operating out of Mexico and California. DEA has determined that a number of its recent meth seizures in Georgia are directly linked to the AMEZCUA drug trafficking organization--one of Mexico's principal drug cartels. The amounts of money generated by these illegal drug transactions are staggering. The DEA reported that one Mexican drug syndicate forwards $20 to $30 million to Colombia for each major drug operation, and makes tens of millions of dollars in profits each week. Moving this money from Mexico to Colombia, or from the U.S. to Mexico, is a relatively simple matter. The most popular method is to ship the currency in bulk by courier or cargo, or transport it overland or by air. Oftentimes, the same vehicle or even the same courier that originally transported the drugs into the United States will carry the drug proceeds out. It was not long ago that a Customs investigation made front page headlines. Three of Mexico's largest banks were indicted by the U.S. for laundering hundreds of millions of dollars in drug money from this country. The three-year sting was unprecedented on two counts. This was the largest money laundering case in the history of U.S. law enforcement. And it was the first time ever that Mexican banks and bank officials have been directly linked to laundering U.S. drug profits. The sting resulted in the arrest of 70 people, including 14 Mexican banking officials. Thirty-five million dollars in illegal drug proceeds was seized immediately. One hundred and twenty-two million dollars more is expected to be recovered from over 100 bank accounts frozen in this country and in Europe. While unprecedented, this operation netted only a drop in the bucket compared to the estimated $60 billion in illegal proceeds reaped from U.S. drug sales each year. Like most of the drug proceeds, this money was earmarked for drug lords in Mexico and Colombia. In this case, Mexican bankers allegedly aided the Juarez cartel in Mexico and the Cali cocaine and heroin syndicate in Colombia. If we ever expect to make in-roads in the so-called ``war on drugs,'' it is not enough just to apprehend the drug trafficker. We must seize his assets as well. Let me give just one example. The Rodriguez- Orejuela brothers in Colombia once ran the most powerful international organized crime group in history. Based on evidence supplied by the U.S. Government, Miguel Rodriguez-Orejuela has been sentenced to 21 years in prison, although it is expected that he will serve only 12. Last year his brother Gilberto was sentenced to 10\1/2\ years in prison on drug trafficking charges. Even now, the Rodriguez-Orejuela brothers are able to run their drug trafficking business from prison through the use of private quarters and telephones. They are by no means the exception. Last year the Colombia National Police took control of four maximum security prisons from the Bureau of Prisons, in an effort to halt jailed traffickers from continuing their illegal operations from behind prison walls. In the final analysis, the only way to destroy the drug cartels is to hit them where it hurts the most--their pocket books. The transportation and transmission (by electronic means) of drug proceeds are enormous problems for law enforcement, but they also present law enforcement with an enormous opportunity. Because drug proceeds in the form of cash occupy much more space than the drugs themselves--often filling suitcases, vehicles, and even airplanes--the movement of the cash is often the most vulnerable part of the drug operation. Indeed, law enforcement agents are frequently successful in intercepting such cash shipments by stopping couriers at airports, opening containers at Customs checkpoints, and encountering cars stuffed with cash during routine traffic stops. However, the ability of law enforcement to confiscate the money--and thus break the drug trafficking cycle--hinges on the government's ability to establish that the money is, in fact, drug proceeds, and not the proceeds of some other form of unlawful activity. Therefore, today the distinguished chairman of the Senate Caucus on International Narcotics Control, Senator Grassley, and I are introducing the Drug Currency Forfeitures Act. Our bill enhances the ability of law enforcement agents to interdict and confiscate the huge quantities of drug money that are being moved through our airports, up and down our major highways, through our ports, and in and out of financial institutions here and abroad--while at the same time it upholds Fourth Amendment constitutional protections against illegal searches and seizures. Specifically, our bill would create a ``rebuttable presumption'' that money is subject to forfeiture as drug proceeds in cases involving drug couriers carrying large amounts of cash through drug transit areas, and in cases involving international money laundering. The presumption would apply if any of the following factors is established by the government. Factor one: There is more than $10,000 in currency being transported in one of the transit places commonly used by drug traffickers--for example, an airport, an interstate highway, or port of entry--and any of the following circumstances commonly associated with the transportation of drug proceeds exists: the money is packaged in a highly unusual manner; or the courier makes a false statement to a law enforcement officer or inspector; or the money is found in close proximity to drugs; or a properly trained dog gives a positive alert. I note here that there has been much criticism of the use of drug dogs to interdict drug money, on the ground that so much currency now in circulation in the U.S. is tainted with drug residue that the drug dog's positive alert is meaningless. Let me say, however, that recent scientific research has refuted this notion and indeed supports the proposition that a drug dog's alert to currency is highly relevant in a forfeiture case. A study by Dr. Kenneth Furton, Director of the Criminalistics Program in the Chemistry Department at Florida International University, has established that a properly trained drug dog does not alert to the cocaine residue on currency, but alerts instead to methyl benzoate--a highly volatile chemical by-product of the cocaine manufacturing process that remains on the currency only for a short period of time. Thus, even if it is true that a high percentage of our currency is contaminated with cocaine residue, the drug dogs are alerting only to money that has recently, or just before packaging, been in close proximity to a significant amount of cocaine. See K.G. Furton, Y.L. Hsu, N. Alvarez and P. Lagos, ``Novel Sample Preparation Methods and Field Testing Procedures Used to Determine the Chemical Basis of Cocaine Detection by Canines,'' Forensic Evidence and Crime Science Investigation, Proc. SPIE 2941, 56-62 (1997). I am attaching to my remarks an article describing Dr. Furton's work. Factor two: The property subject to forfeiture was acquired during a period of time when the person who acquired it was engaged in a drug trafficking offense, and there is no other likely source for the money. I note that this presumption already exists in criminal forfeiture cases. See 21 U.S.C. Sec. 853(d). Factor three: The property was involved in a transaction that occurred, in part, in a bank secrecy jurisdiction or was conducted by, to or through a shell corporation. These two factors appear repeatedly in cases involving international money laundering and therefore are highly indicative of illegal money laundering activity. However, to ensure that the presumption is focused narrowly on the problem this bill is designed to address, it would apply only where the money was being moved in or out of one of the countries the President has listed as a ``major drug-transit country,'' a ``major illicit drug producing country,'' or a ``major money laundering country,'' all of which are defined terms in the Foreign Assistance Act. Factor four: Any person involved in the transaction has been convicted of a drug trafficking or money laundering offense, or is a fugitive from prosecution for such an offense. This factor reflects the obvious fact that the movement of money by a convicted drug trafficker, money launderer or fugitive is highly likely to involve drug proceeds. The existence of any one of these four factors would be sufficient-- by itself, or in some cases, in combination with the facts and circumstances which led to the seizure of the money--to establish probable cause to believe that the money represents drug proceeds, and if left unrebutted, would be sufficient to establish that the money is subject to forfeiture under the Controlled Substances Act, 21 U.S.C. Sec. 881(a)(6), or the Money Laundering Control Act, 18 U.S.C. Sec. 981(a)(1), by a preponderance of the evidence. The owner of the money, of course, would be free to rebut the presumption by submitting admissible evidence that the money was derived from a legitimate source, and the government would have to respond either by impeaching the reliability of such evidence, or by offering admissible evidence of its own to support the forfeiture of the money. See United States v. $129,727.000 U.S. Currency, 129 F.3d 486 (9th Cir. 1997). In this way, legitimate owners of untainted money will be protected. However, drug traffickers and money launderers will no longer be able to rely on the ambiguities inherent in the movement of cash and electronic funds--as well as the ambiguities inherent in the standard of proof in civil forfeiture law--to win the release of their ill-gotten gains without having to come forward with any evidence whatsoever. On June 22, the Supreme Court handed down a highly controversial decision which is certain to have far-reaching ramifications on U.S. drug interdiction policy. That sharply divided ruling involved the case of Hosep Bajakajian, who had attempted to take $357,000 in undeclared cash to Syria, and who had lied about the amount of money he had with him when questioned by a Customs inspector. By ruling that the federal government cannot seize the money of a person trying to carry funds out of the country when that individual fails to declare it, unless the government can show it is tainted money, the High Court's decision may very well reinforce the recent lower court decisions against forfeiture--a critically important weapon in our drug interdiction arsenal. Our bill would address these adverse court decisions by providing needed statutory guidance on the important and contentious issue of property subject to seizure. Our bill has been endorsed by the Fraternal Order of Police, the International Association of Chiefs of Police, the International Brotherhood of Police Officers, and the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association. I hope that my colleagues will support this bill. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of our bill be printed in the Record together with appropriate relevant materials.

Mr. CLELAND

Mr. CLELAND. Mr. President, there have been a series of recent cases in which courts have ruled against one of law enforcement's most effective anti-drug tools--asset forfeiture. Just consider: Law enforcement agents at an airport found almost $50,000 wrapped inside a pair of jeans. A drug dog responded positively to the presence of narcotics on the money, and the traveler, when confronted by the agents, produced a fake driver's license and offered other false evidence. United States v. $49,576.00 in U.S. Currency, l16 F.3d 425 (9th Cir. 1997). In another instance, narcotics agents found $30,000 wrapped in bundles and stashed under the seat of a car. Despite the courier's demonstrably false explanation of the source of the money, the court nevertheless found insufficient evidence to establish probable cause for forfeiture. United States v. U.S. Currency, $30,060.00, 39 F.3d 1039 (9th Cir. 1994). These are but two in a series of cases in which the courts found circumstantial evidence sufficient to establish that the money was derived from some form of criminal activity, but insufficient to establish that the illegal activity involved drug trafficking. The courts therefore ruled that the money seized was not subject to forfeiture, and the proceeds were returned to the trafficker. See also United States v. $13,570.00 in U.S. Currency, 1997 WL 722947 (E.D. La. 1997) (seizure of cash at airport lacked probable cause despite dog sniff, evasive answers, fake ID, courier profile, and prior drug arrest); United States v. $14,876.00 in U.S. Currency, 1997 WL 722942 (E.D. La. 1997) (same); United States v. $40,000 in U.S. Currency, 999 F. Supp. 234 (D.P.R. 1998) (dog sniff, drug courier profile, quantity of currency and evasive answers are not sufficient to establish probable cause where government fails to establish any connection between claimant and any drug trafficker). Mr. President, these court decisions are coming at a time when drug sales in this country are generating $60 billion in illegal proceeds every year. Most of this drug money finds its way to drug kingpins in Mexico and Colombia. And the drugs find their way to Americans of all ages and walks of life. The consequences are devastating. Substance abuse is now the single largest preventable cause of death in this country, with illegal drugs and alcohol killing 120,000 Americans each year. It's an enemy that respects neither class nor age group. High school athletes, runaways, soccer players, gang members, and class valedictorians use and sell drugs. Nationwide, the percentage of teens reporting illegal drug use has doubled over the last 5 years. And now the National Household Survey on Drug Abuse reports that teen drug use rose in 1997, led by increasing marijuana smoking among teenagers who view it as a low-risk ``soft drug.'' It is no wonder that in survey after survey, Americans are reporting that illegal drugs top their list of national concerns. In recent testimony before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, a top official at the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) painted a chilling portrait of the powerful threat to the United States posed by international drug organizations. He said, and I quote, ``These individuals, from headquarters located outside the U.S., influence the choices that many Americans make about where to live, or where they send their children to school. The drugs, and the attendant violence which accompanies the drug trade, have reached into every American community and, in essence, have robbed many Americans of the dreams they once cherished.'' These organized crime leaders are sophisticated and possess the power that comes with unlimited resources. Because they are worth billions of dollars, these drug lords have at their disposal some of the world's most technically advanced airplanes, boats, radar, and communications equipment. They possess weapons in quantities that, DEA testified, ``rival the capabilities of some legitimate governments.'' These drug kingpins send thousands of couriers into the United States who answer to them on a daily basis via faxes, cellular phones, or pagers. Since the disruption of the notorious Cali cartel leadership, we know that traffickers from Mexico have joined together with Colombian traffickers in an emerging alliance which has largely taken over U.S. heroin distribution from Asian organizations and is now producing some of the world's most potent heroin. The manufacture of the vast majority of cocaine in South America is still under the control of the Colombian cartels, which use commercial maritime vessels, containerized cargo and private aircraft to transport the cocaine from their laboratories in the jungles of southeast Colombia through Mexico and the Caribbean into U.S. border points of entry. In fact, 50 to 60 percent of all the cocaine, as well as 25 percent of the heroin and 80 percent or more of the meth coming into the United States, are transported into our country through the U.S.-Mexico border. The DEA testified that the influence of Colombian trafficking organizations in the Caribbean is ``overwhelming.'' Several Colombian drug syndicates have set up command and control bases in Puerto Rico and the Dominican Republic and use the Caribbean Basin to ferry tons of cocaine into the United States each year. According to the DEA, seizures of 500 to 2,000 kilos of cocaine in the Caribbean are now commonplace. Unlike the monopoly-like rule of the Cali cartel, many of the new Colombian cartels have chosen to franchise a large portion of their wholesale heroin and cocaine operations. As a result, criminals from the Dominican Republic have now become the dominant force in the wholesale cocaine and heroin trade on the East Coast of the United States. In addition to heroin and cocain, methamphetamine has become a growing threat within our borders. Methamphetamine trafficking, which until recently had been stopped west of the Mississippi River, is aggressively moving eastward and is now rapidly challenging cocaine as the primary focus of illegal drug trafficking in Georgia and other eastern seaboard States. According to the DEA Atlanta Field Division, Washington may soon declare Atlanta the meth capital of the Southeast. During February alone, DEA seized almost 90 pounds of methamphetamine in metropolitan Atlanta. Ten pounds of the drug was seized from passengers on buses originating in Texas and California. Acting on a tip, DEA agents found another 25 pounds stashed in hidden compartments in a vehicle. And law enforcement agents apprehended two Los Angeles passengers at Hartsfield Airport who had smuggled 20 pounds of meth into the State. These drugs are being ferried into my State by couriers employed by Mexican trafficking organizations operating out of Mexico and California. DEA has determined that a number of its recent meth seizures in Georgia are directly linked to the AMEZCUA drug trafficking organization--one of Mexico's principal drug cartels. The amounts of money generated by these illegal drug transactions are staggering. The DEA reported that one Mexican drug syndicate forwards $20 to $30 million to Colombia for each major drug operation, and makes tens of millions of dollars in profits each week. Moving this money from Mexico to Colombia, or from the U.S. to Mexico, is a relatively simple matter. The most popular method is to ship the currency in bulk by courier or cargo, or transport it overland or by air. Oftentimes, the same vehicle or even the same courier that originally transported the drugs into the United States will carry the drug proceeds out. It was not long ago that a Customs investigation made front page headlines. Three of Mexico's largest banks were indicted by the U.S. for laundering hundreds of millions of dollars in drug money from this country. The three-year sting was unprecedented on two counts. This was the largest money laundering case in the history of U.S. law enforcement. And it was the first time ever that Mexican banks and bank officials have been directly linked to laundering U.S. drug profits. The sting resulted in the arrest of 70 people, including 14 Mexican banking officials. Thirty-five million dollars in illegal drug proceeds was seized immediately. One hundred and twenty-two million dollars more is expected to be recovered from over 100 bank accounts frozen in this country and in Europe. While unprecedented, this operation netted only a drop in the bucket compared to the estimated $60 billion in illegal proceeds reaped from U.S. drug sales each year. Like most of the drug proceeds, this money was earmarked for drug lords in Mexico and Colombia. In this case, Mexican bankers allegedly aided the Juarez cartel in Mexico and the Cali cocaine and heroin syndicate in Colombia. If we ever expect to make in-roads in the so-called ``war on drugs,'' it is not enough just to apprehend the drug trafficker. We must seize his assets as well. Let me give just one example. The Rodriguez- Orejuela brothers in Colombia once ran the most powerful international organized crime group in history. Based on evidence supplied by the U.S. Government, Miguel Rodriguez-Orejuela has been sentenced to 21 years in prison, although it is expected that he will serve only 12. Last year his brother Gilberto was sentenced to 10\1/2\ years in prison on drug trafficking charges. Even now, the Rodriguez-Orejuela brothers are able to run their drug trafficking business from prison through the use of private quarters and telephones. They are by no means the exception. Last year the Colombia National Police took control of four maximum security prisons from the Bureau of Prisons, in an effort to halt jailed traffickers from continuing their illegal operations from behind prison walls. In the final analysis, the only way to destroy the drug cartels is to hit them where it hurts the most--their pocket books. The transportation and transmission (by electronic means) of drug proceeds are enormous problems for law enforcement, but they also present law enforcement with an enormous opportunity. Because drug proceeds in the form of cash occupy much more space than the drugs themselves--often filling suitcases, vehicles, and even airplanes--the movement of the cash is often the most vulnerable part of the drug operation. Indeed, law enforcement agents are frequently successful in intercepting such cash shipments by stopping couriers at airports, opening containers at Customs checkpoints, and encountering cars stuffed with cash during routine traffic stops. However, the ability of law enforcement to confiscate the money--and thus break the drug trafficking cycle--hinges on the government's ability to establish that the money is, in fact, drug proceeds, and not the proceeds of some other form of unlawful activity. Therefore, today the distinguished chairman of the Senate Caucus on International Narcotics Control, Senator Grassley, and I are introducing the Drug Currency Forfeitures Act. Our bill enhances the ability of law enforcement agents to interdict and confiscate the huge quantities of drug money that are being moved through our airports, up and down our major highways, through our ports, and in and out of financial institutions here and abroad--while at the same time it upholds Fourth Amendment constitutional protections against illegal searches and seizures. Specifically, our bill would create a ``rebuttable presumption'' that money is subject to forfeiture as drug proceeds in cases involving drug couriers carrying large amounts of cash through drug transit areas, and in cases involving international money laundering. The presumption would apply if any of the following factors is established by the government. Factor one: There is more than $10,000 in currency being transported in one of the transit places commonly used by drug traffickers--for example, an airport, an interstate highway, or port of entry--and any of the following circumstances commonly associated with the transportation of drug proceeds exists: the money is packaged in a highly unusual manner; or the courier makes a false statement to a law enforcement officer or inspector; or the money is found in close proximity to drugs; or a properly trained dog gives a positive alert. I note here that there has been much criticism of the use of drug dogs to interdict drug money, on the ground that so much currency now in circulation in the U.S. is tainted with drug residue that the drug dog's positive alert is meaningless. Let me say, however, that recent scientific research has refuted this notion and indeed supports the proposition that a drug dog's alert to currency is highly relevant in a forfeiture case. A study by Dr. Kenneth Furton, Director of the Criminalistics Program in the Chemistry Department at Florida International University, has established that a properly trained drug dog does not alert to the cocaine residue on currency, but alerts instead to methyl benzoate--a highly volatile chemical by-product of the cocaine manufacturing process that remains on the currency only for a short period of time. Thus, even if it is true that a high percentage of our currency is contaminated with cocaine residue, the drug dogs are alerting only to money that has recently, or just before packaging, been in close proximity to a significant amount of cocaine. See K.G. Furton, Y.L. Hsu, N. Alvarez and P. Lagos, ``Novel Sample Preparation Methods and Field Testing Procedures Used to Determine the Chemical Basis of Cocaine Detection by Canines,'' Forensic Evidence and Crime Science Investigation, Proc. SPIE 2941, 56-62 (1997). I am attaching to my remarks an article describing Dr. Furton's work. Factor two: The property subject to forfeiture was acquired during a period of time when the person who acquired it was engaged in a drug trafficking offense, and there is no other likely source for the money. I note that this presumption already exists in criminal forfeiture cases. See 21 U.S.C. Sec. 853(d). Factor three: The property was involved in a transaction that occurred, in part, in a bank secrecy jurisdiction or was conducted by, to or through a shell corporation. These two factors appear repeatedly in cases involving international money laundering and therefore are highly indicative of illegal money laundering activity. However, to ensure that the presumption is focused narrowly on the problem this bill is designed to address, it would apply only where the money was being moved in or out of one of the countries the President has listed as a ``major drug-transit country,'' a ``major illicit drug producing country,'' or a ``major money laundering country,'' all of which are defined terms in the Foreign Assistance Act. Factor four: Any person involved in the transaction has been convicted of a drug trafficking or money laundering offense, or is a fugitive from prosecution for such an offense. This factor reflects the obvious fact that the movement of money by a convicted drug trafficker, money launderer or fugitive is highly likely to involve drug proceeds. The existence of any one of these four factors would be sufficient-- by itself, or in some cases, in combination with the facts and circumstances which led to the seizure of the money--to establish probable cause to believe that the money represents drug proceeds, and if left unrebutted, would be sufficient to establish that the money is subject to forfeiture under the Controlled Substances Act, 21 U.S.C. Sec. 881(a)(6), or the Money Laundering Control Act, 18 U.S.C. Sec. 981(a)(1), by a preponderance of the evidence. The owner of the money, of course, would be free to rebut the presumption by submitting admissible evidence that the money was derived from a legitimate source, and the government would have to respond either by impeaching the reliability of such evidence, or by offering admissible evidence of its own to support the forfeiture of the money. See United States v. $129,727.000 U.S. Currency, 129 F.3d 486 (9th Cir. 1997). In this way, legitimate owners of untainted money will be protected. However, drug traffickers and money launderers will no longer be able to rely on the ambiguities inherent in the movement of cash and electronic funds--as well as the ambiguities inherent in the standard of proof in civil forfeiture law--to win the release of their ill-gotten gains without having to come forward with any evidence whatsoever. On June 22, the Supreme Court handed down a highly controversial decision which is certain to have far-reaching ramifications on U.S. drug interdiction policy. That sharply divided ruling involved the case of Hosep Bajakajian, who had attempted to take $357,000 in undeclared cash to Syria, and who had lied about the amount of money he had with him when questioned by a Customs inspector. By ruling that the federal government cannot seize the money of a person trying to carry funds out of the country when that individual fails to declare it, unless the government can show it is tainted money, the High Court's decision may very well reinforce the recent lower court decisions against forfeiture--a critically important weapon in our drug interdiction arsenal. Our bill would address these adverse court decisions by providing needed statutory guidance on the important and contentious issue of property subject to seizure. Our bill has been endorsed by the Fraternal Order of Police, the International Association of Chiefs of Police, the International Brotherhood of Police Officers, and the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association. I hope that my colleagues will support this bill. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of our bill be printed in the Record together with appropriate relevant materials.

Mr. CLELAND

Mr. CLELAND. Mr. President, today I am pleased to offer an important piece of legislation designed to address a critical need of Georgia's veterans and their families. One of the greatest honors our country provides for a veteran's service is the opportunity to be buried in a national cemetery. It is logical that a veteran's family would want to have the grave site of their loved one close by. They want to be able to visit to place flowers or a folded American flag by the headstone of their father, mother, sister or brother. Georgia veterans' families deserve such consideration. The establishment of a new veterans national cemetery in the Atlanta metropolitan area is one of my highest legislative priorities. The current veterans population in Georgia is estimated to be nearly 700,000, with over 400,000 residing in the Metro Atlanta area. Our state currently has two cemeteries designated specifically for veterans, in Marietta and Andersonville. Marietta National Cemetery has been full since 1970, and Andersonville National Historic Cemetery is located in southwest Georgia, at a considerable distance from most of the state's veterans population. The large population of veterans' families in Metro Atlanta and North Georgia is not being served, and we need to change that. Abraham Lincoln once said: ``All that a man hath will he give for his life; and while all contribute of their substance the soldier puts his life at stake, and often yields it up in his country's cause. The highest merit, then, is due to the soldier.'' We owe it to our veterans and their families to provide a national veterans cemetery close to their home. I have been pursuing this matter for over 20 years, since I was head of the Veterans' Administration, now called the Department of Veterans' Affairs. Nationally, there are over 300,000 vacancies in national cemeteries for veterans, but in Georgia, there are no such vacancies. The only option these veterans have is burial in Andersonville, a national historic cemetery which is operated by the National Park Service, not the VA, and is more than 100 miles away from the Metro Atlanta area. This deeply concerns me, especially when one considers that Georgia has the highest rate of growth in terms of military retirees in the Nation, and that the majority of these veterans reside in Metro Atlanta. We really must do better for our veterans. In 1979, when I was head of the VA, our studies documented that the Atlanta metropolitan area was the area having the largest veterans population in the country without a national cemetery. Later that same year, I announced that Metro Atlanta had been chosen as the site for a new VA cemetery, which was to be opened in late 1983. The Atlanta location was chosen after an exhaustive review of many sites, including consideration of environmental, access, and land use factors, and most importantly, the density of veterans population. Unfortunately, the Reagan Administration later withdrew approval of the Atlanta site. Over the years since then, Atlanta has repeatedly been one of the top areas in the United States most in need of an additional national cemetery. Mr. President, the bill I am introducing today is simple. First, it requires the Department of Veterans Affairs to establish a national cemetery in the Atlanta metropolitan area not later than January 1, 2000. Second, it requires the Department to consult with appropriate federal, state, and local officials to determine the most suitable site. Finally, the bill further requires the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to report to Congress on the establishment of the cemetery, including an estimate on its cost and a timetable for completion of the cemetery. I believe this bill is a necessary first step toward the eventual establishment of a national cemetery to meet the needs of Atlanta's veterans and their families. Admittedly, several factors must be resolved before the cemetery can be established. A site must be found and funding must be made available. However, we must move swiftly to resolve this problem so that a critical element of our commitment to the Nation's veterans can be met. I am hopeful that the Senate will take favorable action on my bill early in the next Congress. I want to thank my colleague from Georgia, Senator Coverdell, for joining me in this important effort, and Representative Barr for sponsoring the companion bill in the other body. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. CLELAND

Mr. CLELAND. Mr. President, I would like to take this opportunity to salute Georgia's beloved Varsity Restaurant for 70 years of prospering business and never-ending dedication to its customers and employees. People have come from all around the world simply for a sampling of the Varsity's great food and down home hospitality. The Varsity was founded by Frank Gordy in 1928. As the world's largest drive-in, the Varsity's hot dogs, chili dogs, hamburgers, chili burgers, onion rings, french fries, and fried pies are the best in the world. The Varsity also sells more Coca-Cola than any other single outlet in the world. Whether you get your ``dogs'' at Atlanta's North Avenue Varsity, the Gwinnett Varsity off Jimmy Carter Blvd., the Varsity Jr. on Lindbergh Drive or the Varsity on Broad Street in Athens you are guaranteed to go back for more. The menu is extensive and the Varsity's volume is legendary. Two miles of hot dogs, a ton of onions, 2500 pounds of potatoes, and 5,000 fried pies are served every day. Six 50 gallon pots of chili are made from scratch and, like all specialty items, are prepared from original recipes. Varsity orange is piped from the kitchen to faucets at the serving counter and the popular frosted version is also on tap. Every time I come home to Atlanta from Washington, D.C., stopping by the Varsity is a must on my agenda. In fact, it is often my first stop after leaving the airport. All Georgians can attest that the Varsity's heavy weight, chili steak, frosted orange or fried pies are unlike any other food in the world. I cannot count the number of meals I have eaten at this Atlanta institution, but the memories of dining at the Varsity are endless. Mr. President, I ask that you join me, our colleagues, and the entire Gordy family in recognizing 70 years of mouth-watering food and fond memories, and in wishing the entire Varsity family many more successes in the future.

Mr. CLELAND

Mr. CLELAND. Mr. President, today I am pleased to offer an important piece of legislation designed to address a critical need of Georgia's veterans and their families. One of the greatest honors our country provides for a veteran's service is the opportunity to be buried in a national cemetery. It is logical that a veteran's family would want to have the grave site of their loved one close by. They want to be able to visit to place flowers or a folded American flag by the headstone of their father, mother, sister or brother. Georgia veterans' families deserve such consideration. The establishment of a new veterans national cemetery in the Atlanta metropolitan area is one of my highest legislative priorities. The current veterans population in Georgia is estimated to be nearly 700,000, with over 400,000 residing in the Metro Atlanta area. Our state currently has two cemeteries designated specifically for veterans, in Marietta and Andersonville. Marietta National Cemetery has been full since 1970, and Andersonville National Historic Cemetery is located in southwest Georgia, at a considerable distance from most of the state's veterans population. The large population of veterans' families in Metro Atlanta and North Georgia is not being served, and we need to change that. Abraham Lincoln once said: ``All that a man hath will he give for his life; and while all contribute of their substance the soldier puts his life at stake, and often yields it up in his country's cause. The highest merit, then, is due to the soldier.'' We owe it to our veterans and their families to provide a national veterans cemetery close to their home. I have been pursuing this matter for over 20 years, since I was head of the Veterans' Administration, now called the Department of Veterans' Affairs. Nationally, there are over 300,000 vacancies in national cemeteries for veterans, but in Georgia, there are no such vacancies. The only option these veterans have is burial in Andersonville, a national historic cemetery which is operated by the National Park Service, not the VA, and is more than 100 miles away from the Metro Atlanta area. This deeply concerns me, especially when one considers that Georgia has the highest rate of growth in terms of military retirees in the Nation, and that the majority of these veterans reside in Metro Atlanta. We really must do better for our veterans. In 1979, when I was head of the VA, our studies documented that the Atlanta metropolitan area was the area having the largest veterans population in the country without a national cemetery. Later that same year, I announced that Metro Atlanta had been chosen as the site for a new VA cemetery, which was to be opened in late 1983. The Atlanta location was chosen after an exhaustive review of many sites, including consideration of environmental, access, and land use factors, and most importantly, the density of veterans population. Unfortunately, the Reagan Administration later withdrew approval of the Atlanta site. Over the years since then, Atlanta has repeatedly been one of the top areas in the United States most in need of an additional national cemetery. Mr. President, the bill I am introducing today is simple. First, it requires the Department of Veterans Affairs to establish a national cemetery in the Atlanta metropolitan area not later than January 1, 2000. Second, it requires the Department to consult with appropriate federal, state, and local officials to determine the most suitable site. Finally, the bill further requires the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to report to Congress on the establishment of the cemetery, including an estimate on its cost and a timetable for completion of the cemetery. I believe this bill is a necessary first step toward the eventual establishment of a national cemetery to meet the needs of Atlanta's veterans and their families. Admittedly, several factors must be resolved before the cemetery can be established. A site must be found and funding must be made available. However, we must move swiftly to resolve this problem so that a critical element of our commitment to the Nation's veterans can be met. I am hopeful that the Senate will take favorable action on my bill early in the next Congress. I want to thank my colleague from Georgia, Senator Coverdell, for joining me in this important effort, and Representative Barr for sponsoring the companion bill in the other body. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. CLELAND

Mr. CLELAND. Mr. President, I would like to add a few remarks concerning S. 314, the Federal Activities Inventory Reform (FAIR) Act of 1998. I understand that under this measure, each federal government agency will be required to annually publish an inventory of governmental activities that are not inherently governmental in nature. Under S. 314, agencies will retain discretion to determine whether an activity is inherently governmental or commercial, and private industry will be given the option to challenge that decision. An agency may also decide that an activity is inherently governmental, but nonetheless pursue outsourcing. This latter practice can be continued and is encouraged by S. 314. For example, I would point my colleagues to the practices of the General Services Administration (GSA), the agency charged with managing all federal personal and real property--including the disposal of property no longer needed by the government, but desired by private consumers. Three years ago, an Arthur Anderson study concluded that the auctioning function is inherently governmental to GSA's mission. Nevertheless, GSA has increasingly outsourced this function to the private sector. Today's legislation in no way discourages the federal government's reliance on private industry--particularly, where, as in the case of GSA, a reputable commercial property disposal industry is established and no federal jobs or careers are displaced or otherwise placed at risk. Moreover, auctioning by commercial companies will yield a greater return on the government's investment due to the utilization of commercial incentives and practices. Under Office of Management and Budget Circular Number A-76, agencies are already required to maintain and update a baseline inventory of activities that could be performed by the private sector. S. 314 would largely codify current administrative policy.

Mr. CLELAND

Mr. CLELAND. Mr. President, I rise today to honor the many accomplishments of Christine Jacobs of Norcross, Georgia. Chris is the President, CEO and Chairman of the Board of Theragenics Corporation which markets, sells and distributes the FDA-licensed medical device TheraSeed for treating cancer. She has had many remarkable accomplishments during her career, but today I would like to call attention to yet another important milestone. On August 6, 1998 Chris will switch Theragenics from the NASDAQ exchange, which the company has been trading on publicly since 1986, to the New York Stock Exchange. Chris will become the first female CEO to enroll a company on the New York Stock Exchange. She will also be ringing the bell to open the exchange that morning. Chris Jacobs is truly a remarkable and successful business-savy member of the Georgia business community. She also dedicates time to civic and medical organizations in Georgia including the Georgia Bio- Medical Partnership, the Board of Councilors of the Carter Center, the State's Small Business Taskforce and the Georgia Chamber of Commerce. Chris Jacobs possesses the tenacity and vision that has changed the world as we have known it and paved the road to the next millennium in regard to medical treatment. I ask my colleagues in the Senate to join me in honoring the innumerable achievements of Chris Jacobs and her work at Theragenics, and wish her luck and much success on the New York Stock Exchange. She proves that if we can perceive it we can achieve it--Chris will continue to rewrite history and achieve unending successes.

Mr. CLELAND

Mr. CLELAND. I thank the Senator. I am particularly proud of one such program which is managed by the Georgia College and State University. The Distance Education Unit and the Department of Government there were recently awarded a contract by the Navy to provide two graduate courses aboard the USS Carl Vinson which is deployed in the Pacific Ocean. The courses use two-way video and audio which links educators at the school with students on board the Carl Vinson. We all knew that aircraft carriers were small cities, but this Senator was pleasantly surprised to see that sailors could take graduate level courses while at sea.

Mr. CLELAND. As the Ranking Member of the Personnel Subcommittee of the Senate Armed Services Committee, I believe I can report that our Subcommittee is also very supportive of distance learning initiatives. We are keenly aware of the advantages of distance learning. As you know, Mr. President, many of our military personnel are expected to available for deployment at a moments notice. Others are deployed around the world where they do not have ready access to educational opportunities. Rapid developments in technology have enabled them to continue in their educational development, even while deployed. The ability to continue in one's educational pursuits is a quality of life issue that is not necessarily always at the top of a soldier's list. However, many military personnel are only able to pursue higher education by leaving the military. I believe the maintenance of a viable distance learning program for higher education could be a useful retention mechanism to keep highly motivated individuals in the service.

Mr. CLELAND. I thank my colleagues for their leadership and for allowing me to speak on this matter.

Mr. CLELAND. That is a very good question. I am told that more than 50 percent of military personnel reentering civilian life either change or lose their jobs in the first year after leaving the military. Given this, I believe we should consider providing opportunities for job training and placement for active-duty service members nearing separation or retirement from service without regard to their duty locations. Clayton College and State University has developed a program that could serve as a worthwhile demonstration project to demonstrate how technology can be utilized to provide pre-separation training for civilian jobs to military personnel. The program would provide training via the Internet and other technology to active-duty personnel at their duty locations for specific, existing job opportunities which would be available upon their separation from the military. The program would then link these personnel to these specific jobs ensuring that when the leave the military, employment is available. I am not immediately aware of any initiatives underway that would offer similar opportunities. It is my view that we should encourage the Department of Defense to explore such initiatives, perhaps in conjunction with the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Mr. CLELAND. Mr. President, I rise today to offer my support for the many distance learning initiatives contained in the Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 1999. Senators Inouye and Stevens have done an outstanding job in encouraging the Department of Defense to take full advantage of the opportunities provided by great advances in telecommunications technology, particularly with respect to distance learning. This bill contains funding for distance learning programs for the Marine Corps, and a new initiative for the Army National Guard. In particular, the National Guard initiative would create a distance learning network to reduce the cost of training soldiers, enhance readiness and furthering community development. The Subcommittee on Defense has a demonstrated its support for these and a number of other initiatives underway.

Mr. CLELAND

Mr. CLELAND. Mr. President, I am pleased today to announce that I have added my name as an original co-sponsors of the Low Sulfur Fuel Act of 1998 and to express my reasons for supporting this important legislation. I would first like to thank my colleague from New York, Senator Moynihan, for his authorship of this measure and his leadership on this issue. The bill establishes a national, year-round cap on gasoline sulfur levels, and would impose a reduction of sulfur content in gasoline from 300 parts per million (ppm) to 40 ppm within two years from the date of enactment. High sulfur levels in gasoline increase vehicle emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO), and hydrocarbons (HC) which in turn produce higher levels of particulate matter (PM) and contribute to ground level ozone. Reducing sulfur content levels to 40 ppm has been shown to reduce Nitrogen Oxides by 51 percent, Carbon Monoxide by 40 percent, and Hydrocarbons by 24 percent. Essentially, the sulfur in gasoline inhibits the catalyst in an automobile from doing its job--which is to reduce the emissions of the aforementioned pollutants. Sulfur is a contaminant only and does not in any way enhance engine performance. There are two compelling reasons which led me to support this bill: First, helping our states attain the health requirements set forth by the Clean Air Act by providing them with a viable tool for reducing NOx and CO emissions; and second, updating our gasoline to keep pace with other industrialized nations thereby keeping our automotive fleet competitive in the international marketplace. In my home state of Georgia, the Metro Atlanta area has experienced extensive difficulties in complying with the standards set forth by the Clean Air Act. In a recent attempt to meet these standards, the Georgia Department of Natural Resources (DNR), has voted to implement reduced sulfur content in fuel. The rule would require gasoline in the 25 county area surrounding Atlanta to be reduced to 30 ppm by 2003. Georgia is only the second state, after California, to take such innovative steps to meet air quality goals. In my review of this bill, I sent a copy to Harold Reheis, Director of the Georgia Environmental Protection Division (EPD), an agency of the Georgia DNR for his comments. In his response, which I will ask unanimous consent to add as part of the Record after my statement, Mr. Reheis states that the Moynihan bill would ``result in a reduction in air pollutants statewide and nationwide.'' Further, he added that this bill ``could help prevent ozone nonattainment problems in other urban areas of Georgia like Augusta, Columbus, and Macon, which all could have difficulty meeting the tighter federal ozone standards adopted by the USEPA last year.'' I encourage all my colleagues to contact their State Environmental Agencies to request their input on this matter. Relating to the second point in support of the bill, the U.S. must maintain our innovative and forward thinking approach and support this measure because other countries, such as Japan, Egypt, Thailand, and every member of the European Union have already required similar caps on the sulfur content of their gasoline. Thus, in order for us to compete with these and other countries, we must take this extremely valuable step. California has already taken such action and now we have the opportunity to send a message to the rest of the world, that we, as a nation, are committed to cleaner, more fuel efficient gasoline. Further, we should signify that we are committed to ensuring that our auto industry and the U.S. consumer are equipped with the infrastructure necessary to take advantage of the emerging market for new, innovative, less polluting automobiles. There is a real possibility that if the U.S. does not take this action, we would fall behind the rest of the industrialized world--a position that the US should never be in--and become the dumping ground for higher sulfur level fuels--making it more difficult to shift to the lower sulfur fuels and inhibiting U.S. automakers from producing and U.S. consumers from purchasing, cleaner and more fuel efficient technologies. The crux of this issue is that reducing sulfur content in gasoline to 40 ppm, year round, is a viable, cost-effective tool to dramatically reduce pollutants which cause high levels of Particulate Matter as well as Ozone and I urge my colleagues to support this bill. I ask unanimous consent that the letter from Mr. Reheis be printed in the Record.

Mr. CLELAND

Mr. CLELAND. Mr. President, I am pleased today to announce that I have added my name as an original co-sponsors of the Low Sulfur Fuel Act of 1998 and to express my reasons for supporting this important legislation. I would first like to thank my colleague from New York, Senator Moynihan, for his authorship of this measure and his leadership on this issue. The bill establishes a national, year-round cap on gasoline sulfur levels, and would impose a reduction of sulfur content in gasoline from 300 parts per million (ppm) to 40 ppm within two years from the date of enactment. High sulfur levels in gasoline increase vehicle emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO), and hydrocarbons (HC) which in turn produce higher levels of particulate matter (PM) and contribute to ground level ozone. Reducing sulfur content levels to 40 ppm has been shown to reduce Nitrogen Oxides by 51 percent, Carbon Monoxide by 40 percent, and Hydrocarbons by 24 percent. Essentially, the sulfur in gasoline inhibits the catalyst in an automobile from doing its job--which is to reduce the emissions of the aforementioned pollutants. Sulfur is a contaminant only and does not in any way enhance engine performance. There are two compelling reasons which led me to support this bill: First, helping our states attain the health requirements set forth by the Clean Air Act by providing them with a viable tool for reducing NOx and CO emissions; and second, updating our gasoline to keep pace with other industrialized nations thereby keeping our automotive fleet competitive in the international marketplace. In my home state of Georgia, the Metro Atlanta area has experienced extensive difficulties in complying with the standards set forth by the Clean Air Act. In a recent attempt to meet these standards, the Georgia Department of Natural Resources (DNR), has voted to implement reduced sulfur content in fuel. The rule would require gasoline in the 25 county area surrounding Atlanta to be reduced to 30 ppm by 2003. Georgia is only the second state, after California, to take such innovative steps to meet air quality goals. In my review of this bill, I sent a copy to Harold Reheis, Director of the Georgia Environmental Protection Division (EPD), an agency of the Georgia DNR for his comments. In his response, which I will ask unanimous consent to add as part of the Record after my statement, Mr. Reheis states that the Moynihan bill would ``result in a reduction in air pollutants statewide and nationwide.'' Further, he added that this bill ``could help prevent ozone nonattainment problems in other urban areas of Georgia like Augusta, Columbus, and Macon, which all could have difficulty meeting the tighter federal ozone standards adopted by the USEPA last year.'' I encourage all my colleagues to contact their State Environmental Agencies to request their input on this matter. Relating to the second point in support of the bill, the U.S. must maintain our innovative and forward thinking approach and support this measure because other countries, such as Japan, Egypt, Thailand, and every member of the European Union have already required similar caps on the sulfur content of their gasoline. Thus, in order for us to compete with these and other countries, we must take this extremely valuable step. California has already taken such action and now we have the opportunity to send a message to the rest of the world, that we, as a nation, are committed to cleaner, more fuel efficient gasoline. Further, we should signify that we are committed to ensuring that our auto industry and the U.S. consumer are equipped with the infrastructure necessary to take advantage of the emerging market for new, innovative, less polluting automobiles. There is a real possibility that if the U.S. does not take this action, we would fall behind the rest of the industrialized world--a position that the US should never be in--and become the dumping ground for higher sulfur level fuels--making it more difficult to shift to the lower sulfur fuels and inhibiting U.S. automakers from producing and U.S. consumers from purchasing, cleaner and more fuel efficient technologies. The crux of this issue is that reducing sulfur content in gasoline to 40 ppm, year round, is a viable, cost-effective tool to dramatically reduce pollutants which cause high levels of Particulate Matter as well as Ozone and I urge my colleagues to support this bill. I ask unanimous consent that the letter from Mr. Reheis be printed in the Record.

Mr. CLELAND

Mr. CLELAND. Mr. President, today I am introducing a bill in honor of an American patriot, Lieutenant Henry Ossian Flipper, on whose behalf I offer this legislation for the designation of the Lieutenant Henry O. Flipper Station, a postal station being constructed in Thomasville, Georgia. It is an honor for me to highlight the contributions of this courageous American. Born in 1856, in Thomasville, Georgia, Lieutenant Flipper was the first African-American to graduate from the United States Military Academy at West Point in 1877. Lieutenant Flipper had a distinguished career as an Army officer. His first assignment to frontier duty was with the Tenth Cavalry at Fort Sill, Oklahoma. The Tenth, along with its sister unit, the Ninth Cavalry unit, were responsible for facilitating the movement of pioneers wishing to settle in the Western frontier. The African- American members of these two units became known as ``Buffalo Soldiers.'' During his tenure at Fort Sill, Lieutenant Flipper ingeniously engineered a drainage system to eliminate stagnant malarial ponds and swamps created during the rainy season. This effort made a significant contribution to improving the health of the Post, and the ditch, christened ``Flipper's Ditch,'' is now a historic landmark. Lieutenant Flipper was instrumental in the successful 1880 campaign against Mescalero Apache Chief Victorio, an escapee from the military authorities in New Mexico. Facing a judicial sentence for murder in 1879, Victorio was able to escape, gather his forces and begin a rampage throughout New Mexico and Texas. Through tough terrain and logistical challenges, the soldiers of the Ninth and Tenth Cavalry were able to push Victorio into Mexico where he was killed by the Mexican Army. It is very timely that we commemorate Lieutenant Flipper since this year is the fiftieth anniversary of the racial integration of the military. This action marked a historic change which has led to significant progress in eliminating racial barriers. Lieutenant Flipper's legacy is that of a pioneer in confronting the challenges of racial strife who paved the way for this evolution. Although Lieutenant Flipper left the military in 1882, he was able to prove to America that African-Americans possessed the quality of military leadership. After the end of his military service in 1882, Lieutenant Flipper continued a very distinguished career, applying his surveying and engineering skills as a civil and mining engineer on the frontiers of the Southwest and Mexico. He became the first African-American to gain prominence in the engineering profession. Historical accounts depict the solid perseverance of Lieutenant Flipper. He confronted racial bias demonstrating unflinchingly strong character and intellect. In a book entitled ``An Officer and a Gentlemen,'' historian Steve Wilson is credited with compiling a list of ``firsts'' for an African-American which were achieved by Lieutenant Flipper: Military Academy graduate, cavalry officer, surveyor, cartographer, civil and mining engineer, translator, interpreter, inventor, editor, author, special agent for the Justice Department, personal confident and advisor to a Senator, and pioneer in the oil industry. In a ceremony in 1977, Lieutenant General Sidney B. Berry, the United States Military Academy's Superintendent, praised Lieutenant Flipper's memory, stating that, ``there was a strength and gentleness that transcended any bad treatment Flipper received. He was a strong and gentle man.'' Lieutenant Flipper was a pioneer for civil rights in the military and in the civilian community. Although he had a very successful civilian life, Lieutenant Flipper always considered himself first and foremost an Army officer. I join the residents of Thomasville in this quest of the post office designation in honor of Lieutenant Flipper. Not only is this hero one of Georgia's own, Lieutenant Flipper has earned the respect of a grateful Nation. The measure I am submitting today will give him this well-deserved recognition. Mr. President, I request unanimous consent that the full text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. CLELAND

Mr. CLELAND. Mr. President, today I am introducing a bill in honor of an American patriot, Lieutenant Henry Ossian Flipper, on whose behalf I offer this legislation for the designation of the Lieutenant Henry O. Flipper Station, a postal station being constructed in Thomasville, Georgia. It is an honor for me to highlight the contributions of this courageous American. Born in 1856, in Thomasville, Georgia, Lieutenant Flipper was the first African-American to graduate from the United States Military Academy at West Point in 1877. Lieutenant Flipper had a distinguished career as an Army officer. His first assignment to frontier duty was with the Tenth Cavalry at Fort Sill, Oklahoma. The Tenth, along with its sister unit, the Ninth Cavalry unit, were responsible for facilitating the movement of pioneers wishing to settle in the Western frontier. The African- American members of these two units became known as ``Buffalo Soldiers.'' During his tenure at Fort Sill, Lieutenant Flipper ingeniously engineered a drainage system to eliminate stagnant malarial ponds and swamps created during the rainy season. This effort made a significant contribution to improving the health of the Post, and the ditch, christened ``Flipper's Ditch,'' is now a historic landmark. Lieutenant Flipper was instrumental in the successful 1880 campaign against Mescalero Apache Chief Victorio, an escapee from the military authorities in New Mexico. Facing a judicial sentence for murder in 1879, Victorio was able to escape, gather his forces and begin a rampage throughout New Mexico and Texas. Through tough terrain and logistical challenges, the soldiers of the Ninth and Tenth Cavalry were able to push Victorio into Mexico where he was killed by the Mexican Army. It is very timely that we commemorate Lieutenant Flipper since this year is the fiftieth anniversary of the racial integration of the military. This action marked a historic change which has led to significant progress in eliminating racial barriers. Lieutenant Flipper's legacy is that of a pioneer in confronting the challenges of racial strife who paved the way for this evolution. Although Lieutenant Flipper left the military in 1882, he was able to prove to America that African-Americans possessed the quality of military leadership. After the end of his military service in 1882, Lieutenant Flipper continued a very distinguished career, applying his surveying and engineering skills as a civil and mining engineer on the frontiers of the Southwest and Mexico. He became the first African-American to gain prominence in the engineering profession. Historical accounts depict the solid perseverance of Lieutenant Flipper. He confronted racial bias demonstrating unflinchingly strong character and intellect. In a book entitled ``An Officer and a Gentlemen,'' historian Steve Wilson is credited with compiling a list of ``firsts'' for an African-American which were achieved by Lieutenant Flipper: Military Academy graduate, cavalry officer, surveyor, cartographer, civil and mining engineer, translator, interpreter, inventor, editor, author, special agent for the Justice Department, personal confident and advisor to a Senator, and pioneer in the oil industry. In a ceremony in 1977, Lieutenant General Sidney B. Berry, the United States Military Academy's Superintendent, praised Lieutenant Flipper's memory, stating that, ``there was a strength and gentleness that transcended any bad treatment Flipper received. He was a strong and gentle man.'' Lieutenant Flipper was a pioneer for civil rights in the military and in the civilian community. Although he had a very successful civilian life, Lieutenant Flipper always considered himself first and foremost an Army officer. I join the residents of Thomasville in this quest of the post office designation in honor of Lieutenant Flipper. Not only is this hero one of Georgia's own, Lieutenant Flipper has earned the respect of a grateful Nation. The measure I am submitting today will give him this well-deserved recognition. Mr. President, I request unanimous consent that the full text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. CLELAND

Mr. CLELAND. Mr. President, I rise today to honor two fallen heroes-- U.S. Capitol Police Officer J.J. Chestnut and U.S. Capitol Police Special Agent John Gibson--who gave their lives to protect us. When I say ``us,'' I do not refer only to members of Congress, to the tourists who visited the Capitol last Friday, or to staff members working that afternoon, I refer to all Americans. J.J. Chestnut and John Gibson gave their lives to protect our house, the people's house, and our freedom. J.J. Chestnut, 58, joined the Capitol Police force in 1980, following 20 years of service in the United States Air Force. He earned numerous commendations and awards for both his military and police service, including a Vietnam Service Medal, the Bronze Star for Meritorious military service and countless letters of appreciation from citizens and staff for assistance provided and attention to duty. Officer Chestnut is survived by his wife, Wen Ling, and five children. John Gibson, 42, also joined the Capitol Police force in 1980, and also earned numerous commendations. In 1988, Gibson was commended for going to the aid of a citizen, and saving their life by administering CPR. Special Agent Gibson is survived by his wife, Evelyn, and three children. It is horribly ironic to me that one of the fallen officers, J.J. Chestnut, was a Vietnam Veteran who survived combat only to fall at the hand of a fellow American. As a veteran he served his country so that we could all have our freedom, a freedom which the gunman who walked into the United States Capitol last Friday and opened fire, did not understand, did not honor and certainly did not respect. In 1862, Nathaniel Hawthorne wrote: ``It is natural enough to suppose that the center and heart of America is the Capitol.'' He stated that the Capitol's combination of dignity, harmony, and utility made it a fit embodiment of the highest traits of our nation. A year later, Sculptor Thomas Crawford's 19\1/2\ foot, 7\1/2\ ton Statue of Freedom was lifted and placed atop the Capitol Dome. Nearly every President since Andrew Jackson has been inaugurated on its steps. The Capitol has hosted a cast of American legends, as great Senators and great members of the House have presided and debated in each of two houses over the years, including John Calhoun, Daniel Webster, Henry Clay, Robert Lafollette, George Norris, Richard Russell, John F. Kennedy, Sam Rayburn, Carl Vinson, Robert Byrd. The Capitol has also been home to so many milestones in American history. The Capitol was where the Civil Rights Act was passed in 1964, and where women were granted the right to vote. It was where war was declared after the invasion of Pearl Harbor following upon the famous ``Day of Infamy'' speech. It was where the Social Security Act was enacted, and where legislation was passed to limit child labor. More than anything, our Capitol has stood as a symbol of our democracy, of our liberty, and of our freedom since President George Washington laid the cornerstone for the building in 1793. Let us not let the actions of the gunman last Friday threaten our freedom, or our belief in our democracy. Instead, let us focus on the heroic actions of officers J.J. Chestnut and John Gibson, who last week gave the ultimate sacrifice for their country. I am reminded of a passage from Thucydides' ``Funeral Oration of Pericles'': So they gave their bodies to the commonwealth and received, each for his own memory, praise that will never die, and with it the grandest of all sepulchers, not that in which their mortal bones are laid, but a home in the minds of men, where their glory remains fresh to stir to speech or action as the occasion comes by. For the whole earth is the sepulcher of famous men; and their story is not graven only on stone over their native earth, but lives on far away, without visible symbol, woven into the stuff of other men's lives. For you now it remains to rival what they have done and, knowing the secret of freedom a brave heart, not idly to stand aside from the enemy's onset. We have a lot to learn from the selfless bravery and public service displayed by these two men. Our thoughts and prayers are with their families and friends at this difficult time. God bless.

Mr. CLELAND

Mr. CLELAND. I, along with residents of Talbot and Muscogee Counties, thank my colleagues for their understanding and support and believe that this project would provide a critical economic boost to this region. swordfish conservation initiative

Mr. CLELAND. I thank the Senator. I understand that although projects are not earmarked, language is provided in the bill about projects intended to provide favorable recommendations to the EDA, if the project meets EDA criteria. Is my understanding correct?

Mr. CLELAND. I thank the Senator. I understand that the EDA has stated a willingness to meet with County and City officials to review and reconsider the proposal at any time. Given the importance of this project and the apparent discrepancy between the information provided by local officials and the information cited by EDA in rejecting the proposal, I urge that the EDA give prompt consideration of any such request for a meeting. Further, assuming that the job-creating potential of the waterline Extension Project can be verified, I ask the distinguished Chairman and Ranking Member if they would agree that this is the kind of project Congress intended for EDA to give favorable consideration to in its public works construction program?

Mr. CLELAND. Mr. President, I would first like to thank my distinguished colleagues, the Chairman Senator Gregg and Ranking Member Senator Hollings, for their leadership and superb management of this bill. I would like to take a moment to express my support for a matter of great importance to me, specifically obtaining funding for a Waterline Extension Project in Georgia. The project would involve providing $1,000,000 in Economic Development Administration (EDA) Public Works (Title I) funds for construction of an extended 16-inch water line (16,000 L.F.) along Macon Road (U.S. Highway 80) from Muscogee County into Talbot County. I understand that a proposal for this project was submitted to the EDA, but the application was denied. Apparently, the application was rejected because the project did not identify any, or a significant number of, near term new jobs. However, I have been assured that, although one industry alone would not fulfill the new job requirement, the waterline would allow several new industries to locate in the area which will more than meet the new job requirement. In fact, there have been commitments in writing from three businesses of their intent to locate in the newly developed industrial site. Talbot County is one of the most economically depressed counties in Georgia. In fact, in 1994, Talbot County had approximately 25% of its population living below the poverty line, ranking near the bottom of the state. If funded, the waterline would provide the vital infrastructure needed to serve potential industrial sites located in Talbot County and bring with it much needed opportunities for employment in well paying jobs. Senator Hollings, I understand that Committee policy prohibits earmarking EDA funding for individual projects. Is that accurate?