Alfonse D’Amato

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation to amend the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States with respect to shadow mask steel. Shadow mask steel, a vital component of color television picture tubes and computer video monitors, is used to produce ``shadow masks'' which prevent image distortion on the viewing screens of televisions and computer video monitors. Unfortunately, neither shadow mask steel, nor any viable substitute, is produced within the United States. Therefore, United States shadow mask producers must import this product from steel producers in Japan and Germany. Domestic shadow mask production faces a difficult challenge to stay competitive in today's shadow mask market. Competition from foreign shadow masks is increasing as foreign manufacturers aggressively pursue the U.S. market. In addition, color picture tube and computer video monitor manufacturers are increasing their efforts to reduce production costs due to increased competition in the television and computer markets. These factors reinforce the vital need for competitively-priced component materials, such as shadow masks. Eliminating the duty on shadow mask steel, a product that is already subject to a gradual tariff elimination schedule, would be an important step toward enabling domestic manufacturers to remain competitive in the global market. Major U.S. television picture tube and computer video monitor manufacturers that employ thousands of workers throughout the United States rely on a consistent supply of domestically-produced shadow masks. If such companies were unable to count on such a supply, we run the risk of supplanting domestic production of this product with imported shadow masks from foreign competitors, resulting in higher costs and delivery uncertainties associated with purchasing shadow mask imports. Such increased costs and uncertainty would certainly result in reduced competitiveness of U.S. television picture tube and computer video monitor manufacturers vis--vis foreign manufacturers. Reduced competitiveness could lead to the transfer of existing U.S. manufacturing operations abroad, and/or the closing of U.S. facilities, resulting in the loss of thousands of actual and potential U.S. jobs in the television and computer manufacturing industries.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, today the Senate will consider, and I trust pass, S. 318, the Homeowners Protection Act of 1997. The Homeowners Protection Act, which I introduced earlier this year, and the Banking Committee passed by a 16-to-1 vote, is truly important legislation. This bill will protect homebuyers from excessive mortgage insurance premiums for homebuyers. It is a great product of great deal of hard work by a number of the Banking Committee's members. As a result, the legislation contains the consumer protections of the original bill; at the same time, the bill will be less of a compliance burden for the businesses that are subject to the legislation. Mr. President, the substitute amendment that Senator Sarbanes and I will offer for Senate consideration is the result of a great deal of hard work by Members on both sides of the aisle. First, I would like to begin by thanking my colleague and friend from North Carolina, Senator Faircloth, for his hard work on this issue. Senator Faircloth and his staff have worked tirelessly to help craft compromise language that encompasses real consumer protection without undue regulatory burden. I would also like to offer my thanks to ranking minority member Paul Sarbanes and the bill's cosponsors, Senator Dodd and Senator Bryan, for their continuous support. I truly appreciate their valuable input in preparing the floor amendment that we are considering today. Likewise, I would like to commend Senators Grams and Moseley-Braun for their successful handling of the lender paid mortgage insurance issue, and my friend from Utah, Senator Bennett, for helping to craft compromise language regarding class action liability. Once again, I would particularly like to thank Representative James Hansen (R-UT), who has been the leader in the House in the fight to address PMI abuses. Mr. President, by passing this bill we can remedy a market dysfunction--unnecessary private mortgage insurance premiums. These premiums are being paid by tens of thousands of American homeowners. Private mortgage insurance is typically required when a homebuyer cannot make the standard 20-percent downpayment. For many creditworthy, cash-poor potential homebuyers, private mortgage insurance has been a blessing. Unfortunately, it can also become a curse. I will present just one example of this unfair practice. A homebuyer purchases a $100,000 home with a 30-year, fixed rate mortgage and a 10- percent downpayment. After 10 years and $3,500 in mortgage insurance premiums, it is likely that the homeowners would have a 20-percent equity stake in his or her home. At this time, private mortgage insurance is no longer necessary. However, if that homeowner is unaware of the right to cancel--as many are--and continues to pay for unnecessary insurance, he or she could spend an additional $7,000 in premiums over the life of the loan. And this is less costly than many of the horror stories we hear. In fact, private mortgage insurance rates average between $20 and $100 per month, meaning that some consumers are unknowingly paying from $240 to $1,200 a year for absolutely no reason. Situations like these are nothing less than a fleecing of the American homeowner. The private mortgage insurance industry extended coverage on nearly 900,000 of the approximately 4.4 million mortgages made for the purchase of single-family homes in 1995. At a Banking Committee hearing earlier this year, the spokesman for the private mortgage insurance industry stated that of the approximately 5 million homeowners repaying mortgages covered by PMI, 5 percent could be eligible for cancellation. That amounts to 250,000 hardworking families. And some estimates go much higher. In fact, according to a recent Washington Post article by Ken Harney: An eye-opening new estimate of the extent of the problem came last week when a Dallas-based loan portfolio analyst said he believes that as much as one-fifth of some lenders' mortgage portfolios consist of PMI-insured loans with equities that are greater than 20 percent of current market resale value. Mr. President, clearly, American homeowners, particularly middleclass and firsttime homeowners need our help--and I can say today that that help is on the way. The committee print enables homeowners to initiate cancellation when they have accumulated 20-percent equity. Otherwise, the general rule is that PMI must be automatically canceled at 22 percent. The bill also requires that all existing mortgagors who currently maintain PMI will receive an annual notice informing them that under certain circumstances their insurance may be canceled. The notice must include information to allow the homeowner to contact his or her servicer regarding cancellation requirements. New homebuyers will be informed of their cancellation rights at closing, and will be informed of their right under this law at closing and annually. Mr. President, let me state for the record: I am opposed to unnecessary and excessive government regulation. This bill accomplishes the goals of S. 318 without imposing excess regulation. Clearly, the Congress should allow the free market to resolve most problems. This bill is only needed because, due to the peculiar nature of the PMI market, the market has not remedied this problem. I am grateful for the cooperation of all the industries and consumer groups that have helped bring us to this point. Mr. President, the Homeowner's Protection Act is evidence of what this body can accomplish with hard work on a bipartisan basis. Currently, unnecessary PMI premiums are wrong--when this bill becomes law, they will be illegal. I urge my colleagues to support this important bill and to vote for its passage. Amendment No. 1623 (Purpose: To provide a substitute)

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. That is correct. Moreover, when S. 1228, as amended, is adopted, this will similarly indicate the intent of Congress that the dollar bill shall continue to be printed and shall remain in circulation.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I rise to support immediate passage of the ``Senior Citizen Home Equity Protection Act'' (S. 562). This legislation contains essential provisions which are urgently required to protect our senior citizens from further exploitation by fraudulent operators who are manipulating the Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) home equity conversion mortgage program. The bill also contains a number of housing and flood insurance program reauthorizations and technical corrections which are needed to ensure the effective and efficient continuation of existing programs. The Senior Citizen Home Equity Protection Act, which I introduced on April 10, 1997, was originally passed by the Senate on April 25, 1997. It seeks to prevent unscrupulous middlemen, posing as ``estate planners'', from taking advantage of seniors by charging unnecessary and excessive fees to assist them in obtaining a home equity conversion mortgage. These predators have charged elderly homeowners fees ranging from 6 to 12 percent of the loan amount. Hundreds of very low-income seniors have been manipulated into paying several thousand dollars in return for ministerial and often meaningless services. HUD provides information on reverse mortgages at no charge. These abuses must be halted at once. This bill provides two important safeguards to stop such exploitation. First, it provides a requirement that the mortgagor has received a full disclosure of all costs of obtaining the mortgage, including any costs of estate planning, financial advice or other related services. Second, it clarifies that the HUD Secretary has authority to impose restrictions to ensure that the mortgagor is not charged any unnecessary or excessive costs for obtaining a reverse mortgage. This legislation also provides temporary extensions of certain public and assisted housing policy reforms which have been previously extended in VA-HUD appropriations legislation since Fiscal Year 1996. An owner's right to prepay a Federal Housing Administration-insured multifamily mortgage, subject to certain conditions, is clarified. The bill reauthorizes several federally assisted multifamily rental housing programs under the jurisdiction of HUD and the Rural Housing Service of the Department of Agriculture. Such extensions will assure that much needed rental programs for low-income families continue in an uninterrupted fashion. The National Flood Insurance Program, which is vital for our homeowners residing in floodplain and coastal areas, is also reauthorized. Last fall, Congress passed the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996. The legislation presented before you today makes technical and conforming changes to ensure the effective implementation of that Act. I would like to commend Senator Connie Mack, Chairman of the Banking Committee's Subcommittee on Housing Opportunity and Community Development, for his leadership in the development of this legislation. I applaud Senator Mack, Ranking Minority Member Paul Sarbanes and Subcommittee Ranking Minority Member John Kerry for their fine stewardship of housing and community development programs under the Banking Committee's jurisdiction. Mr. President, S. 562 should be law by now. By delaying action on the bill for 5 months, the House of Representatives has left our senior citizens unprotected and vulnerable to predatory practices--and for no reason other than to engage in parliamentary gamesmanship. Mr. President, I cannot condone this delay. I urge the House of Representatives to pass this bill, which now contains additional provisions the House has insisted upon. There is no opposition to this bill to my knowledge. I respectfully urge the Senate and the House of Representatives to grant passage of this bill before adjournment. It is imperative that we ensure that our nation's most vulnerable homeowners are no longer victimized. Without final passage of this bill, our very low-income elderly homeowners may continue to be preyed upon. I ask for immediate support of this vital legislation.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, today I introduce the Northern Ireland/ Border Counties Free Trade, Development and Security Act. This legislation is a carbon copy of S. 1976, legislation that I introduced in the 104th Congress. Joining me as original cosponsors are my friends and colleagues, the senior Senator from Illinois, Senator Moseley-Braun and the Senator from Mississippi, Mr. Cochran. The Northern Ireland Free Trade, Development and Security Act reintroduced today will--by University of Ulster estimates, create 12,000 jobs within the twelve counties of Northern Ireland and the Border Counties. It will produce an additional $1.5 billion into that economy annually. The new jobs it will create will be targeted to those areas that need the most, areas where the current unemployment rate ranges between 30 percent and 50 percent, areas that have never felt the effects of real economic expansion or growth. Further, this legislation will provide those jobs and hope without any discernable impact upon our nations trade or budget deficit, as was the case with Gaza/West Bank legislation. This bill will operate in harmony with stated goals of the European Union, United Kingdom and the Irish Republic. It will additionally comport with the requirements of the World Trade Organization. Mr. President, the paradox of Northern Ireland is that she has given so much to other cultures and lands but has been incapable of fully reaping the rewards of her own peoples skills and strengths at home. The unfortunate reality is that as in the Republic of Ireland, a large majority of the North's highly educated and skilled younger generation has been forced to emigrate due to high unemployment levels which are as high as 70 percent in some areas. These disadvantaged areas are the ones which this legislation has been especially designed to target. Joint cooperation and joint economic development between the United States, Northern Ireland and the European Union will integrate the most distressed parts of Northern Ireland and the Border Counties into a dynamic economy that--while firmly rooted in the European Union-- continues to expand and cement new trading relationships beneficial to all trading partners. Northern Ireland's peace process must move forward and the aspirations and goodwill of the vast majority of its citizens must be accompanied by hard work and endeavor. A more prosperous economy with more evenly spread and meaningful job opportunities can only serve to bridge the social and economic disparities that exist in this region. In conclusion this opportunity cannot be overlooked, after 25 years since the outbreak of the ``troubles,'' the people of Northern Ireland have suffered enough violence and depravity. Now it is time to embark on a rebuilding process that will give no chance to the terrorist but every chance to peace and reconciliation. Mr. President, it is time to roll up our sleeves and do something real and substantive for all the people of Northern Ireland. This legislation goes far beyond symbolic gestures and grand statements of concern. It will provide a real and solid foundation that the people of Northern Ireland can use to build that new and brighter future. This legislation represents the Senate's down payment on that future. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a public statement of support from Minister James McDaid, the Minister of Tourism and Trade for the Republic of Ireland, found in today's Irish News--be printed in the Record.

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr President, I rise today to introduce legislation necessary to correct a problem faced by an important segment of the American exporting community, catalogue merchants. Catalogue merchants are multi-billion dollar export businesses in New York State and across the nation. Due to an anomaly in our customs law, some products sold by these merchants face double duties when the goods are returned to them by customers abroad. The bill I am introducing today seeks to correct this problem by making sure that duties are only assessed once--as the law intended--the first time a product comes into this country from abroad. If I may Mr. President, let me explain the problem by first telling you how the system is supposed to work. When a catalogue merchant imports a product directly from abroad, as the importer of record, he pays a duty on the product. Let's say the product is a pair of trousers from Taiwan. A merchant in the United States takes direct delivery of a pair of pants from a company in Taipei, and pays duties to the U.S. Treasury on the trousers when they enter the United States. The merchant then sells the pants to a customer in Montreal, Canada. But, the pants are the wrong size, and the customer returns the same pair of trousers directly to the catalogue merchant in the U.S. In that case, properly, is no duty paid on the returned trousers. After all, a duty was properly paid on the trousers when they were first imported into the U.S. That is how the law works when the catalogue merchant is also the official importer of record. Now, take the same situation, but add a broker here in the United States, (the way most catalogue merchants import merchandise into the United States) who is officially the importer of record. The trousers come into the United States from Taipei, but this time, instead of going directly to the merchant, they are imported by a U.S. distributer. The distributer, who is the importer of record, properly pays the duty on the pants, and then transfers the trousers to the catalogue merchant in the U.S. The catalogue merchant then sells the trousers to the customer in Montreal, who subsequently returns the trousers to the U.S. merchant (via a return clearinghouse in Canada, that is set up to ship returned products back to the U.S. in bulk). That is where the problem comes in. When the trousers come back to the United States (as part of a bulk shipment), duty has to be paid on the trousers a second time. Officially, that is because the catalogue merchant is not the original importer of record, and thus a second duty is assessed on the trousers. Clearly, this makes no sense. A second duty should not have to be paid on the same pair of trousers, just because the U.S. catalogue seller is not the original U.S. importer of record. What this amendment says, essentially, is that it doesn't matter who the original importer of record is; as long as the proper duty is paid when an article first enters the U.S., a duty is not assessed the second time the article enters the U.S., when it re-enters the U.S. as a sales return. The President may know that I have sought this change in law for more than a year, and it is my hope that when the Senate next turns to miscellaneous trade matters, this very minor provision can be included. The U.S. Customs Service has told importers that legislation is the only remedy to correct this anomaly. Furthermore, the measure should be deemed ``revenue neutral'' because importers can already avoid the double duty by simply shipping the returns back by (inefficiently) shipping the returns back to the U.S. individually rather than (efficiently) consolidating the shipments. This measure is a common-sense, good government measure which promotes U.S. exports, and correspondingly keeps companies from moving good jobs in distribution and logistics offshore.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I rise today to join with my friend and colleague, Senator Moynihan, to introduce legislation that will declare the Lower East Side Tenement Museum a national historic site. Most of us have heard the stories of how the great wave of immigrants of generations ago entered our Nation, but few really know what happened to them after they landed at Ellis Island. At the Lower East Side Tenement Museum at 97 Orchard Street in New York City, one is able to follow the lives of the immigrants beyond the first hours on our shores. The museum tells their history, displays their courage and showcases their values in an interpretive setting that brings the visitor back to an era from which many of us came. The museum presents to many of us an awareness of our ancestral roots that we may never have known existed. Through the legislation being introduced by Senator Moynihan and me, the museum will be able to affiliate itself with the National Park Service, bestowing national recognition on the humble beginnings of millions of our ancestors. The Tenement Museum is unique in that it not only traces the quality of life inside the tenement, but presents a picture of the immigrant's outside world as well. Due to the cramped and dingy nature of the tenement, as much time as possible was spent outside. Thus, in order to fully explore their lives, it is essential to look toward their work, their houses of worship, their organizations, and their entertainment. The museum incorporates the experiences of yesteryear's immigrants and interprets them for today's generations. It gives the visitor a powerful glimpse into the life and living arrangements that our ancestors faced on a daily basis. Besides onsite programs, the museum utilizes the surrounding neighborhood; an area which continues to this day in its role as a receiver of immigrants. Throughout our Nation we have preserved, remembered and cherished places of national significance and beauty. We have put enormous energy toward maintaining homes of noted Americans and protecting vast areas of wilderness. What we do not have, though, is a monument to the so- called ordinary citizen. The Tenement Museum can fill that role and will do so at no cost to the Federal Government under this legislation. It is unlikely that many of those who lived in buildings like the one at 97 Orchard Street felt that they were special. Rather, they were probably grateful for the chance to come to America to try to make a better life for themselves and their families. Given the living and working conditions that we now take for granted, the language and cultural obstacles they had to overcome, we should applaud their ability to take hold of an opportunity and not only survive, but thrive. It is their contributions to society in the face of overwhelming obstacles that defined an era and established an ethic that survives to this day. It is their spirit that we admire, and that, in retrospect, makes these otherwise ordinary individuals special. The Tenement Museum is their monument, and as their descendants, it is ours as well. Congress has an opportunity to recognize the pioneer spirit of our ancestors and deliver it to future generations of Americans. The museum reminds us all of an important and often forgotten chapter in our immigrant heritage, mainly, that millions of families made their first stand in our Nation not in a log cabin or farmhouse or mansion, but in a city tenement. Granting the Lower East Side Tenement Museum affiliated status within the National Park Service will shed light on that chapter while linking it to the chain of the Status of Liberty, Ellis Island, and Castle Clinton in the story of our urban immigrant heritage. I urge my colleagues to join Senator Moynihan and me in cosponsoring this bill, and I urge its speedy consideration by the Senate. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I rise today to join with my friend and colleague, Senator Moynihan, to introduce legislation that will declare the Lower East Side Tenement Museum a national historic site. Most of us have heard the stories of how the great wave of immigrants of generations ago entered our Nation, but few really know what happened to them after they landed at Ellis Island. At the Lower East Side Tenement Museum at 97 Orchard Street in New York City, one is able to follow the lives of the immigrants beyond the first hours on our shores. The museum tells their history, displays their courage and showcases their values in an interpretive setting that brings the visitor back to an era from which many of us came. The museum presents to many of us an awareness of our ancestral roots that we may never have known existed. Through the legislation being introduced by Senator Moynihan and me, the museum will be able to affiliate itself with the National Park Service, bestowing national recognition on the humble beginnings of millions of our ancestors. The Tenement Museum is unique in that it not only traces the quality of life inside the tenement, but presents a picture of the immigrant's outside world as well. Due to the cramped and dingy nature of the tenement, as much time as possible was spent outside. Thus, in order to fully explore their lives, it is essential to look toward their work, their houses of worship, their organizations, and their entertainment. The museum incorporates the experiences of yesteryear's immigrants and interprets them for today's generations. It gives the visitor a powerful glimpse into the life and living arrangements that our ancestors faced on a daily basis. Besides onsite programs, the museum utilizes the surrounding neighborhood; an area which continues to this day in its role as a receiver of immigrants. Throughout our Nation we have preserved, remembered and cherished places of national significance and beauty. We have put enormous energy toward maintaining homes of noted Americans and protecting vast areas of wilderness. What we do not have, though, is a monument to the so- called ordinary citizen. The Tenement Museum can fill that role and will do so at no cost to the Federal Government under this legislation. It is unlikely that many of those who lived in buildings like the one at 97 Orchard Street felt that they were special. Rather, they were probably grateful for the chance to come to America to try to make a better life for themselves and their families. Given the living and working conditions that we now take for granted, the language and cultural obstacles they had to overcome, we should applaud their ability to take hold of an opportunity and not only survive, but thrive. It is their contributions to society in the face of overwhelming obstacles that defined an era and established an ethic that survives to this day. It is their spirit that we admire, and that, in retrospect, makes these otherwise ordinary individuals special. The Tenement Museum is their monument, and as their descendants, it is ours as well. Congress has an opportunity to recognize the pioneer spirit of our ancestors and deliver it to future generations of Americans. The museum reminds us all of an important and often forgotten chapter in our immigrant heritage, mainly, that millions of families made their first stand in our Nation not in a log cabin or farmhouse or mansion, but in a city tenement. Granting the Lower East Side Tenement Museum affiliated status within the National Park Service will shed light on that chapter while linking it to the chain of the Status of Liberty, Ellis Island, and Castle Clinton in the story of our urban immigrant heritage. I urge my colleagues to join Senator Moynihan and me in cosponsoring this bill, and I urge its speedy consideration by the Senate. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I rise today briefly to discuss the publication of the latest list of dormant accounts in Swiss banks. On October 29, 1997, the Swiss Bankers Association published its second list of dormant accounts. The list contains some 3,700 names of account holders that have not been heard from since May 9, 1945, the conclusion of the Second World War. This is the second time the Swiss Bankers Association has published such a list, the first time being on July 23, 1997. On that occasion, a great number of names appeared on that list that had proven to be either Nazis or those that were unable to obtain their accounts despite repeated attempts to do so. The latest list, contains the names of Johann Rohani and Anna Rohanny, of Amsterdam. Yesterday afternoon, I heard from the Rohany's daughter, Susan Unger, who informed my staff that these people were her parents. She went on to say that her mother had tried and been turned down in 1968 trying to claim the funds which were hers. Moreover, as late as October 1, of this year, she tried to claim the account and was turned down. Yet, when one looks at the latest list, it is inescapable that these are the same names. Apparently, the accounting firm looking for the accounts failed to check her parents' names on the then-pending lists. This is terribly unfortunate. Mrs. Unger has tried and tried to obtain funds that were legitimately hers and yet, she and her mother have been denied. What is even more bothersome is the fact that while the accounting firm turned her down 1 month ago, and that her parents' names appear on the new list, how many others I wonder, are in the same situation. How many have been turned down, with looking for names appearing on the first list, when they might well have appeared on this new list? We would have a better idea if the second list had been published in full like the first list. This one was not, it was only available on the Internet, through a search mechanism, not a full printout of the names, making it immensely more difficult, if not impossible to find names, if you do not see all of them. Mr. President, the Swiss banks have a long way to go before they can regain the respectability they once had. Continued indifference to cases such as this are very unfortunate. I wish for the sake of the claimants they would come to their senses and do what is right. One can only hope.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Holocaust Victims Redress Act. We all know that the Second World War was one of the darkest periods in the history of mankind. Nazi Germany used its vast resources, technology, and extensive transportation system for the sole purpose of the persecution and annihilation of a single people, simply because of their religion. This inhumanity was unheard of in history. Starvation, disease, slavery, random executions, children separated from their parents, husbands separated from their wives, the murder of infants, the rate of women; these were the everyday tortures inflicted on the Jews of Europe by their Nazi aggressors. By the end of the war, the bulk of the Jewish population, 6 million men, women and children had been killed. And those displaced and demoralized few who survived this ordeal were left to pick up the pieces of their lives and start anew. Today, we all know what the Swiss bankers did with the Jewish assets entrusted to them. Yet, during that period, the United States Government seized $198 million in German assets and froze an estimated $1.2 billion more in Swiss assets located in the United States, later returned to Switzerland in 1946, after the signing of the Washington accords. The unfortunate fact is that among the capital confiscated by our Government were funds belonging to Holocaust victims, frozen to prevent them from falling into the hands of the Third Reich. Realizing that there were victims of the Holocaust who may not have had any legal heirs, Congress, after the war, authorized the transfer of $3 million from those assets to organizations providing relief and rehabilitation to Holocaust survivors. However, only one-sixth of that amount was ever paid to the Jewish Restitution Successor Organization, dedicated to the task of caring for the survivors. In June of this year, Under Secretary of State Stuart Eizenstat, in testimony before the House Banking Committee, urged Congress to reconsider the $500,000 settlement made with survivors of the Holocaust, who had assets in U.S. banks, saying they have a compelling moral claim to the unpaid portion of the estimated $3 million that was originally authorized for compensation. The Holocaust Victims Redress Act seeks to right these wrongs, providing some amount of justice to survivors of the Holocaust while they are still alive, doing so in the following ways: As I stated earlier, only one-sixth of the amount authorized by Congress was actually paid to the Jewish Restitution Successor Organization of New York. This bill would authorize the appropriation of funds equal to the present value of the unpaid difference. It would seek to strike an agreement among the signatories of the Paris Agreement on Reparations whereby all, or a substantial portion, of the gold held by the Tripartite Commission for the Restitution of Monetary Gold would be contributed to charitable organizations to assist elderly survivors of the Holocaust. Furthermore, it expresses the sense of Congress that all governments should act in good faith and facilitate efforts to return private and public properties, looted by the Nazis, to their rightful owners in accordance with the Hague Convention of 1907. I would like to congratulate my colleagues, Representatives Jim Leach of Iowa and Benjamin Gilman of New York, chairmen of the House Banking and House International Affairs Committees respectively, for their work to introduce this bill in the House. It is a good bill. It is the right and just thing to do. It offers at least a modicum of justice to a rapidly diminishing population which has long suffered the wounds of hatred and bigotry inflicted by the Nazis. This legislation has the support of the administration, as demonstrated by Under Secretary of State Stuart Eizenstat. I strongly urge the bill's speedy adoption. Mr. President, I ask for unanimous consent that the text of the bill, along with letters from Under Secretary of State Stuart Eizenstat and the Anti-Defamation League in support of the legislation, be printed in the Record.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Holocaust Victims Redress Act. We all know that the Second World War was one of the darkest periods in the history of mankind. Nazi Germany used its vast resources, technology, and extensive transportation system for the sole purpose of the persecution and annihilation of a single people, simply because of their religion. This inhumanity was unheard of in history. Starvation, disease, slavery, random executions, children separated from their parents, husbands separated from their wives, the murder of infants, the rate of women; these were the everyday tortures inflicted on the Jews of Europe by their Nazi aggressors. By the end of the war, the bulk of the Jewish population, 6 million men, women and children had been killed. And those displaced and demoralized few who survived this ordeal were left to pick up the pieces of their lives and start anew. Today, we all know what the Swiss bankers did with the Jewish assets entrusted to them. Yet, during that period, the United States Government seized $198 million in German assets and froze an estimated $1.2 billion more in Swiss assets located in the United States, later returned to Switzerland in 1946, after the signing of the Washington accords. The unfortunate fact is that among the capital confiscated by our Government were funds belonging to Holocaust victims, frozen to prevent them from falling into the hands of the Third Reich. Realizing that there were victims of the Holocaust who may not have had any legal heirs, Congress, after the war, authorized the transfer of $3 million from those assets to organizations providing relief and rehabilitation to Holocaust survivors. However, only one-sixth of that amount was ever paid to the Jewish Restitution Successor Organization, dedicated to the task of caring for the survivors. In June of this year, Under Secretary of State Stuart Eizenstat, in testimony before the House Banking Committee, urged Congress to reconsider the $500,000 settlement made with survivors of the Holocaust, who had assets in U.S. banks, saying they have a compelling moral claim to the unpaid portion of the estimated $3 million that was originally authorized for compensation. The Holocaust Victims Redress Act seeks to right these wrongs, providing some amount of justice to survivors of the Holocaust while they are still alive, doing so in the following ways: As I stated earlier, only one-sixth of the amount authorized by Congress was actually paid to the Jewish Restitution Successor Organization of New York. This bill would authorize the appropriation of funds equal to the present value of the unpaid difference. It would seek to strike an agreement among the signatories of the Paris Agreement on Reparations whereby all, or a substantial portion, of the gold held by the Tripartite Commission for the Restitution of Monetary Gold would be contributed to charitable organizations to assist elderly survivors of the Holocaust. Furthermore, it expresses the sense of Congress that all governments should act in good faith and facilitate efforts to return private and public properties, looted by the Nazis, to their rightful owners in accordance with the Hague Convention of 1907. I would like to congratulate my colleagues, Representatives Jim Leach of Iowa and Benjamin Gilman of New York, chairmen of the House Banking and House International Affairs Committees respectively, for their work to introduce this bill in the House. It is a good bill. It is the right and just thing to do. It offers at least a modicum of justice to a rapidly diminishing population which has long suffered the wounds of hatred and bigotry inflicted by the Nazis. This legislation has the support of the administration, as demonstrated by Under Secretary of State Stuart Eizenstat. I strongly urge the bill's speedy adoption. Mr. President, I ask for unanimous consent that the text of the bill, along with letters from Under Secretary of State Stuart Eizenstat and the Anti-Defamation League in support of the legislation, be printed in the Record.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, November 4, 1997 at 10:00 a.m. in room 216 of the Senate Hart Office Building to hold a hearing on ``competition, innovation, and public policy in the digital age.''

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent on behalf of the Governmental Affairs Committee to meet on Tuesday, November 4, at 9:00 a.m. for a Nomination Hearing on the following nominees: Ernesta Ballard, to be a Member, Postal Board of Governors; Dale Cabaniss, to be a Member, Federal Labor Relations Authority; and Susanne T. Marshall, to be a Member, Merit Systems Protection Board.

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Financial Services and Technology of the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, November 4, 1997, to conduct a hearing on ``mandating year 2000 disclosure by publicly traded companies''.

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet on Tuesday, November 4, 1997, at 9:30 am on pending committee business.

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be granted permission to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, November 4, for purposes of conducting a full committee hearing which is scheduled to begin at 10:00 a.m. The purpose of this hearing is to consider the nominations of Curtis L. Hebert and Linda Key Breathitt to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the full Committee on Environment and Public Works be granted permission to conduct a hearing Tuesday, November 4, 2:00 p.m., Hearing Room (SD- 406), on S. 627, The African Elephant Conservation Act reauthorization, and S. 1287, the Asian Elephant Conservation Act of 1997.

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs be authorized to meet at 9:15 a.m. on Tuesday, November 4, 1997 in Room 485 of the Russell Senate Building to mark-up the following: H.R. 976, the Mississippi Sioux Tribe Judgment Fund Distribution Act of 1997; and the Nomination of B. Kevin Gover, to be Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs, Department of the Interior.

Mr. D'AMATO. The Committee on Veterans' Affairs requests unanimous consent to hold a markup on the following nominations: Richard J. Griffin to be Inspector General, Department of Veterans Affairs; William P. Greene, Jr. to be Associate Judge, Court of Veterans Appeals; Joseph Thompson to be Under Secretary for Benefits, Department of Veterans Affairs; and Espiridion A. Borrego to be Assistant Secretary for Veterans Employment and Training, Department of Labor; The markup will take place in S216, of the Capitol Building, after the first scheduled votes in the Senate on Tuesday morning, November 4, 1997.

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Transportation and Infrastructure be granted permission to conduct a hearing Tuesday, November 4, 9:30 a.m., Hearing Room (SD- 406) on the status of Federal transportation programs in the absence of a multi-year reauthorization.

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Science, Technology and Space of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet at 2:30 p.m. on next generation internet.

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, November 4, 1997, at 2:15 to hold a Business Meeting.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs reported S. 1228, the 50 States Commemorative Coin Program Act on Friday, October 31, 1997. The committee report, Senate Report No. 105-130, was filed the same day. The Congressional Budget Office cost estimate required by Senate Rule XXVI, section 11(b) of the Standing Rules of the Senate and section 403 of the Congressional Budget Impoundment and Control Act, was not available at the time of filing and, therefore, was not included in the committee report. Instead, the committee indicated the Congressional Budget Office cost estimate would be published in the Congressional Record when it became available. Mr. President, I ask that the full statement and cover letter from the Congressional Budget Office regarding S. 1228 be printed in the Record. The material follows: U.S. Congress, Congressional Budget Office, Washington, DC, October 31, 1997. Hon. Alfonse M. D'Amato, Chairman, Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 1228, the 50 States Commemorative Coin Program Act. If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is John R. Righter (for federal costs), and Matthew Eyles (for the private-sector impact). Sincerely, James L. Blum (For June E. O'Neill, Director). Enclosure. congressional budget office cost estimate S. 1228--50 States Commemorative Coin Program Act Summary: S. 1228 would require the U.S. Mint to make changes to the quarter-dollar and one-dollar coins and to issue three coins commemorating the 100th anniversary of the first flight at Kitty Hawk, North Carolina. CBO estimates that enacting this bill would decrease direct spending by $15 million over the 1998-2002 period and by $40 million over the 1998-2007 period. Because the bill would affect direct spending, pay-as-you-go procedures would apply. S. 1228 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) and would not affect the budgets of state, local, or tribal governments. Description of the bill's major provisions: S. 1228 would direct the Secretary of the Treasury to design and issue a series of quarters commemorating the 50 states over a 10-year period beginning in 1999. During this period, designs for each state would replace the current eagle design on the reverse side of the George Washington quarter. The Mint would issue five quarters a year in the order that the states ratified the Constitution or were admitted into the Union. Before selecting an emblem for each state, the Secretary of the Treasury would consult with the state's governor and with the federal Commission of Fine Arts (CFA) and would submit the selected design for review by the Citizens Commemorative Coin Advisory Committee (CCCAC). The bill would authorize the Mint to sell silver replicas of the quarters--both in proof and uncirculated versions. S. 1228 also would permanently replace the current Susan B. Anthony one-dollar coin with a new dollar coin. Under the bill, the Mint could produce additional quantities of the Susan B. Anthony, if needed, until the new coin was ready for circulation. (The Mint predicts that public demand will exhaust its current inventory of approximately 130 million coins in about 30 months.) The new one-dollar coin would be golden in color and have distinctive tactile and visual features but would have the same diameter and weight as the current coin. In consultation with the Congress, the Secretary of the Treasury would select the designs for both sides of the coin. The bill also would direct the Treasury to market the coin to the American public before placing it into circulation and to study and report to the Congress on the results of its efforts. In addition, the Mint would have the authority to include quantities of the new coin in collector sets sold to the public prior to its introduction into circulation. Unlike previous proposals to introduce a new dollar coin, S. 1228 would not eliminate the one-dollar bill. Finally, S. 1228 would direct the U.S. Mint to produce a ten-dollar gold coin, a one-dollar silver coin, and a half- dollar clad coin in fiscal years 2003 and 2004 commemorating the 100th anniversary of the first flight of Orville and Wilbur Wright at Kitty Hawk, North Carolina. In selecting a design for each coin, the Secretary of the Treasury would consult with the Board of Directors of the First Flight Foundation and the CFA and submit the designs for review by the CCCAC. The coins would be available for sale from August 1, 2003, through July 31, 2004. The price of each coin would equal the sum of its face value, the amount of the surcharge set for it by the bill, and the costs of the Mint to produce it. The bill would set a surcharge of $35 per coin for the ten-dollar coin, $10 per coin for the one-dollar coin, and $1 per coin for the half-dollar coin. S. 1228 would require the Mint to transfer all proceeds from surcharges to the First Flight Foundation. Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated budgetary impact of S. 1228 is shown in the following table. The costs of this legislation fall within budget function 800 (general government). In addition to the budgetary effects summarized in the table, by increasing the public's holding of coins, S. 1228 also would result in the government acquiring additional resources for financing the federal deficit. The seigniorage (or profit, the difference between the face value of coins and their cost of production) from placing the additional coins in circulation would reduce the amount of government borrowing from the public. Under the principles established by the President's Commission on Budget Concepts in 1967, seigniorage does not affect the deficit but is treated as a means of financing the deficit. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. I want to congratulate the chairman of the Immigration Subcommittee, Senator Abraham, for focusing on this issue and am pleased to join him and my other colleagues in putting forth this legislation which is aimed at correcting deficiencies that exist in the current law. Let me say I don't intend to repeat all of the arguments put forth by my colleagues. But I do want to point out, very clearly, there are a number of my colleagues who are concerned about the impact of implementation of this legislation. We were given such assurances as it related to its enforcement--that there was no intent to impose various requirements that would actually stop people from Canada who were coming in on a daily basis--millions of people, millions. In New York, 2.7 million Canadians visit for at least 1 night. One bridge, the Peace Bridge, carries 80 million dollars' worth of goods and services between Canada and New York, my State. Mr. President, 80 million dollars' worth of merchandise a day. It is estimated that if we impose this law that we will impose more time on inspections, which is now about 30 seconds per person, and make that at least 2 minutes a person. We will have traffic jams of 3, 4, 5 and 6 hours. We will cost American consumers hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars. We will disrupt trade. We will create an absolute catastrophe at our borders. Now, is that what we intend to do? If we really want to go after drug dealers, and that is what this intends to do, then let's go after them. We know who the cartel leaders are. You are going to stop millions of people on a daily basis who are traveling back and forth between Canada and the United States? That is not going to affect the drug trade. Who are we kidding? The implementation of this would be costly because we are talking about $1 billion a day in trade. That is what we are talking about, $1 billion a day. Senator Simpson, who was chairman of the Subcommittee on Immigration last year, along with Congressman Lamar Smith, chairman of the House committee, in a letter that they wrote to the Canadian Ambassador, said that ``We did not intend to impose a new requirement for border crossing cards * * * on Canadians who are not presently required to possess such documents.'' Mr. President, this legislation authored by Senator Abraham, and which I am very pleased to support, would exclude Canadians who are currently exempted, just like we told the Canadian Ambassador. So this legislation really keeps a commitment that was made to our friends, to our partners in Canada, and one in which I must say is absolutely vital to the interests of many, many communities. Let me mention a number of communities who have said if this legislation is not amended, it would be disastrous: Buffalo, NY; Syracuse, NY; Onondaga County; Oswego County and Plattsburgh. I have to tell you, they have been absolutely aghast. These are just some of the communities who have written to me and expressed, by either way of their elected officials or by the various trade groups and representatives, that this would be catastrophic. I believe they are right. This bill will stop problems before they are created--traffic jams never envisioned before, the flow of goods and services absolutely brought to a stop. I don't think we should wait for the problem to take place, nor do I think we can continue to abdicate our responsibility. As Senator Abraham has pointed out quite eloquently, we have not gotten the kind of clarification necessary that would allow the normal intercourse of business between our two great countries. You can't jeopardize people's lives, the well-being of our communities and, indeed, our national prosperity. I am pleased to support this bill. I hope we can get Senator Abraham speedy action on this. I intend to support Senator Abraham in every way possible and I want to commend you for having brought this to the attention of the U.S. Congress and putting forth legislation in such a thoughtful way. Last but not least, this legislation does something that is pretty important. It calls for increasing the number of Customs and INS inspectors and says at least half of them have to be placed on northern borders. While I understand that we have some tremendous problems on our southern borders dealing with the flow of drugs, we cannot underestimate the importance of continuing the process of commerce--in a manner which will continue to expand upon it and not impinge upon it. I thank my colleague from Michigan for being so forthright on this. I hope we can get this legislation passed sooner rather than later. To reiterate, I am pleased to join with the chairman of the Immigration Subcommittee, Senator Abraham and the ranking member of the subcommittee, Senator Kennedy, to introduce the Border Improvement and Immigration Act of 1997--a bill that will preserve the smooth and efficient trade and travel experienced between the United States and Canada. A provision of the 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act has caused enormous trepidation among businesses and families living along the northern border of the United States and Canada. Several organizations have contacted me with their concern about section 110 of the 1996 act--a provision that requires ``every alien'' to display documents upon entry to or exit from the United States. To put this problem into perspective, let me explain what implementation of section 110 would mean for New York State. Over 2.7 million Canadians visit New York each year for at least 1 night, spending over $400 million. Last year, my State's exports to Canada exceeded $9.5 billion and the first 6 months of 1997 has seen a rise in exports. The ties between the communities are strong and must not be disrupted. The common council of the city of Plattsburgh has submitted a resolution indicating the threat to the strong relationship enjoyed by Canada and the United States--its economic, cultural, and social impact. The Greater Buffalo Partnership states that there are about 5,000 trucks moving goods through the port of Buffalo every day that will be subject to a time intensive document production under this provision. They conclude that ``this provision will cause 5-hour delays and jeopardize every business relying on just in time deliveries.'' This new requirement will cause unprecedented traffic jams at the border and chaos in the business and travel industry in northern New York. Implementation of this border restriction would be costly for both American and Canadian business and tourism throughout both nations. Nationally, trade with Canada hovers near $1 billion a day and there has been up to 116 million people entered the United States from Canada in 1996. As bilateral trade grows every year, traffic congestion and back ups could be expected to last hours, translating into frustration and lost opportunities. When Congress passed this law, there was no intent to impose this requirement on Canadians. As expressed by Senator Alan Simpson, chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration last year, and Congressman Lamar Smith, the chairman of the House Subcommittee on Immigration, in a letter to the Canadian Ambassador, ``we did not intend to impose a new requirement for border crossing cards * * * on Canadians who are not presently required to possess such documents.'' This new legislation will exclude Canadians, who are currently exempted from documentary requirements, from having to register every arrival and departure at the United States border. Because of the tremendous burden of enforcement on our borders, the bill also authorizes an increase of at least 300 INS inspectors and 150 Customs inspectors each year. There is a major problem brewing on our border with Canada. It's a problem that threatens vital trade and travel between our two countries. This bill will halt the problem, and allow our normal trade and tourism to continue successfully. I am proud to lead the effort to pass this important legislation.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. I want to congratulate the chairman of the Immigration Subcommittee, Senator Abraham, for focusing on this issue and am pleased to join him and my other colleagues in putting forth this legislation which is aimed at correcting deficiencies that exist in the current law. Let me say I don't intend to repeat all of the arguments put forth by my colleagues. But I do want to point out, very clearly, there are a number of my colleagues who are concerned about the impact of implementation of this legislation. We were given such assurances as it related to its enforcement--that there was no intent to impose various requirements that would actually stop people from Canada who were coming in on a daily basis--millions of people, millions. In New York, 2.7 million Canadians visit for at least 1 night. One bridge, the Peace Bridge, carries 80 million dollars' worth of goods and services between Canada and New York, my State. Mr. President, 80 million dollars' worth of merchandise a day. It is estimated that if we impose this law that we will impose more time on inspections, which is now about 30 seconds per person, and make that at least 2 minutes a person. We will have traffic jams of 3, 4, 5 and 6 hours. We will cost American consumers hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars. We will disrupt trade. We will create an absolute catastrophe at our borders. Now, is that what we intend to do? If we really want to go after drug dealers, and that is what this intends to do, then let's go after them. We know who the cartel leaders are. You are going to stop millions of people on a daily basis who are traveling back and forth between Canada and the United States? That is not going to affect the drug trade. Who are we kidding? The implementation of this would be costly because we are talking about $1 billion a day in trade. That is what we are talking about, $1 billion a day. Senator Simpson, who was chairman of the Subcommittee on Immigration last year, along with Congressman Lamar Smith, chairman of the House committee, in a letter that they wrote to the Canadian Ambassador, said that ``We did not intend to impose a new requirement for border crossing cards * * * on Canadians who are not presently required to possess such documents.'' Mr. President, this legislation authored by Senator Abraham, and which I am very pleased to support, would exclude Canadians who are currently exempted, just like we told the Canadian Ambassador. So this legislation really keeps a commitment that was made to our friends, to our partners in Canada, and one in which I must say is absolutely vital to the interests of many, many communities. Let me mention a number of communities who have said if this legislation is not amended, it would be disastrous: Buffalo, NY; Syracuse, NY; Onondaga County; Oswego County and Plattsburgh. I have to tell you, they have been absolutely aghast. These are just some of the communities who have written to me and expressed, by either way of their elected officials or by the various trade groups and representatives, that this would be catastrophic. I believe they are right. This bill will stop problems before they are created--traffic jams never envisioned before, the flow of goods and services absolutely brought to a stop. I don't think we should wait for the problem to take place, nor do I think we can continue to abdicate our responsibility. As Senator Abraham has pointed out quite eloquently, we have not gotten the kind of clarification necessary that would allow the normal intercourse of business between our two great countries. You can't jeopardize people's lives, the well-being of our communities and, indeed, our national prosperity. I am pleased to support this bill. I hope we can get Senator Abraham speedy action on this. I intend to support Senator Abraham in every way possible and I want to commend you for having brought this to the attention of the U.S. Congress and putting forth legislation in such a thoughtful way. Last but not least, this legislation does something that is pretty important. It calls for increasing the number of Customs and INS inspectors and says at least half of them have to be placed on northern borders. While I understand that we have some tremendous problems on our southern borders dealing with the flow of drugs, we cannot underestimate the importance of continuing the process of commerce--in a manner which will continue to expand upon it and not impinge upon it. I thank my colleague from Michigan for being so forthright on this. I hope we can get this legislation passed sooner rather than later. To reiterate, I am pleased to join with the chairman of the Immigration Subcommittee, Senator Abraham and the ranking member of the subcommittee, Senator Kennedy, to introduce the Border Improvement and Immigration Act of 1997--a bill that will preserve the smooth and efficient trade and travel experienced between the United States and Canada. A provision of the 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act has caused enormous trepidation among businesses and families living along the northern border of the United States and Canada. Several organizations have contacted me with their concern about section 110 of the 1996 act--a provision that requires ``every alien'' to display documents upon entry to or exit from the United States. To put this problem into perspective, let me explain what implementation of section 110 would mean for New York State. Over 2.7 million Canadians visit New York each year for at least 1 night, spending over $400 million. Last year, my State's exports to Canada exceeded $9.5 billion and the first 6 months of 1997 has seen a rise in exports. The ties between the communities are strong and must not be disrupted. The common council of the city of Plattsburgh has submitted a resolution indicating the threat to the strong relationship enjoyed by Canada and the United States--its economic, cultural, and social impact. The Greater Buffalo Partnership states that there are about 5,000 trucks moving goods through the port of Buffalo every day that will be subject to a time intensive document production under this provision. They conclude that ``this provision will cause 5-hour delays and jeopardize every business relying on just in time deliveries.'' This new requirement will cause unprecedented traffic jams at the border and chaos in the business and travel industry in northern New York. Implementation of this border restriction would be costly for both American and Canadian business and tourism throughout both nations. Nationally, trade with Canada hovers near $1 billion a day and there has been up to 116 million people entered the United States from Canada in 1996. As bilateral trade grows every year, traffic congestion and back ups could be expected to last hours, translating into frustration and lost opportunities. When Congress passed this law, there was no intent to impose this requirement on Canadians. As expressed by Senator Alan Simpson, chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration last year, and Congressman Lamar Smith, the chairman of the House Subcommittee on Immigration, in a letter to the Canadian Ambassador, ``we did not intend to impose a new requirement for border crossing cards * * * on Canadians who are not presently required to possess such documents.'' This new legislation will exclude Canadians, who are currently exempted from documentary requirements, from having to register every arrival and departure at the United States border. Because of the tremendous burden of enforcement on our borders, the bill also authorizes an increase of at least 300 INS inspectors and 150 Customs inspectors each year. There is a major problem brewing on our border with Canada. It's a problem that threatens vital trade and travel between our two countries. This bill will halt the problem, and allow our normal trade and tourism to continue successfully. I am proud to lead the effort to pass this important legislation.