Alfonse D’Amato

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I yield back any time that we might have, and I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I rise today to support a native New Yorker, a fellow New Yorker, Andrew Cuomo, to be Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development. I am pleased that the Senate Banking Committee reported Mr. Cuomo's nomination yesterday by a unanimous vote. I am privileged to support the confirmation of a native New Yorker, particularly one who has done so much in the area of housing in such a relatively short period of time. I commend Mr. Cuomo for his record of public service, first as an advocate for the homeless, and second in terms of his stewardship as Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and Development at HUD. Since 1993, the Secretary has successfully presided over an annual budget of nearly $10 billion, encompassing a wide diversity of housing, community, and economic development programs. He has shown innovation, insight, and tireless efforts to serve our cities, suburbs and rural areas. He has done so in a way that has avoided partisanship with an eye toward giving to many of those who would otherwise not have the opportunity for good, safe, affordable housing. That is his record as it relates to the private sector in providing transitional housing for the homeless. It is not good enough, Mr. President, to simply say, ``Let's build a shelter, temporary, for the homeless,'' and bring them off the streets and leave them in a situation that during the day, or when the weather is not inclement, they go back out into the community and wander around aimlessly. We cannot then think the community has met its obligation, its moral and ethical responsibilities to those people--when we take them back in during inclement weather but again discharge them. Mr. Cuomo, as a young man in 1986, founded and served as president of Housing Enterprise for the Less Privileged, known as HELP. HELP is a provider of housing which uses a strategy to move homeless people from the streets to transitional housing with supportive services to deal with the number of problems that these families may have, like drug addiction and alcohol addiction. HELP was a model for his approach to homelessness that he utilized at the Department of Housing and Urban Development. HELP is providing assistance for over 4,000 people each year. His grassroots background working in communities, not coming in opposition and thrusting a program upon the community, but working with the community and the private sector, has helped provide him with the insights that I think are so necessary in order for us not to have a department that looks down upon the cities and the States and the communities, but instead works with them in partnership. Mr. President, let me suggest the Department of Housing and Urban Development needs a lot of work. It needs to be improved. There are some very serious problems. Indeed, unless we address those problems we could face a very difficult situation with hundreds of thousands of people being in a position that they are unable to live in a decent place. We are now approaching a situation that has built up over the years. Our section 8 program's current renewal budget is something in the area of $3.4 billion. That is what we are going to spend to help people who live in this section 8 assisted housing pay for the differential in terms of what they can afford to pay and what the rent is established at. Mr. President, 38 percent are senior citizens. That budget need will rise this October from $3.4 billion to over $10 billion. The total HUD budget is only $20 billion. And we have an increase of approximately $7 billion. Where will that money come from? Are we going to increase? Is the administration and the Congress going to increase by $7 billion the HUD budget? I do not think so. This is going to take innovative leadership. It is going to take a husbanding and directing of resources in the way they should be directed to maximize our spending. I believe it will take a more enlightened approach by the administration and Congress to deal with the insufficiency of resources that HUD presently has. I do not think it is going to be an easy job to get additional resources given the fact that the inspector general has indicated that there are some very severe problems that exist at HUD. There are serious problems ahead that the new Secretary and the Congress are going to have to deal with. HUD faces a fiscal crisis. Hard choices are going to have to be made. This really calls upon all of us, including the Secretary under his leadership, to work together to ensure that our Nation's most needy, particularly our senior citizens, are not going to be jeopardized as a result of this fiscal crisis that we are facing. Again that crisis is going to be upon us sooner rather than later. It will be with us this coming October. In conclusion, Mr. President, I again say that after a very thorough nomination hearing, and Mr. Cuomo meeting with just about every Banking Committee member, the committee unanimously voted for his confirmation. I look forward to a successful confirmation of Andrew Cuomo so that we can begin to work toward our mutual goals of improving access to housing in all of our Nation's communities. I strongly urge my colleagues to approve this confirmation, and I applaud the President for choosing Andrew Cuomo and designating him to be our next Secretary of HUD. Mr. President, I yield the floor. Mr. SARBANES addressed the Chair.

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Melody Fennel and David Hardiman be permitted privileges of the floor during consideration of the pending nomination.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I rise today to offer the Northern Ireland Fair Employment Practices and Principles of Economic Justice Act of 1997. This amendment seeks to deter efforts to use the work place as an arena of discrimination in Northern Ireland. The Northern Ireland Fair Employment Practices and Principles of Economic Justice Act of 1997 incorporates the MacBride Principles, which are modeled after the famous Sullivan Principles, one of the initial efforts to apply United States pressure to change the system of apartheid in South Africa. The MacBride Principles are named in honor of the late Sean MacBride, winner of the Nobel Peace Prize and co-founder of Amnesty International. This amendment will enlist the cooperation of United States companies active in Northern Ireland in the campaign to force the end of discrimination in the workplace by: First, eliminating religious discrimination in managerial, supervisory, administrative, clerical, and technical jobs and significantly increasing the representation in such jobs of individuals from under represented religious groups. Second, providing adequate security for the protection of minority employees at the workplace. Third, banning provocative sectarian and political emblems from the workplace. Fourth, publicly advertising all job openings and undertaking special recruitment efforts to attract applicants from under represented religious groups, and establishing procedures to identify and recruit minority individuals with potential for further advancement, including managerial programs. Fifth, establishing layoff, recall, and termination procedures which do not favor particular religious groupings. Sixth, abolishing job reservations, apprenticeship restrictions, and differential employment criteria which discriminate on the basis of religious or ethnic origin. Seventh, developing and expanding upon existing training and educational programs that will prepare substantial numbers of minority employees for managerial, supervisory, administrative, clerical, and technical jobs. Eighth, appointing a senior management staff member to oversee the U.S. company's compliance with the principles described above. It is in the workplace in Northern Ireland, which can be used to eliminate discrimination, where improving the employment opportunities for the underprivileged will help factor out the economic causes of the current strife in Northern Ireland. This will hopefully begin the process toward a peaceful resolution of the so-called troubles. 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 offer the Northern Ireland Fair Employment Practices and Principles of Economic Justice Act of 1997. This amendment seeks to deter efforts to use the work place as an arena of discrimination in Northern Ireland. The Northern Ireland Fair Employment Practices and Principles of Economic Justice Act of 1997 incorporates the MacBride Principles, which are modeled after the famous Sullivan Principles, one of the initial efforts to apply United States pressure to change the system of apartheid in South Africa. The MacBride Principles are named in honor of the late Sean MacBride, winner of the Nobel Peace Prize and co-founder of Amnesty International. This amendment will enlist the cooperation of United States companies active in Northern Ireland in the campaign to force the end of discrimination in the workplace by: First, eliminating religious discrimination in managerial, supervisory, administrative, clerical, and technical jobs and significantly increasing the representation in such jobs of individuals from under represented religious groups. Second, providing adequate security for the protection of minority employees at the workplace. Third, banning provocative sectarian and political emblems from the workplace. Fourth, publicly advertising all job openings and undertaking special recruitment efforts to attract applicants from under represented religious groups, and establishing procedures to identify and recruit minority individuals with potential for further advancement, including managerial programs. Fifth, establishing layoff, recall, and termination procedures which do not favor particular religious groupings. Sixth, abolishing job reservations, apprenticeship restrictions, and differential employment criteria which discriminate on the basis of religious or ethnic origin. Seventh, developing and expanding upon existing training and educational programs that will prepare substantial numbers of minority employees for managerial, supervisory, administrative, clerical, and technical jobs. Eighth, appointing a senior management staff member to oversee the U.S. company's compliance with the principles described above. It is in the workplace in Northern Ireland, which can be used to eliminate discrimination, where improving the employment opportunities for the underprivileged will help factor out the economic causes of the current strife in Northern Ireland. This will hopefully begin the process toward a peaceful resolution of the so-called troubles. 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 to support passage of the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996 (H.R. 3219). I would like to express my appreciation to Senate Committee on Indian Affairs Chairman John McCain, Senator Ted Stevens, Senator Pete Domenici and Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell for their commitment and dedication to reforming Indian housing policy. In addition, I would like to commend the House of Representatives for taking the initiative in developing and passing this important legislation. This legislation originally passed the House of Representatives as title VII of H.R. 2406, the United States Housing Act of 1996. On June 20, 1996, the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs and the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs held a joint hearing on this bill and the future of Indian housing policy for our Nation. The cornerstone of H.R. 3219 is the promotion of the essential Federal-Indian policy of tribal self-determination and self-governance. It recognizes the unique government to government relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. The bill also makes a long overdue recognition that the conditions of American Indian and Alaska Native housing are very different from those of urban public housing and responds by separating the programs from each other. This legislation is supported by the majority of Indian tribes and Indian Housing Authorities across America. It responds to tribal requests for reduced Government regulation, greater flexibility, and the consolidation of funding sources into block grants. In addition, it recognizes the reluctance of the private sector to provide housing on trust or restricted land by broadening the scope of the loan guarantee program and providing for 50-year leasehold interests on such lands. Importantly, the bill maintains maximum rent restrictions to protect recipients of housing assistance. The monthly rent or homebuyer payment may not exceed 30 percent of the monthly adjusted income of such family. However, a tribally designated housing entity may choose to require a monthly housing payment which is less than 30 percent. Although this bill is not perfect, it represents a strong beginning in the process of devolving control of housing policy from the Federal Government to the States and localities, in this case the tribally designated housing entities. The Senate Committee on Banking stands ready to legislate any necessary improvements which may be required prior to final implementation of the legislation. I rise to support the adoption of the Native American Housing Assistance and Self- Determination Act of 1996.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, today I rise to offer the Commemorative Coin Act of 1996, an amendment to H.R. 1776, the Black Revolutionary War Patriots Act. This measure incorporates the commemorative coin initiatives that have not only successfully garnered overwhelming support in the Senate, as well as the endorsement of the Citizens Commemorative Coin Advisory Committee, but coin initiatives that have also been unanimously agreed to by the House of Representatives. Commemorative coins are collectibles that raise the public's awareness of events that molded our Nation, of the personal sacrifice and contribution from outstanding leaders, and of historic sites and fantastic natural monuments. We have already been successful in achieving our goal of Commemorative Coin reforms. These reforms are the result of the outcry for boycotts among numismatists nationwide and the losses commemorative programs have been experiencing over the last few years. I called for a study of the commemorative coin program by the Government Accounting Office in July 1995. The report was not issued until August 1996. The message in the report was simple--either take steps to reform commemorative programs or continue on the same path of burdening the taxpayer. After negotiations with the House, we were able to reach an agreement that had the full support of the House, the Senate, the Citizens Commemorative Coin Advisory Committee and the U.S. Mint. The reforms we now have are based on those sponsored by Representative Michael Castle, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy of the Committee on Banking and Financial Services. Congressman Castle's bill, H.R. 2614, which was supported overwhelmingly in the House, served as an appropriate foundation for the reforms. I commend Mr. Castle on his guidance and perseverance as it relates to commemorative coin program reforms. The coin programs that this bill authorizes will give recognition to deserving, influential American citizens and historic figures such as Jackie Robinson, George Washington, Dolley Madison and Franklin Delano Roosevelt. For the first in the history of the Mint's commemorative coin program, we will honor not only the sacrifices and contributions made by African Americans during the Revolutionary War period, but Crispus Attucks, the first African American Revolutionary War patriot and colonist killed during the Boston Massacre. In addition we will celebrate the 125th anniversary of our country's first national park--Yellowstone National Park. And on a more somber note, we will salute the selfless contributions that our Nation's law enforcement officers and their families have made in preserving public safety. These men and women are not enlisted for battle, yet they risk their lives everyday. And tragically enough, lives are lost so that others may live without the threat of crime. The production and sale of commemorative coins allows the Treasury a means of decreasing the national deficit. Worthy causes also benefit from funds raised for worthwhile projects. Yet we are well aware that as the commemorative coin market becomes more and more saturated, it is becoming more and more common for coin programs to post losses, significant losses--in millions of dollars. Profits realized through well received programs end up covering these losses. That is essentially how the Mint's Public Enterprise Fund operates. But, we cannot and should not become completely reliant upon the safety net of the Public Enterprise Fund. In addition to the commemorative coin provisions, this legislation authorizes a study for the 50 States Circulating Commemorative Coin Programs. This temporary change to our currency could make history as well as teach history. Each State of the Union would be represented on the quarter in the order in which it joined the Union. Representation of all States would end 10 years from the inception of the circulating program. Mr. President, the time has come to assure that the American taxpayer is protected from losses that commemorative coin programs may experience. The reforms we have adopted will accomplish just that. Simultaneously, those reforms will revitalize the commemorative coin program and preserve the hobby of collecting coins. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a summary of the amendments be printed in the Record.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I thank the leader for his patience and help, and our Democratic leader as well, for joining Senator Graham and all those Senators who worked to bring us to this point. This legislation not only accomplishes some magnificent goals in commemorating some wonderful Americans and various events--Jackie Robinson, among those--but, in addition, will raise money for some very worthy causes like the Jackie Robinson Foundation to help needy students. It has already provided scholarships for 400 children. One last thought. This package is a very carefully worked out reform package that Congressman Castle, our colleague in the House, has worked on to achieve what I think will streamline this process so it will be a credit to the Congress in future deliberations as they relate to which coins should we be commemorating and how do we go about this, instead of a haphazard scattergun manner. I thank both of the leaders. Not only do we mint various coins--it does provide for that--but also sets up a procedure which will bring much more order to this House as well as to the House of Representatives. I thank both leaders.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I am very pleased that the Senate passed the conference report to H.R. 3005, the National Market Improvement Act of 1996, on Tuesday, November 1, 1996. This bill is a critical piece of legislation that will streamline securities regulation and provide important investor and consumer protections-- maintaining the preeminence of the U.S. capital markets. Section 102 of the bill will enable issuers whose securities are listed or authorized for listing on the New York Stock Exchange, the American Stock Exchange, the National Market System of the Nasdaq or a comparable exchange (or tier or segment thereof) to register those securities only with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Those issuers would not have to register their listed securities--or those securities that have been authorized for listing--with the 50 States. The conferees intended for this provision to accord equal treatment to each of the exchanges explicitly listed in the statute (the New York Stock Exchange, the American Stock Exchange, the National Market System of the Nasdaq) as well as any other exchange (or segment or tier thereof) with comparable listing standards. The conferees are concerned, however, that a strict reading of the statutory language may lead to the interpretation that the conferees intended the provision to accomplish something different than absolute parity of treatment among the eligible exchanges. Mr. President, this is unequivocally not the case. In the future, I will seek to correct the drafting error to avoid any ambiguity in the statute. Pending that legislative fix, I take this opportunity to make the record clear--the conferees intended for issuers whose securities are listed or authorized for listing on the National Market System of the Nasdaq to be exempt from State registration requirements under section 102 of H.R. 3005.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. We share the Senator's concern. In response, let me say that it is not our intent that the regulators implement the deposit shifting provision in a way that would raise constitutional free speech issues. The Supreme Court has made it clear that the first amendment protections do indeed extend to lawful and accurate business communications and we expect the regulators to abide by these decisions.

Mr. D'AMATO. I would be happy to yield to the Senator from California.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, today I speak in support of H.R. 3005, the National Securities Markets Improvement Act of 1996. This bill is a critical piece of securities legislation that will vastly improve our securities markets and provide important investor and consumer protections. As most of my colleagues already know, an earlier version of this bill, S. 1815, passed the Senate unanimously in late June. That bill enjoyed strong bipartisan support. As testament to that support, we were able to introduce the bill, mark it up in committee, and pass it through the Senate within 2 months. Through hard work on both sides of the Capitol, the House and Senate conference on H.R. 3005 produced a sound bill that thoughtfully and carefully tightens the securities laws. I thank my distinguished colleagues and conferees whose tenacity and dedication have made it possible to produce this legislation. I thank the chairman and ranking member of the Securities Subcommittee, Senators Gramm and Dodd, along with the ranking member of the full committee, Senator Sarbanes. I also thank my esteemed colleague, Senator Bennett, who has been very helpful to the committee on securities legislation this Congress. I thank the staffs: Howard Mennell, Steve Harris, Laura Unger, Wayne Abernathy, Mitchell Feuer, Andrew Lowenthal, and Robert Cresanti, as well as the legislative counsel, Laura Ayud, who literally made this bill possible. Mr. President, I urge the Senate to act expeditiously on this conference report so that we may then forward it to the White House for the President's signature. The National Securities Markets Improvement Act of 1996 is a significant piece of legislation that will ensure that the U.S. securities market remains the pre-eminent securities market in the world. The U.S. securities market has the most capital and the most investors. Over 50 million Americans own stocks, not counting more than 10,000 institutional investors. Last year, the U.S. stock market had $7.98 trillion in capital--close to half the amount of capital in the entire world market. This legislation will make it easier to raise capital in the securities market. The bill will create a new category of unregistered private investment companies that will help venture capitalists tap the capital markets to fund business endeavors. It will also bring more funding and investment to small business by making it easier for economic, business, and industrial development companies to raise money without having to register with the SEC and by providing liquidity and investment opportunities to business development companies. The bill will promote capital formation by eliminating many overlapping State and Federal requirements for registering securities. It eases the restrictions on borrowing that currently restricts U.S. broker-dealers' sources of funding their business. The bill will make U.S. broker-dealers more competitive in the global markets. It will also allow U.S. firms to pass on substantial savings to their customers. This bill will make the securities laws reflect the reality of today's marketplace. It will simplify procedures for paying fees and making disclosures. It will give the Securities and Exchange Commission flexibility to adapt to the changing financial market by letting the SEC say the securities laws don't apply where they don't make sense. This legislation will tighten up regulation by giving the States and the SEC distinctly separate regulatory roles. It will divide between the SEC and the States regulation of the 22,000 registered investment advisers who are entrusted with $10.6 trillion in customer funds--much of which represents savings and retirement money. As a result, investment advisers will be better regulated and consumers and investors better protected. The bill will make the mutual fund market a national market, that will be comprehensively regulated by the SEC. Mutual funds have become a household commodity in the last several years with almost one-third of U.S. households--that's 30 million households--owning a total of $2.7 trillion in mutual funds. This bill recognizes that the growth in the mutual fund industry means that it is no longer practicable for all 50 States to have a hand in what goes into a mutual fund prospectus. This legislation also makes sure investors and consumers are not confused about what's in a mutual fund by giving the SEC authority to set standards on mutual fund names. This is not a controversial bill, it enjoys support on both sides of the aisle. It thoughtfully and carefully tightens the laws governing the securities market. I commend my colleagues and their staff for their excellent work in drafting this legislation and urge my colleagues to support passage of the bill.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. I would be pleased to take part in such a colloquy.

Mr. D'AMATO. The Senator is correct.

Mr. D'AMATO. The Senator is correct.

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I wonder if the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Small Business would like to comment on the Senate substitute amendment to H.R. 3719, the Small Business Programs Improvement Act of 1996. Am I correct in my understanding that this legislation is included in the omnibus appropriations bill that will be considered by the Senate today, and that it contains important provisions designed to preserve and strengthen several SBA finance programs that benefit small businesses throughout the country.

Mr. D'AMATO. The Senator is correct.

Mr. D'AMATO. I am pleased that this very important new provision is included in this legislation. I believe it is appropriate for the Federal Home Loan Bank system to assist small businesses, by making additional leverage investments in SBIC's, as an element in fulfilling the Federal Home Loan Banks' community and economic development mission.

Mr. D'AMATO. Again the Senator is correct. EPA is given authority only to address the two specific issues covered by title V. No other rulemaking authority is conferred or affected by this legislation.

Mr. D'AMATO. That is correct.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I rise today to lend my strong support to H.R. 1281. This sense of the Congress measure is intended to act as a first step to urge several Federal agencies through the Freedom of Information Act, to open their files that contain information about individuals that are believed to have participated in Nazi war crimes. This sense of the Congress measure stems from the efforts of Representative Maloney of my home State of New York. Representative Maloney propose H.R. 1281, a bill that would have amended the National Security Act of 1947, and required Federal agencies to make public under the Freedom of Information Act, all information regarding individuals who participated in Nazi War Crimes during World War II. Mr. President, it is very important that we make a strong statement in this body that all the facts relating to the Holocaust be brought to light. I believe that it is our duty to never forget the millions of people who died in the Holocaust. Further, I believe we also have a duty to the survivors and victim's families to pursue every answer into this terrible period in the history of man. Yet, over 50 years have passed since the end of World War II and we still have many unanswered questions. Some of these questions can be answered with the cooperation of our own Federal agencies, but, some agencies have inexplicably blocked access to files and information that could help to shed light on the Holocaust and Nazi war criminals. These answers could help to provide piece of mind to millions of people around our country and around the world. Further, the release of these Nazi war crime files could provide historians with a more clear view of these horrible events over half a century ago, thus helping to ensure the despicable acts of the Holocaust are never repeated. The survivors and victim's families have waited too long. The time to open the files is now, there can be no more excuses. I urge my colleagues to join me in this effort and ask for their support on this measure.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, title II of the omnibus appropriations bill is comprised of several bills that the Senate Banking Committee considered and reported this Congress. Title II contains critical legislation to stabilize the deposit insurance funds, commonly referred to as BIF/SAIF. Title II also contains language based on our committee's lender liability, regulatory relief and fair credit reporting legislation. Our actions today will ensure that the taxpayer will not pay one additional dollar for cleaning up the savings and loan crises. The package we are considering today represents a significant achievement. This time Congress will take the responsible action and resolve a pending problem before another S&L crisis erupts. Mr. President, Congress needs to take action now to resolve the difficulties facing the Savings Association Insurance Fund [SAIF]. The thrift industry has recovered from the dire financial straits it faced in the late 1980's. However, the SAIF, which insures thrift deposits, is in extremely weak financial condition. Currently, the SAIF holds only half the capital it is required to hold under statute. The Bank Insurance Fund [BIF] was fully capitalized in 1995, permitting bank insurance premiums to drop to near zero. SAIF members continue to pay significantly higher rates which means that thrifts will continue to try and move deposits out of SAIF. The possible shrinkage of SAIF also raises the probability of a default on the $800 million in Financing Corporation [FICO] bond interest that thrifts now pay. The BIF/SAIF proposal requires institutions with SAIF deposits to pay a one-time special assessment to full capitalize the SAIF. This special assessment will ensure that thrifts pay their fair share of the costs and will raise $4.1 billion in collections. Beginning January 1, 1997, all FDIC-insured institutions will pay the $800 million annual interest payments due on FICO bonds. Spreading the FICO burden will eliminate the incentive for SAIF deposits incentive to leave the fund. By removing the incentive to shift from SAIF to BIF, SAIF will be a more stable fund. Bank regulators will also have the authority to prevent SAIF deposits from being shifted in the BIF for purposes of evading SAIF assessments. However, Congress does not intend that regulators inappropriately use this authority to prevent institutions from accurately communicating with either existing or potential customers regarding the products and services offered by their institutions. In the long term, the BIF/SAIF provisions would merge the BIF and the SAIF to protect the smaller, less diversified SAIF fund with the broader membership of the BIF. The merger will be dependent on subsequent Congressional action to address the complex issues surrounding the future of the thrift charter. I am hopeful that the next Congress will diligently work to resolve these issues. Mr. President, by accepting these banking provisions, this Congress can also act to lower the cost of regulation to financial institutions and their consumers. The committee-reported regulatory relief provisions go a long way in relieving banks of some of the bureaucratic redtape that increases operating costs for banks and other lenders. Regulatory micromanagement is significant because higher costs for lenders drive up the price of financial products, and ultimately drive up the cost for consumers. The mountain of regulatory redtape that confronts banks is the cumulative result of years of legislation. Laws were passed to achieve any of a number of legitimate private policy concerns. Nevertheless, many of these laws are regulatory overkill. Many of the laws that are amended or repealed by this title do not help to accomplish an intended goal. Other provisions are being amended or repealed because they impose compliance costs that outweigh the discernible benefit. As a result, banks and other financial institutions are overburdened with regulatory mandates that bear no reasonable relationship to safety and soundness, consumer protection or protection of the deposit insurance funds. Title II eliminates many arcane regulatory burdens that just don't make sense. For example, our language eliminates branch application requirements for ATM's. These applications are time consuming for banks to prepare and for the regulators to approve. Our language also eliminates the 90 day prior-notice requirement for moving a branch within the same neighborhood. Title II also removes the 7 percent growth cap on nonbank banks. These provisions will allow banks and other lenders to operate more efficiently and cheaply. They will help to defer the costs that banks will incur as part of the BIF/SAIF package. Title II also contains fair credit reporting reform language. These provisions will ensure that mistakes in credit reports will be corrected quickly and properly. Consumer credit reports play an essential role in the consumer finance markets. These reports allow lenders to make informed credit-granting decisions quickly and cheaply. However, if credit reports are inaccurate, both the consumer and lender lose; the consumer loses an opportunity to obtain needed financing, and the lender loses potential business. The provisions of title II will help make sure that credit reports are accurate, and that any discovered inaccuracies are corrected as soon as practicable. The provisions of title II will also promote greater privacy for the information in credit reports by assuring that credit report information is not distributed wily-nilly, but rather, only to persons with narrowly defined legitimate purposes for using the information. This law will provide significant new privacy protections for consumers. While access to credit information is necessary for a number of legitimate business reasons, and credit reporting allows consumers to obtain prompt credit at low cost, the privacy of consumer credit information must be jealously guarded. Title II will help promote this important privacy goal. Title II also includes the Asset Conservation, Lender Liability and Deposit Insurance Protection Act of 1996. This legislation is based on S. 394, a bill that I introduced at the beginning of this Congress. The lender liability provisions contained in title II represent the results of extensive negotiations among the administration, the lending industry and the interested committees of both Houses. These environmental liability provisions will ensure greater access to credit for small business and for environmental cleanup efforts; they will help fuel economic growth without endangering the environment. It is a clear demonstration of what can be accomplished, on a bipartisan basis, when the administration and the Congress work together to craft commonsense solutions to real problems. I would particularly like to thank Senators Chafee and Smith, the chairman of the Environment Committee and its Superfund Subcommittee, respectively, for their cooperation and assistance with this legislation--they were both instrumental in resolving this major public policy issue. The environmental title clarifies the liability of both secured parties and fiduciaries under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, or Superfund. Court decisions have eviscerated the so-called secured lender exemption contained in the original Superfund law and created uncertainty as to the liability of lenders for cleanup costs. As a result, lenders have been less willing to make loans to small businesses and farms in order to avoid the risk of unlimited liability under CERCLA. Lenders do not make loans to certain types of business because they fear potential liability for environmental damage if they try to protect themselves against default through the foreclosure process. Court decisions also have raised the prospect of fiduciaries being held personally liable for environmental problems on properties held in trust, even when the fiduciary did not create, or contribute to, the problem. Title II clarifies and confirms the original secured creditor exemption. For lenders and fiduciaries, this bill does not remove liability; it simply establishes bright lines tests for liability. These tests should promote greater understanding among all lenders of the ``do's and don'ts'' of environmental liability. As a result of this greater understanding, lenders should become constructively involved in environmental cleanups. This legislation provides the certainty needed by all parties-- lenders, fiduciaries, guarantors, insurers, university foundations, pension administrators as well as a host of borrowers. Federal agencies such as the FDIC also stand in the position of lenders as well as receivers of property and will benefit from the certainty provided by this legislation. For the most part, this legislation codifies the terms of rules of the Environmental Protection Agency on Superfund and on the Solid Waste Disposal Act's underground storage tank provisions. Some sections of the bill merit particular attention. The new section 101(20)(G)(iv) defines the term ``lender'' by providing examples of institutions or activities that qualify an institution as a lender. This laundry list is joined together by the word and between items (VII) and (VIII). Readers of this provision should not be misled or interpret the use of and as establishing an 8- step test--a person may qualify as a lender if it meets any of the requirements provided in (G) (I) through (VII), not all of these requirements. This is just common sense; otherwise, it would be impossible for any institution to qualify as a lender. For instance, none of the Government-sponsored enterprises described in subparagraph (VI), can also qualify as an insured depository institution under subparagraph (I) or as an insured credit union under subparagraph (II)--it just is not possible under current Federal banking law. These provisions should be read as separate tests for qualifying as a lender, and this drafting error should be addressed as soon as possible. This legislation includes a new CERCLA section 107(n)(3). This new section is intended to make clear that the standard for liability under CERCLA for fiduciaries for their negligent acts is the common-law standard for negligence when acting in a fiduciary capacity. The new section 107(n)(4) clarifies that if a fiduciary stays within the specified safe harbors, the fiduciary will not face personal liability; rather, the underlying trust or estate would be liable under the general CERCLA liability rules contained in section 107(a). The definition of fiduciaries, in the new section 107(n)(5) which refers to indenture agreements, participations in debt securities and like activities, is intended to describe the kinds of activities contemplated by the Trust Indenture Act. Trust indentures facilitate corporate borrowings and are similar to mortgages because they provide security for repayment of investors. The trustee protects the interest of security holders who have purchased bonds issued by an obligor developing a project. As with other trustees, indentured trustees face less choice than lenders on whether or not to take possession of the property, as such duties may be required in connection with fulfilling the trustee's fiduciary obligations to the security holders. Because such trust indentures do not arise under the same common law rules as traditional trusts, the language in the new section 107(n)(5)(A)(X) of CERCLA simply assures that these trusts receive the same guidance as provided for other types of trusts. The language in the new section 107(n)(8)(B) of CERCLA (regarding claims against nonemployee agents or independent contractors retained by fiduciaries) refers to such parties engaged in property management or hazardous waste disposal and does not infer that actions should be available against lawyers, accountants and other parties who are retained by a fiduciary but without responsibility for decisionmaking on hazardous materials. The language referring to a lender as one who holds indicia of ownership should not be interpreted to mean that a lender who gives up indicia of ownership, either by transferring a security interest to a third party or by relinquishing the interest, loses the protection of the exemption. Under section 101(20)(F)(ii), if a security holder gives up their interest and is subsequently joined as a party in a suit, the former security interest holder will enjoy the same protection enjoyed while holding the security interest. New section 101(20)(G)(I) is intended to clarify that the defined term extension of credit includes the making or renewal of any loan, the granting of a line of credit or extending credit in any manner, such as an advance by means of an overdraft or the issuance of a standby letter of credit, in addition to the two specifically listed types of lease financing transactions. This legislation makes the same lender and fiduciary provisions that apply under Superfund law applicable to the Solid Waste Disposal Act, and the underground storage tank provisions of that act. The Environmental Protection Agency should move expeditiously to provide guidance consistent with the statutory language for fiduciaries, who are not currently addressed in section 9003(h)(9) or in the current EPA underground storage tank rule. It is my hope that this legislation will encourage environmental cleanups by the private sector, and help to put farm land and urban properties back to full use. Lenders will have clear guidance as to the potential environmental liability they face, and, hopefully, small businesses will be able to obtain credit more easily. Fiduciaries receiving property will be able to operate with greater certainty in undertaking their duties. Mr. President, I want to thank all of my colleagues on the Senate Banking Committee for their hard work on the legislation incorporated in title II. This title contains a significant portion of the committee's agenda for this year. The committee has worked diligently to consider and pass a challenging legislative agenda this Congress. This agenda included Securities litigation reform, BIF/SAIF legislation, Regulatory relief, Fair Credit Reporting Reform, Environmental Lender Liability and Securities Regulatory Reform. The Committee has worked effectively, on a bipartisan basis, and I commend the entire membership of the committee. I would like to thank the ranking member, Senator Sarbanes for his cooperation. I would also like to thank Senators Shelby and Mack for their stewardship of regulatory reform, and Senators Bond and Bryan for their leadership on Fair Credit. Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to support these banking measures which will strengthen our Nation's financial system and protect our taxpayers. regulatory accounting

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, the Senator is absolutely correct. Section 2241 was not in anyway intended to repeal or change the Comptroller's existing authority to grant waivers to foreign bank affiliates under 12 U.S.C. 72. I join with my colleague in stating that it is the intent of this body that the OCC should treat any change to its current exemption authority as a drafting error and should not take any action to implement the change. I will work with my colleague in the 105th Congress to correct the drafting error made by section 2241.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. There is no appeal.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Yes, Senator Bryan. I agree with your assessment on these points.