Alfonse D’Amato

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. I yield to the Senator from North Carolina whatever time he needs, Madam President.

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, Whitewater is a very serious matter. Some questions raised by Whitewater go to the very heart of our democratic system of government. We must determine whether the public trust has been abused. We must ascertain whether purely private interests have been placed above the public trust. The American people have a right to know the full facts about Whitewater and related matters. After the Banking Committee's hearings last year, many important questions still remain. The American people have a right and a need to know the answers to these questions. Congress has the responsibility to serve as the public's watchdog. We would be derelict in our duties if we did not pursue these Whitewater questions. The Senate must proceed in an evenhanded, impartial, and thorough manner. We have a constitutional responsibility to resolve these issues. Mr. President, we now bring before the Senate a resolution that authorizes a special committee administered by the Banking Committee to continue the Whitewater inquiry that was started but not completed during the last Congress. I thank my distinguished colleague, Senator Sarbanes, for his hard work and cooperation in the preparation of this resolution. We have jointly prepared a resolution that is balanced and fair and that will allow the special committee to search for the truth. I am confident that Senator Sarbanes and I will continue the Banking Committee's bipartisan approach to the Whitewater matter. Mr. President, our pursuit of these questions must be and will be fair, straightforward, and responsible. The American people expect and deserve a thorough inquiry committed to the pursuit of truth. That is the American way. Last summer, the Banking Committee met these vigorous requirements. Our examination of the Whitewater matter was impartial, balanced, and thorough. That is our goal in this Congress. I am confident that we will meet these goals. During last summer's hearings, many facts were uncovered. We learned that certain top administration officials were not fully candid and forthcoming with the Congress. That is an undisputed fact. The public has a right to expect more from those in positions of trust. We also learned that senior Treasury Department and Clinton White House officials mishandled confidential law enforcement information concerning Madison Guaranty. That is another undisputed fact. Madison is now defunct; it is a defunct S&L at the heart of the Whitewater matter. The failure of this Arkansas S&L eventually cost American taxpayers more than $47 million. Mr. President, the American people have a right to know the answers to [[Page S6772]] many serious questions still remaining about Whitewater and related matters. We have a constitutional obligation to seek the answers to these questions. That is why I am offering this resolution today. Now I will briefly outline some of the matters that this resolution authorizes the special committee to investigate. We will begin with the handling of the papers in deputy White House counsel Vince Foster's office following his death. Who searched Mr. Foster's office on the night of his death? What were they looking for? What happened to Mr. Foster's papers? Were any papers lost or destroyed? And who authorized the transfer of Mr. Foster's Whitewater file to a closet in the First Family's residence? The public has a right to the answers to these questions. Mr. President, this resolution encourages the special committee to coordinate its activities with those of the independent counsel, Kenneth Starr. Senator Sarbanes and I have met with the independent counsel. Judge Starr has indicated to us that he has no objection to the special committee's plan to inquire into the handling of Mr. Foster's papers. Senator Sarbanes and I are committed to coordinating the committee's activities with those of the special counsel. This resolution authorizes the special committee to pursue answers to other questions raised during the Banking Committee's hearings last year. We will explore the scope and impact of the improper dissemination of confidential law enforcement information concerning Madison Guaranty. How widely did the Clinton administration officials communicate this confidential information? Did any high-ranking officials inform targets of criminal investigations? If so, did this impact any ongoing investigations? The public has a right to know the answers to these questions. The special committee will also examine whether there were any improper contacts between the Clinton White House and the Justice Department regarding Madison Guaranty. We know that Paula Casey, the U.S. attorney in Little Rock, declined to pursue criminal referrals involving Madison. That is an undisputed fact. We also know that Webster Hubbell, who has pleaded guilty to mail fraud and tax evasion, was the No. 3 official at the Justice Department at this critical time. This is another undisputed fact. The committee will ascertain whether Mr. Hubbell contacted Paula Casey about Madison. And who else, if anyone, knew about these contacts with the U.S. attorney. The public has the right to know. Mr. President, this resolution authorizes the special committee to explore whether the Resolution Trust Corporation and other officials in Washington tried to interfere improperly with RTC staff in Kansas City responsible for investigating wrongdoing at Madison. If such interference occurred, who authorized it, and why? The public deserves answers to these questions. During last summer's hearings, the Banking Committee learned that the Treasury inspector general furnished the Clinton White House, at the White House counsel's request, transcripts of the inspector general's depositions. That is an undisputed fact. The committee will now look into whether these deposition transcripts were used to coach administration witnesses before they appeared in front of the committee. That would be wrong. The public has a right to know if it happened. All of these matters that I have discussed so far involve events that occurred after January 1993 when President Clinton took office. There are also serious questions regarding events that occurred in Arkansas in the 1980's when President Clinton was Governor. This resolution also authorizes the special committee to examine these matters. Some of these Arkansas matters are complex and will require the committee's close review of many thousands of pages of documents. We will review the operations and regulations of Madison Guaranty. Did James McDougal, Madison's chairman and Governor Clinton's business partner, improperly divert Madison's funds to himself and others? Did any of this money find its way into the White House real estate project in which McDougal and Governor Clinton were partners? Did McDougal misuse Madison funds to cover any losses the First Family suffered on their Whitewater investment? The public has a right to know the answers to these questions. Mr. President, the resolution further authorizes the special committee to examine the Rose law firm's representation of both Madison and RTC, and senior partners at the Rose law firm, including Larry Rodham Clinton, Webster Hubbell, and Vince Foster. The committee must ascertain whether the Rose law firm properly handled the RTC civil claims concerning Madison. Did the firm have a conflict of interest, and did American taxpayers lose money in the process? We will also examine Capital Management Services and its president, David Hale, a former Arkansas judge and Clinton appointee. Hale has publicly charged that the President pressured him to make Small Business Administration loans that were used to prop up Madison. Did this happen? Did Hale also make improper Small Business Administration loans to current Arkansas Gov. Jim Guy Tucker? Then there is the matter of the financing of the 1990 Arkansas gubernatorial campaign. We now know that the president of the Perry County Bank, Neal Ainley, has pleaded guilty to violating Federal laws in connection with the handling of certain large cash transactions for the Clinton campaign. Ainley claims he did so at the direction of campaign officials. The public has a right to know who authorized this activity and why. Mr. President, this resolution will authorize the special committee to examine these and related matters. We will take every reasonable step to complete this inquiry promptly. We hope that the administration cooperates with us in this regard. But we also intend to be thorough and comprehensive. This resolution provides $950,000 to fund the special committee through February 29, 1996. If additional money is needed, the special committee will make a recommendation not later than January 15, 1996, and the majority and minority will meet to determine the time for any vote. Mr. President, we expect to hold public hearings into the handling of the papers of Vince Foster's office in late June or early July. We will continue our inquiry by subject matter until it is completed. In doing so, we will make every effort not to interfere with the independent counsel's criminal investigation. Mr. President, the American people deserve to know the full facts about Whitewater and related matters. As I said at the outset, we will conduct this inquiry in a fair, evenhanded, and impartial manner. That is what the American people want, expect, and deserve. I urge the approval of this resolution. I see that my distinguished colleague and ranking member, Senator Sarbanes, is here. We have allocated up to 2 hours, equally divided. I yield the floor.

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the resolution was agreed to.

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, we yield back the remainder of our time.

Mr. D'AMATO. Madam President, at this time, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. D'AMATO. Madam President, I know of my good friend, Senator Faircloth's concern that there be ample scope to look into all of the matters that are relevant, and I share that concern. I think that this resolution very fairly embodies us with the authority--and I would refer to page 4. As my friend raises, we did not attempt to spell out every single area. Page 4, line 12, says: Subsection 3. To conduct an investigation and public hearings into and study all matters that have any tendency to reveal the full facts about . . . Then we go through all of the various areas. There are other Senators who are going to speak, but I believe it is important to summarize those areas. Senator Sarbanes has. The fact is that we include the ability to look into the bond underwriting contracts between the Arkansas Development Finance Authority and Lasater & Co., and all of those activities to which my friend has referred. But there must be a connection, and if there is a connection, well, then, we will look into the area, and I will touch on these areas in more detail before our time is up. So I share my friend's concern. This will be thorough. It will be thoughtful. And when subpoenas are issued--and I must tell you that the specific instance that he raises is troubling, that of a witness who failed to respond to a subpoena, especially one who works for the Government, who was given notice, and who gave the committee, either the majority or the minority or our staff, no reason to believe that he would not be there. That will not be tolerated. If we run into a situation like that, I can assure you, and I know that the ranking member shares this same concern, we want people to respond to subpoenas. We will not issue them frivolously. I think in that case a subpoena might not have even been issued because we assumed that he was going to be there. So it is not a bad track record to have almost everybody respond, including even those who were not subpoenaed. But, we will remain vigilant in seeking this kind of cooperation. I see that Senator Bond is in the Chamber, and he is on the Banking Committee and was an integral part of last year's hearings, and I yield to him 10 minutes from my time.

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I send the resolution to the desk on behalf of myself and Senator Dole--and I know others would like to join--and I ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent on behalf of the Governmental Affairs Committee to meet on Wednesday, May 17, at 10 a.m., for a hearing on Executive Reorganization: An Overview of How To Do It.

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 Wednesday, May 17, 1995, at 10 a.m.

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be permitted to meet Wednesday, May 17, 1995, beginning at 9:30 a.m. in room SD-215, to conduct a hearing on Medicare solvency.

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet on Wednesday, May 17, 1995 at 9:30 a.m. in open session to receive testimony on the National Security Implications of the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty--START II.

Mr. D'AMATO

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

Mr. D'AMATO. Will the time start to run as of now?

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I have a resolution which I will shortly be sending to the desk. May I ask, what is the pending business?

Mr. D'AMATO. I believe we have agreed that there will be no more than 2 hours.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I have the greatest respect for the Senator from Alaska and I honor his diligent effort to do what is in the best interests of his great State. I must however oppose this legislation for the reason that I strongly believe it would be damaging to U.S. jobs and national security. Mr. President, 22 years ago, the Trans-Alaska Pipeline Authorization Act of 1973 permitted the building of a pipeline from the North Slope producing fields to Valdez. Through an amendment to section 28 of the Mineral Leasing Act, Congress placed strict prohibitions on exporting Alaskan oil due to the energy crisis. Mr. President, in 1992, this Senate addressed the Nation's overreliance on foreign oil and voted 94 to 4 to reduce the Nation's dependence on imported oil in order to provide for the energy security of the Nation. I have always opposed lifting the Alaskan North Slope [ANS] oil export ban for two reasons: national energy security and the protection of U.S. jobs. Mr. President, since 1973 when the ban was enacted, things have dramatically changed--for the worse in terms of our energy dependence. The situation is not improving. During the early 1970's, the United States imported roughly 22 percent of our total oil consumption; in 1990, imported oil accounted for 39 percent of our oil consumption. The Energy Information Administration recently forecasted that our dependence on foreign oil will exceed 60 percent by the year 2010. Considering the current situation in the Middle East, specifically with regard to Iran, our Nation's continued reliance on foreign oil constitutes a serious threat to our national security as well as to our economy. Mr. President, Iran is a terrorist regime intent on aggression in the gulf. In the past few weeks reports have surfaced suggesting that the regime is stationing more troops, Hawk missiles, and chemical weapons in the Straits of Hormuz. Mr. President, this represents a major threat to the flow of oil to the West. It is clear to all, that the disruption of the flow of oil could be devastating. It is because of the nature of the Iranian threat that I introduced two pieces of legislation, S. 277 and S. 630, which effectively place a total United States trade embargo on Iran, in the case of the first bill, and a global embargo in the second bill. The President's recent Executive order effectively implements my first bill and is a positive step toward cutting off Iran, but we have more to do. When we conduct business with Iran, we are subsidizing Iran's terrorist activities with hard currency. Because of this, we have to cut off our purchases of Iranian crude. Because of the nature of the Iranian, Iraqi, and Libyan regimes, we are currently closed out of 10 percent of the world's oil production by Iran, Iraq, and Libya. Iran's actions in the Middle East may result in a further reduction in our access to oil from this region. The volatile Middle East situation only makes our country's supply of domestically produced oil more essential. Mr. President, not only is our heavy dependence on foreign oil dangerous but it also damages our economy. Boone Pickens, president of Mesa, Inc., of Dallas, TX, testified before the Committee on Foreign Relations, on March 27, 1995, that, The two oil shocks of the 1970's reduced U.S. gross national product by 3.5 percent, increased unemployment by 2 percent, increased interest rates by 2-3 percent, and added 3 percent to the general rate of inflation. He added that, Taken together, the combined impact of these effects on the U.S. economy in the decade following the 1973 Arab oil boycott totaled $1.5 trillion! Mr. President, lifting the ANS oil export ban would not only export oil, it would also export U.S. jobs. Current statutory restrictions on oil exports result in the employment of U.S.-built, U.S.-manned vessels--that is Jones Act tankers--to transport most ANS crude. Under U.S. law, Jones Act tankers must be built in the United States and manned with American crews. However, if ANS exports were allowed, the oil would probably be transported to the Far East on U.S.-flag, non-Jones Act ships. U.S.-flag vessels can be foreign-built and transferred to U.S. registry. Foreign subsidies make it cheaper to build ships abroad than in U.S. yards with American workers. The consequences of Alaska oil exports to the Jones Act tanker fleet would be devastating. ANS exports would result in approximately 20 Jones Act tankers being scrapped and roughly 651 seagoing jobs lost. Against this structural collapse, there would be a modest offset of about 225 new American seagoing jobs on six foreign-built very large crude carriers operating under the U.S. flag from Alaska to Japan in export service. The most significant development in the likely ANS export proposal would tankers. This change would accomplish a longstanding objective of North Slope producers who want to avoid replacing their Jones Act fleets in the United States due to the higher costs of domestic construction. If such export authority were granted, ever-increasing volumes of Alaska oil would be carried to the Far East on foreign built bottoms, thereby eliminating the need to construct replacement tonnage in U.S. yards. Prospective employment losses resulting from ANS exports are estimated to be 7,500 U.S. shipbuilding and allied industry jobs. Mr. President, exporting ANS crude oil would also be catastrophic to the west coast ship repair business. Negative consequences are certain to result because foreign sales of Alaska oil will: First, reduce the overall size of the ANS fleet as well as the number of vessels that must be repaired; and second, make it economically attractive for all U.S. tankships employed in Alaska oil service to have repairs done in less expensive yards located in the Far East. A study concluded that removing the statutory restrictions on the export of Alaska North Slope crude oil will cause the loss of 10,000 U.S. jobs in the maritime shipyard sector alone. Thus, exporting ANS crude will result in measurable harm to this important sector at the very time domestic shipyards are attempting to make the difficult transit from Navy to commercial construction. The U.S. ban on ANS oil exports was done to ease the country's dependence on foreign oil. Today, however, the United States is more dependent on foreign oil than in 1973. Lifting this ban would only serve to increase our vulnerability to blackmail by Iran, who could use oil to hold the United States and the world hostage. Moreover, the United States can ill-afford to ship United States produced oil elsewhere when we are trying to compensate for the loss of Iranian, Iraqi, and Libyan oil. Lifting the ban would export thousands of jobs to foreign countries. It is imperative that we keep the ban on ANS oil exports for the sake of U.S. jobs and our national security. For these reasons, I must respectfully disagree with the honorable Senator from Alaska and oppose his legislation, S. 395.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I would like to express my sincere congratulations today to a great artist and a great man, Morton Gould. Considering Mr. Gould's numerous lifetime achievements in music, he is well deserving of the high honor that has been presented to him, the 1994 Pulitzer Prize for music composition. Born in Richmond Hill, NY, on December 10, 1913, Mr. Gould's music career began at age 6 with his first published piece, a waltz, appropriately titled ``Just Six.'' At age 8, Mr. Gould entered the Institute of Musical Arts in New York City on scholarship and continued studying and playing music until his teens. After having to leave school for financial reasons and working for a while as a pianist for vaudeville acts, he landed a job as a pianist for the Radio City Music Hall. By the time he was 21, Mr. Gould was introducing his work through conducting and arranging a weekly series of orchestra radio programs for the Mutual Radio Network. Mr. Gould's unique blend of music, resonating of jazz, folk, hymns, spirituals, gospel, and Latin-American, reflects the lyrical cross- section of America that makes his work so well loved. Some of his more popular works include: ``Latin-American Symphonette''; ``Spirituals for Orchestra''; ``Tap Dance Concerto''; ``Jekyll and Hyde Variations''; ``American Salute and Derivations for Clarinet and Band'' written for the late Benny Goodman. ``Pavanne,'' from Gould's ``Second Symphonette'' has become one of the most widely performed instrumental standards. During his distinguished career he has composed works for Broadway musicals, dance, ballet, film, and television. His work has been commissioned by symphony orchestras, the Library of Congress, the Chamber Music Society of Lincoln Center, the New York City Ballet, and the American Ballet Theatre. His compositions have been performed around the world by many great conductors of today as well as those of the past, including the great talents of Arturo Toscanini, Leopold Stokowski, Artur Rodzinski, Dimitri Mitopoulos, and Fritz Reiner. While Mr. Gould's work has spanned the greater part of this century, he has always managed to remain contemporary. Beginning with LP's, his multitude of works have made their way into each new recording medium, including the new digital recording technology which he was one of the first to use as early as 1978. As an artist himself, Mr. Gould has long fought to protect the rights of all musical creators. Since 1935, he has been a member of the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers, the oldest performing rights organizations in the world. He has also served on the organization's board of directors since 1959 and from 1986-94, he was its president. His many awards include a Grammy and a number of Grammy nominations; the 1983 Gold Baton Award, presented by the American Symphony Orchestra League; the 1985 Medal of Honor for Music from the National Arts Club; 1986 election to the American Academy of Arts and Letters; and the National Music Council's Golden Eagle Award. And in December 1994, Mr. Gould was presented with a lifetime achievement award by the Kennedy Center. Last March 10, 11, and 12, Mstislav Rostropovich conducted the National Symphony Orchestra of Washington, DC, in the world premier of Mr. Gould's ``Stringmusic,'' for which he received the Pulitzer Prize. This extraordinary piece was commissioned by the Hechinger Foundation in honor of Mr. Rostropovich's last season as musical director of the National Symphony Orchestra and to honor Mr. Gould's 80th birthday. As a fellow New Yorker and fellow American, I salute Mr. Gould's accomplishments and contributions through his music which have given so much to us all and forever enriched our lives.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, at this time I would like to pay tribute to an outstanding professor at New York University by the name of Jan Moor-Jankowski. Dr. Moor-Jankowski, a world renowned research physician and trailblazer on scientific first amendment rights, has been unanimously elected to the late Dr. Linus Pauling's chair at the French National Academy of Medicine, Division of Biologic Sciences. The origins of the French Academy of Medicine extend to the Royal Academies of the 18th century. The Academy provides a forum for medical debates and advises the French Government on health-related matters. Louis Pasteur was one of its notable members. A limited number of distinguished non-French scientists are elected to provide representation of the world-wide scientific community. An election is for lifetime and only occurs when a chair is vacated. Election to the Academy is one of France's highest and rarest honors, reserved for the most respected scientist in the world. At the time of his election, Nobel Prize winner Dr. Pauling was virtually a household name thanks to his groundbreaking theories on the effects of vitamins on cancer and other diseases. Like Dr. Pauling, Dr. Moor-Jankowski was chosen from a list of highly regarded candidates as the sole U.S. citizen to be honored with membership on the biological sciences board of the Academy. For example, this latest award is only the last in a string of scientific honors bestowed on Dr. Moor-Jankowski. In 1994, he was given the William J. Brennan, Jr. Defense of Freedom Award by the Libel Defense Resource Center. In addition, in 1984, Dr. Moor-Jankowski was made a Knight of the French Order ``Ordre National de Merite'' for World War II resistance and scientific achievements. Other medals and awards from Israel, the U.S.S.R., Italy, and Switzerland have punctuated his career. Dr. Moor-Jankowski is an alumnus of the Swiss universities of Fribourg and Berne. He began his career at the University of Geneva where his research interests in the study of polymorphic phenotypic expressions of the genetic substrate of man led to his discovery of clinically silent hemophilia B, and of the significant genetic drift of blood group frequencies in the inhabitants of the highest Alpine villages. During subsequent research at Cambridge University, Dr. Moor- Jankowski discovered the polymorphism of allotypes of serum proteins in mice and monkeys. For the past 30 years, Dr. Moor-Jankowski's laboratory, LEMSIP, has been participating in international collaborative studies leading to the development of the first tests for and vaccines against various forms of infectious hepatitis, and since 1987, in collaboration with Institute Pasteur, Paris, in the development of the first vaccines against AIDS. He also serves as Director of the World Health Organization Collaborating Center for Hematology of Primate Animals, and is editor- in-chief of the Journal of Medical Primatology. Again I would like to take this time to honor an outstanding New York resident who has devoted his life to enhancing the quality of life in this country and toward solving world health problems. We wish him continued success in all future endeavors.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I rise today to comment on an interview that appeared in the New York Times, on Sunday, May 14, 1995, entitled, ``Iran Says It Plans 10 Nuclear Plants But No Atom Arms.'' I must say that the interview is quite candid in as much as we have the Director of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization, Reza Amrollahi, stating that his nation intends to build as many as 10 nuclear reactors throughout the country. What we have is an Iranian official publicly stating the number of reactors Iran wants to build, as well as confirming that Iran is buying two more Chinese reactors, in addition to the Russian reactors they intend to purchase. This is remarkable and scary. Mr. President, this interview only confirms what I have been saying all along. The terrorist regime in Iran is bent on aggression and will not stop. It is bad enough that they are abusing the human rights of the Iranian people and hijacking their rich history, but they are sacrificing the Iranian people's welfare in return for a headlong drive for nuclear armament. This is all very unfortunate for the abused Iranian people and dangerous for the world. I hope that Iranians remember what their corrupt government did to them. Mr. President, I ask that the text of the above-mentioned article be printed in the Record. [From the New York Times, May 14, 1995] Iran Says it Plans 10 Nuclear Plants But No Atom Arms (By Elaine Sciolino) Teheran, Iran, May 13--Iran's top nuclear official said today that his country intended to build about 10 nuclear power plants in the next two decades, but denied charges by the United States that Iran is trying to develop nuclear weapons. The official, Reza Amrollahi, also said that last year he signed a formal contract with China for two nuclear power reactors and that Chinese experts had completed a feasibility study and had begun to draw up blueprints and engineering reports for a site in southern Iran. Iran has already made a ``down payment'' for the project, which will cost $800 million to $900 million and involve training by Chinese experts, said Mr. Amrollahi, director of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization. Although the United States has doubted that China is capable of building the reactors on its own because the original model included parts from Germany and Japan, Mr. Amrollahi said the Chinese now believed that they had successfully duplicated the technology. The United States has led a global campaign to prevent Iran from receiving any nuclear technology because of its suspected weapons program. Mr. Amrollahi's statements suggest that the agreement with China is much further along than was previously known, and that Iran is planning a vast long-range nuclear energy program. They seem certain to strengthen the conviction both within the Clinton Administration and Congress that Iran is determined to become a nuclear power. In addition to its oil reserves Iran has the second largest natural gas reserves in the world, and natural gas is much cheaper to develop than nuclear energy. That makes American officials suspicious that Iran wants nuclear power as part of a weapons program. In a clear attempt to answer charges that Iran is developing nuclear weapons, Mr. Amrollahi made his remarks in a two-and-a-half-hour interview at his agency's new six-story building. It is part of a sprawling complex in central Teheran that includes a small nuclear research reactor built for Iran by the United States in the late 1960's, when the monarchy was in power and the relationship with Washington was close. Officials offered a brief tour of the complex, including a visit to two radio isotope laboratories for medical research, although they did not allow a tour of the reactor. ``In case we get enough money, in case we have enough trained people, we have a plan to take 20 years to get 20 percent of our energy from nuclear,'' Mr. Amrollahi said. Asked whether that could mean about 10 reactors, he said, ``Something like that.'' If Russia completes two reactor projects in Iran, and China builds two, it would mean that the Iranian Government intends to build six more throughout the country. At the summit meeting in Moscow this week, President Clinton tried without success to persuade President Boris N. Yeltsin to abandon an ambitious nuclear energy project with Iran, arguing that its Islamic Government had embarked on a crash nuclear weapons program and that even peaceful nuclear cooperation was dangerous. Secretary of State Warren Christopher was similarly rebuffed when he made the same point to China's Foreign Minister, Qian Quichen, in New York last month. Mr. Amrollahi reiterated that Iran had already invested $6 billion in the project--which is subject to international inspection and safeguards--and wanted to finish it. He said the contract with Moscow consists of a $780 million deal in which Russia will complete one of two reactors that a German firm was building at the southern port city of Bushehr before the project was halted after the 1979 revolution. If that project goes well, Russia will finish the second reactor. The United States opposes the project in part because it will give Iran access to expertise, technology and training it would not otherwise have. Mr. Amrollahi said that 150 Russian nuclear experts were already working at the site and that 500 would eventually be based there; a much smaller number of Iranians will be trained in Russia on how to operate the plant, he added. ``Training people is part of that nuclear power plan,'' he said. ``I don't know why they make such a hot fudge of it.'' Mr. Amrollahi denied reports that Iran had negotiated--or even discussed--a plan to buy a gas centrifuge from Russia that could have rapidly enriched uranium to bomb-grade quality. ``This was a diplomatically made cake,'' he said of reports from Washington about the existence of a separate, albeit tentative agreement with Russia. Russia has agreed to supply the enriched uranium needed to operate the plant it will finish, he said. Asked whether Iran was pursuing a program to enrich uranium, at first he said, ``Not now,'' but added quickly: ``No. Not forever. Not. No. Not at all.'' Asked why Iran simply doesn't use natural gas for fuel, Mr. Amrollahi said, ``natural gas is one of the best fuels, and many countries at the moment need it. So we think it is better to sell it.'' Like many of Iran's nuclear specialists, Mr. Amrollahi has been educated and trained in the West. He holds a master's degree in electrical engineering from the from the University of Paris. He briefly worked for the Belgian Government in nuclear safety in the 1970's. He has headed Iran's nuclear program for 15 years, and spoke with precision when discussing Iran's official nuclear reactor and research sites in Iran. But the United States and Germany have amassed substantial evidence that Iran is secretly buying components and technology from abroad that they claim are not necessary for nuclear energy development or research and can only be useful in a determined weapons program. American and German intelligence officials believe that Mr. Amrollahi controls only part of Iran's nuclear program and that Iran has created a parallel program through the military that is largely responsible for purchases of nuclear related items. According to this view, the Defense Ministry Organization inside the Defense Ministry uses front organizations like the Sharif University of Technology in Teheran to help buy nuclear-related equipment. On the basis of reports by Germany's foreign intelligence agency in 1992 and 1993 that Sharif was involved in secret nuclear activities, Germany began to reject all requests for equipment by the university. Early last year, the German agency said that the university's physics research center was involved in buying technology that could be used in making weapons, including nuclear-related materials. Mr. Amrollahi strongly denied the claim that he was not fully in charge. ``I am responsible for the atomic energy of Iran,'' he said, ``Believe it, we don't have any other institutions or departments that pay attention to nuclear issues.'' Mr. Amrollahi also denied reports that Iran secretly has been buying nuclear technology and equipment from abroad, noting that the International Atomic Energy Agency, which is responsible for monitoring nuclear programs around the world, turned up nothing suspicious during a visit to Sharif University. But the nuclear chief was unfamiliar with intelligence reports about Iran's nuclear-related overtures abroad and asked for copies of news clippings describing the details. Asked, for example, about a report that Iran tried unsuccessfully to buy cylinders of fluorine for Sharif University in 1991, Mr. Amrollahi said, ``Wrong. I deny it totally.'' Asked about a report that Sharif University approached the German firm Thyssen in 1991 for specialized magnets he replied, ``No, we never did.'' Asked whether Sharif University tried to buy balancing machines from another German firm in 1991, he replied, ``You can go and ask Sharif University.'' Asked about a seizure by Italian authorities of high technology ultrasonic equipment that could be used in nuclear reactor testing in the Italian port of Bari last January, he replied, ``Believe it, that's wrong, totally.'' Asked about an earlier seizure by Italian customs of eight steam condensers destined for Iran in 1993, he said, ``I don't know really. I don't know. It's totally wrong.'' Mr. Amrollahi also denied a recent charge by Mr. Christopher, based on American intelligence reports, that Iran tried to buy enriched uranium from Kazakhstan in 1992. Other senior American officials in Washington said that Iran sent a purchasing team to Kazakhstan three years ago, but that it came home empty-handed. The visit contributed to a decision by the Pentagon last year to secretly airlift 500 kilograms of bomb-grade uranium from Kazakhstan's nuclear fabrication plant for safe storage in the United States. ``We didn't send any team,'' Mr. Amrollahi said. ``Definitely not. What is the use of enriched uranium for? The Russians do have many, many nuclear weapons but they couldn't use them. I think the bomb age is over. We don't think we need a nuclear weapon.''

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I rise today to honor the men and women who gave their lives so that we may be protected. Aware of the dangers that face them everyday, law enforcement officers carry out their duties to protect the lives of others. Too often, their own lives are lost. Unfortunately, this year, 298 additional names will be carved into the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial, here in Washington, DC. It is only fitting that on this day I pay tribute to several New York law enforcement officers who died in the line of duty. On March 15, 1994, Officer Sean McDonald was brutally slain while on duty in the 44th Precinct in New York. His murder occurred as he attempted to save two people from a robbery attempt. In a few short moments, while a series of gunshots, these ruthless cowards stole the life of a dedicated police officer, husband and father. In a similar incident on May 20 of 1994, a perpetrator fatally shot Investigator Ricky J. Parisian, a devoted officer in Oneonta, NY. Investigator Parisian's life was abruptly ended when the robber he was struggling with shot him. He was 34 years old. Several other names will also be added to the memorial. The names to be added include law enforcement officers who were also killed in the line of duty in 1994. These officers include: Police Officer Nicholas DeMutis of the New York City Police Department who was killed on January 25th, Police Officer Jose Perez of the New York City Police Department who was killed on April 27, Police Officer John J. Venus of the Suffolk County Police Department who was killed on November 20, and Police Officer Raymond R. Cannon, Jr., of the New York City Police Department who was killed in December 1994. The memorial will also hold the names of officers who died in the line of duty before 1994 but were not listed until this year, including: Police Officer John Cahill of the Haverstraw Village Police Department, Police Officer Francis J. Donato, Jr., of the New York State Park Police, Police Officer John Bauer of the Cheektowaga Police Department, and Sgt. David C. Pettigrew of the Freeport Police Department. On this day of remembrance, I would like to recognize the heroic service of officers across the United States who risk their lives each and every day, in every city, county, and State in this country, so that we may live in safety. The National Law Enforcement Officer Memorial was dedicated in 1991 and presently holds 1,293 names. This memorial is a way to express our Nation's appreciation of law enforcement officers and their efforts to fight crime and protect our families. This year's memorial observation is also an opportunity for this Congress to renew our pledge to make our communities safer. By passing legislation that will require tougher sentences for convicted criminals, this Congress can do its part. If law enforcement officers can patrol our streets, risking their lives, then the least we can do is make sure that these criminals are not back on the streets before they have fully served their time.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. I may have some very comprehensive, exhaustive amendments. I hope I do not have to offer them.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Bank Insurance distinguished colleague from Connecticut, Senator Dodd. This bill, which is substantially similar to S. 2548, the bill that Senator Dodd and I introduced last October, makes an essential change to the definition of a ``deposit'' contained in the Federal Deposit Insurance Act. Companion legislation was introduced in the House of Representatives last Wednesday. The House bill, H.R. 1574, was introduced by Representative Roukema and received bipartisan cosponsorship from Representatives McCollum, Vento, and Kanjorski. This amendment to the Federal Deposit Insurance Act is necessary to address a recent development in the banking industry--the so-called retirement CD. This product, which is essentially a deferred annuity, is offered and underwritten by banks. Senator Dodd and I, along with several other Banking Committee members, raised a number of concerns about the retirement CD in a letter to the FDIC and the Comptroller of the Currency last year. Nevertheless, the Comptroller of the Currency and the FDIC have permitted the offering of this investment vehicle, with FDIC insurance protection. In light of this, Congress must act to clarify the law. Mr. President, we are talking about banks, with little or no annuity underwriting experience, guided simply by computer software, assuming the underwriting risk that is attendant to this insured hybrid investment vehicle. This is not an empty concern--at least three federally insured banks have taken advantage of this breach in the regulatory scheme and are offering this investment vehicle. Allegedly, a number of other federally insured banks are getting ready to do so. And what will happen if these institutions cannot properly manage the underwriting risk? If any of these banks mismanage this risk and fail, the only guaranteed insurer will be the FDIC insurance fund, and ultimately, perhaps, the American taxpayer. Mr. President, the IRS recently issued a proposed regulation pertaining to the retirement CD's tax-deferred status. Nevertheless, banks may still offer this product, and the integrity of the bank insurance fund must be protected. The fund must not be used as a safety net for untested and uncertain investment vehicles. And that's exactly the risk that this legislation will protect against. This bill precludes the extension of FDIC insurance protection to this bank- underwritten investment vehicle. Nothing more and nothing less. I have carefully considered the arguments offered in support of this product and I remain extremely concerned about the threat this product could pose to the bank insurance fund. Mr. President, this bill will protect the bank insurance fund against potential losses that are attributable to any retirement CD that has been underwritten by any bank since last October. This bill retains the effective date employed last Congress in S. 2548--October 6, 1994. This effective date is justified, since both industry and the regulators were put on notice of congressional concerns well before that time. Further, this effective date has been retained in fairness to those institutions that deferred to congressional concerns and did not pursue the marketing of this investment product. Mr. President, this bill was drafted with the intention of avoiding any undesired effects on standard deposit products that banks commonly offer today. For instance, qualified plans and individual retirement accounts are not intended to be covered by this legislation, to the extent that they do not generate depository institution liabilities that constitute annuity contracts. This is the case even if the depository institution liability has tax-deferred status under section 72 of the Internal Revenue Code. Mr. President, this bill is being introduced in order to provide further congressional guidance as to the appropriate scope and operation of Federal banking law and the proper use of Federal deposit insurance. This bill makes sense in terms of bank insurance fund protection, safe-and-sound banking practices, and ultimately, taxpayer protection. The bank insurance fund exists to protect the ordinary depositor--it should not be used to give bank-offered financial products a competitive marketing edge. Competitive innovations should always be welcomed, but not the misuse of Federal deposit insurance. I hope my colleagues will support this legislation.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I rise today to join the distinguished majority leader, Senator Dole, as an original cosponsor of the Jerusalem Embassy Relocation Implementation Act of 1995. It is outrageous that the United States has diplomatic relations with 184 countries throughout the world and in every one, but Israel, our Embassy is in the functioning capital. In Israel, our Embassy is in Tel Aviv. I see no reason why this should be the case. It is wrong and it must end now. Jerusalem should not be thrown around like a bone to Yasir Arafat. Israel has endured much throughout her history and for her to have to suffer the indignity of her main ally refusing to place its Embassy in her functioning capital is an insult. With the exception of the Sinai given back under the treaty with Egypt, she has had to fight again and again for the same pieces of land. Jerusalem, however, is a different case. Jerusalem, the holy city and ancient capital of Israel, must never again become divided. It was for this reason that Senator Moynihan, myself, and 91 other Members of the Senate sent a joint letter to the Secretary of State urging him to begin planning now for the relocation of the Embassy to Jerusalem by no later than May 1999. This letter was sent in March of this year. To date, there has been no reply. This is unfortunate. The matter is simple. Jerusalem is and will remain the permanent and undivided capital of a sovereign Israel. I'm not going to let the State Department bureaucrats forget that. I call on the President to recognize this and to begin the process toward moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem. It is shameful that the United States continues to bend to pressure to place the American Embassy in Tel Aviv and not in Jerusalem. Mr. President, while I understand that the present negotiations are delicate, I do not want this administration to be under the impression that Jerusalem is some prize to be claimed by the Palestinians or anyone else. Let the message be clear: A united Jerusalem is off limits for negotiation. Jerusalem belongs to Israel and our Embassy belongs in Jerusalem. I urge my colleagues to support this important bill and I urge its swift passage so that our Embassy in Israel can finally be rightfully located in Jerusalem. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that my remarks appear in the Record along with those of Senator Dole and the other cosponsors of this legislation.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my distinguished colleague from Delaware, Senator Roth, in submitting a resolution to prevent further restriction of the Federal income tax deduction for home mortgage interest. To further limit or eliminate the deductibility of mortgage interest for homeowners--the majority of which are middle- income Americans--would be to restrict their ability to buy into the American dream. It is no secret that homeownership is a fundamental American ideal. Cutting or wiping out this deduction, which has been available to Americans since 1913, will simply put the possibility of homeownership out of reach for many Americans. The mortgage interest deduction is one of a number of tax benefits that serves a good social purpose. It is not an unintended loophole but, rather, a provision created to foster investment by the private sector. The home mortgage interest deduction has served as one of the cornerstones of our national housing policy, making us one of the best housed countries in the world and creating safe and secure neighborhoods. Further restrictions could also have a disastrous effect on the American housing industry, especially if interest rates continue to rise. People simply will not be able to buy homes, which would have a devastating impact on the economy, particularly the banking, lending and construction industries. Higher unemployment rates would result and local governments would suffer, as shrinking homeownership would, in turn, mean a dwindling tax base. Mr. President, the National Association of Home Builders estimates that eliminating the home mortgage interest deduction would reduce the value of an average American home by about 20 percent. For all intents and purposes this would have the effect of a heavy tax increase. For the sake of the economy and middle-income Americans we cannot erode the American dream: homeownership.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss the ongoing situation in Iran. Clearly, the situation in Iran today is one of desperation. The Iranian people, suffering the depredations of 16 years of rule by a corrupt, terrorist, regime, deserve better. They deserve to have a government that respects the rich and dignified history of the Iranian people. Unfortunately, what they have gotten is a government that violates their human rights and has brought a formerly rich and varied economy down upon the shoulders of the people, suffocating them. While we know that the regime in Teheran practices terrorism with great frequency throughout the world, most people forget that they also inflict terror against their own people. If they will torture and execute their own people, what respect will they have for those of other nations? Mr. President, today we must understand one simple fact: the terrorist regime in Iran does not represent the Iranian people. It represents murder, terror, and destruction, nothing more and nothing less. The Iranian people deserve better, and they deserve freedom from the corrupt rule of the terrorist regime that calls itself the Government of Iran.