Tom Daschle

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, on behalf of my colleagues on the Judiciary Committee, on that, too, I must object.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I would like to speak in honor of the special 25th annual banquet for the Foster Grandparents Program in Aberdeen. I would like to recognize most especially Linda Dillavou for all the hard work and time she has put into the Foster Grandparent Program. The success of their operation is due in no small part to her dedication and hard work. For the past 25 years, this Foster Grandparents organization has strengthened the Aberdeen community by providing services to children that local budgets cannot afford. It has built important bridges across the generations. Those of you gathered here this evening offer emotional support for those children who have been abused or neglected, mentor troubled teens and young mothers, and care for premature infants and children with physical disabilities. ``Grannies'' and ``Granddads'' serve one-on-one with children. They tutor, counsel, assist, guide or help in a variety of ways--whatever is needed. They serve in schools, hospitals, shelters, Head Start, and other child-serving facilities. They represent one of South Dakota's growing resources. The United States is in the midst of a demographic revolution. There are twice as many older adults today as there were 30 years ago; soon nearly a quarter of the population will be more than 65 years old. By the middle of the next century, for the first time, the number of Americans over 65 will exceed those under 18. For the most part, this transformation is portrayed as a source of new strains on South Dakota families, the economy, and the Federal budget. But the prevailing pessimism about the graying of America is blinding us to the great promise of this change. The talent and civic potential they provide for South Dakota is immeasurable. After all, our senior population is, quite possibly, this country's best increasing natural resource. Why? They share the time they have. They offer practical wisdom, gained from experience, and carry with them a world otherwise lost to younger generations. Seniors also have special reason to become involved in the civic and voluntary work that others cannot perform. The awareness that comes with age inspires reflection about the legacy that we leave behind: we are what survives of us, especially through these children. Their 25 year history is, indeed, impressive. To help us all appreciate how far this organization has come, I'd like to share the story of this organization's beginning--a story of a historical accident rather than enlightened vision. President Johnson--in an attempt to help poor seniors--ordered the Office of Aging at the Department of Health, Education and Welfare to devise an initiative engaging low-income seniors in community service for vulnerable children. When the office was unveiled, what would become the Foster Grandparent Program was rejected as preposterous by the Nation's most progressive children's organizations--mostly hospitals and large institutions for developmentally disabled youth. The seniors would have little to contribute to children, they complained; besides, they would spread disease and probably even lack the wherewithal to get to the job. The agencies actually refused to take the Government's money. Times have certainly changed. Given this history, we should challenge ourselves to imagine new institutions that make full use of the resources of age for the next successful 25 years for the Aberdeen Foster Grandparents. Pilot programs suggest the kinds of contributions seniors might make. In Hilton Head, SC, a group of retired physicians and nurses have formed a free health clinic providing, among other things, preventive care for low-income families. In Virginia and Montana, the Senior Environmental Corps is dedicated to alerting doctors, the elderly, and the public to the special environmental hazards faced by the older population. In Massachusetts, a group of downsized electrical workers is helping young ex-criminal offenders make the transition to productive life in the community. This Aberdeen Foster Grandparent Program--on the occasion of their 25th anniversary--is our best glimpse at how we can benefit from the energy and talent of older Americans on a grander scale. The record of the Foster Grandparent Program suggests that if we build appealing service opportunities for older adults, they will come forward and lend a hand. I congratulate the Aberdeen Foster Grandparents on this very special occasion, and I thank them for giving selflessly of their time to make the past 25 years so successful.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, as hard as it is for me to believe, it was 8 years ago this month that the Berlin Wall came tumbling down. Who among us can forget the stirring pictures of that moment? The entire world watched as jubilant Germans, separated for 38 years by a man-made scar running the length of their country, breached this once impregnable barrier. In so doing, they not only united Germany, they brought together a continent. The dismantlement of the wall dramatically symbolized to all that democracy had at last triumphed over totalitarianism. The fall of the wall set in motion a series of incredible events. In June 1991, Boris Yeltsin became the first democratically elected Russian President. Two months later Yeltsin disbanded the Communist Party. By the end of 1991, the Soviet Union itself ceased to exist. And the Warsaw Pact, the once fearsome military alliance established to counter and defeat NATO, was officially dissolved. After five decades of tension, the loss of thousands of lives, and the expenditure of several trillion dollars, the cold war was over. However, as the euphoria of this historic occasion began to melt away, leaders in the United States, Europe, and Russia began to realize that the national security paradigms they had used for nearly half a century no longer applied. They would be required to think anew--a task that presented both challenges and opportunities. President George Bush took the first steps toward aligning our national security posture with the emerging post-cold war realities in September 1991. Acting on the advice of Gen. George Butler, the commander in chief of the U.S. Strategic Command, President Bush ordered the U.S. Air Force to stand-down the portion of our strategic bomber force it had kept ready to fly at a moment's notice for most of the cold war. Shortly thereafter, the nuclear weapons on-board these planes were removed and placed in storage. President Bush would also take off alert status those strategic missiles earmarked for elimination under the START I Treaty. President Clinton has also contributed to solving our post-cold war security concerns. Under his leadership, the Senate ratified the START II Treaty, which limits the United States and Russia to no more than 3,500 strategic weapons. President Clinton completed negotiations on the Chemical Weapons Convention and secured the Senate's approval this past April. The CWC treaty would eliminate the scourge of chemical weapons from the face of the Earth. And finally, just 1 month ago, President Clinton submitted to the Senate the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. If enacted, this treaty would be a useful tool in our efforts to stem proliferation. I hope the Senate will be allowed to act on this treaty when we return. While we have made some progress in realigning our national security policies to more fully reflect the realities of the post-cold war world, we still have much more to accomplish. Perhaps the most startling and dramatic indicator of how far we have to go is the fact that, as I stand here today--8 years after the fall of the Berlin Wall--the United States and Russia still possess roughly 14,000 strategic nuclear weapons and tens of thousands more tactical nuclear weapons. And even more alarming, both sides keep the vast majority of their strategic weapons on a high level of alert. In a recent editorial, former Senator Sam Nunn and Dr. Bruce Blair assert that each nuclear superpower maintains roughly 3,000 strategic nuclear warheads ready to launch at a moment's notice. According to Nunn and Blair, while this practice may have been necessary during the cold war, ``today [it] constitutes a dangerous anachronism.'' Mr. President, I believe we can and must do much more to address the threat posed by nuclear weapons. On September 17, I sent a letter to the Congressional Budget Office asking them to assess the budgetary and security consequences of a series of measures designed to reduce the spread of nuclear weapons and the likelihood they would ever be used. I expect to receive preliminary results from this inquiry by early next year. In addition, I conducted a meeting earlier this week to explore one particular means of reducing the risk of unauthorized or accidental use of nuclear weapons--removing from alert status some fraction of the strategic ballistic missile force. As a result of this meeting and a series of discussions with Senator Nunn, Dr. Blair, and General Butler, I am convinced that it is time to seriously consider de-alerting at least a portion of our strategic ballistic missile. I say this for several reasons. First, the likelihood of a surprise, bolt-out-of-the-blue attack of our strategic nuclear forces is unimaginable if not impossible in today's world. Keeping large numbers of weapons on high alert status fails to recognize this reality. Second, concerns are growing about the reliability and condition of the Russian early warning and command and control systems. United States security depends on the Russians' ability to accurately assess the status of United States forces and to control their own forces. Public reports indicate their early warning sensors are aging and incomplete, their command and control system is deteriorating, and the morale of the personnel operating these systems is suffering as a result of the lack of pay and difficult working conditions. It is in our interest to have Russian missiles taken off alert and Russian leaders given more time to interpret and respond to events. Third, de-alerting a portion of our strategic missile force now could strengthen the hand of those in the Russian Duma who support START II and other United States-Russian security measures. De-alerting some United States strategic missiles could send an important signal at a crucial stage in Russia's consideration of the START II Treaty. In addition, when President Bush took unilateral action to de-alert a portion of our strategic forces, President Gorbachev reciprocated by removing from alert a number of Russian land- and sea-based missiles. Finally, de-alerting a portion of our strategic missile force would not sacrifice U.S. security. The United States has already indicated a willingness to reduce its total strategic force to as few as 2,000 weapons. Even if we were to de-alert the entire MX force, the United States would retain roughly 2,500 weapons on alert status, and several thousand more could be made ready to launch. Moreover, should circumstances warrant, the United States could reverse any de-alerting measures it may take. Mr. President, despite the fact that the Soviet Union dissolved and the cold war ended, the risks posed by nuclear weapons persist and evolve. I plan to do what I can to explore options for reducing these risks. I believe de-alerting a portion of our missile force merits further study in this regard. I look forward to working with my colleagues and the administration in the next session of Congress to fully explore this measure as well as any other that could lessen the dangers of nuclear weapons. Mr. President, I yield the floor. Mr. ROCKEFELLER addressed the Chair.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, as we work through the Executive Calendar in the closing hours of the first session of the 105th Congress, I want to call my colleagues' attention to the President's nominee to be Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Indian Affairs, Kevin Gover of Albuquerque, New Mexico. This appointment is important to my state and my constituents. Approximately 70,000 Native Americans live on nine reservations in South Dakota. Their daily lives are greatly affected by the activities of the BIA. The appointment is also important to the nation as a whole. Anyone familiar with American history or who believes in the American dream of equal opportunity for all has a stake in federal Indian policy. The Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Indian Affairs play a critical role in setting the agenda for the Bureau of Indian Affairs and has a great impact on the success or failure of federal Indian policy. He or she must understand the history of federal/Indian relations and have a vision for the future of this relationship. The Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs must not only be accessible to tribal leaders, but also serve as an effective advocate for Indian people within the Executive branch decision-making circles. Finally, the Assistant Secretary must be a manager of the agency as well as a spokesperson for Administration policy. Kevin Gover is a strong nominee to lead the Bureau of Indian Affairs. He is an enrolled member of the Pawnee Tribe of Oklahoma and is a partner in the law firm Gover, Williams and Janov in Albuquerque, New Mexico. He received his JD from the University of New Mexico and has specialized in federal Indian law, natural resource law, environmental law and housing law. Kevin Gover has not only the intellectual capability and legal skill, but also the practical experience needed to be effective as Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Indian Affairs. He has worked in Indian Country long enough to see the successes and failures of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and he has the perspective to help chart its course to the future. Those of us in this chamber who represent significant Indian constituencies can all attest to the magnitude, complexity and significance of the challenges facing the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Tribal leaders in South Dakota have discussed with me their concerns about broad and important issues such as economic development, education, housing and health care. The BIA must be prepared to play a fair and constructive role in addressing these and other concerns about the quality of life on our reservations. I expect we all want the next Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Indian Affairs to possess the intellect, vision, leadership skills and wisdom to make this organization more effective and responsive to the ever-changing needs of those it serves. I believe Kevin Gover possesses these qualities. There has been some concern expressed about the role Mr. Gover played as a private attorney in gaming activities in New Mexico. Senator Campbell, Chairman of the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, and Senator Inouye, Vice Chair of the Committee, have both had an opportunity to review the FBI background report on Mr. Gover. They reported in the Committee hearing that they found nothing that should disqualify Mr. Gover from serving as Assistant Secretary. This review obviously included his activities as counsel to tribes with gaming operations in New Mexico. Moreover, in his confirmation hearings, Mr. Gover made clear that while he makes no apology for his support of Indian gaming, as Assistant Secretary he will not tolerate illegal gaming. Kevin Gover has strong support throughout Indian Country. He enjoys this support because tribes realize that the Bureau of Indian Affairs needs a leader like Kevin Gover to move the BIA into the 21st century. I support this nomination and encourage my colleagues to do likewise.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, today I am reintroducing legislation to provide employees of congressional contractors the same access to health coverage as other congressional workers. This bill should have passed last year, when I was thwarted in an effort to pass this measure as an amendment to the Treasury-Postal Appropriations bill. Instead, another 12 months have gone by in which workers in this very building lack health insurance while you and I and our staffs have access to a wide variety of subsidized health plans. In fact, about 1,900 employees of companies that contract with the Federal Government do not have employer-sponsored health insurance. Efforts to privatize even more services previously performed by Federal Government workers will exacerbate this situation. Who are these contractors? They include House restaurant and mailroom staff, electronics technicians, day care providers, accountants, data processors, and construction and maintenance workers. They are like you and me and others with whom we work side-by-side in the Halls of the Congress, except they don't have the kind of health security we take for granted. As we devise new ways to extend health coverage to uninsured children and workers between jobs, how can we in Congress allow individuals who prepare our meals, repair our equipment, maintain our buildings, and care for our children go without the same coverage that we provide our staff? In good conscience, we can't. That's why I am introducing a bill that would require firms that contract with Congress to offer insurance to their employees. This requirement would apply to firms that employ 15 or more workers, and that have Federal contracts worth over $75,000. These contractors could buy a private health plan, or they could select a plan from FEHBP. In either case, they would be required to contribute to employees' premiums, just as the Federal Government contributes to its workers' coverage. This would ensure that everyone working full-time for Congress has access to high quality, comprehensive coverage. This kind of action is not without precedent. Several years ago, concern about high turnover among Senate daycare employees led the Senate to give these contract workers FEHBP coverage. And Congress has a long history of taking action to guarantee fair working conditions for contract workers. For 65 years, the Davis-Bacon Act and other similar measures have guaranteed competitive wages to Federal contract workers. This bill complements those efforts. But passing of this measure is not just a humane gesture. It is a practical one. Health costs for uninsured workers who become ill are simply shifted onto others. They are shifted onto public programs like Medicaid; to doctors and hospitals in the form of charity care; and into the premiums paid by those with access to private coverage. Clearly, we're all paying, one way or another, for those who have no insurance. And we're paying more than necessary. The uninsured often forgo preventive care and early intervention only to end up in an emergency room or hospital bed instead. Congress should not tolerate this kind of inefficient cost shifting. We should be setting an example for the rest of the Government and the private sector. Some may say this measure will reduce the cost savings from privatization. I believe Congress should contract out services performed more efficiently by the private sector. But reducing benefits like health coverage to save money is penny wise and pound foolish. And even if outsourcing is the wave of the future, Congress should set an example by protecting rights and benefits of those caught in the transition. Cutting costs by cutting benefits may be easy, but it's not efficient, and it's not responsible. Congress should not save money by denying workers a basic benefit. For many years now, Members of Congress have spoken on the floor about the need to extend coverage to the uninsured. We all recognize there can be no financial security without health security. Let's show the country that what is good for Members of Congress and their employees is also good for the contractors who serve us. I hope my colleagues will join me in support of this bill. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, today I am reintroducing legislation to provide employees of congressional contractors the same access to health coverage as other congressional workers. This bill should have passed last year, when I was thwarted in an effort to pass this measure as an amendment to the Treasury-Postal Appropriations bill. Instead, another 12 months have gone by in which workers in this very building lack health insurance while you and I and our staffs have access to a wide variety of subsidized health plans. In fact, about 1,900 employees of companies that contract with the Federal Government do not have employer-sponsored health insurance. Efforts to privatize even more services previously performed by Federal Government workers will exacerbate this situation. Who are these contractors? They include House restaurant and mailroom staff, electronics technicians, day care providers, accountants, data processors, and construction and maintenance workers. They are like you and me and others with whom we work side-by-side in the Halls of the Congress, except they don't have the kind of health security we take for granted. As we devise new ways to extend health coverage to uninsured children and workers between jobs, how can we in Congress allow individuals who prepare our meals, repair our equipment, maintain our buildings, and care for our children go without the same coverage that we provide our staff? In good conscience, we can't. That's why I am introducing a bill that would require firms that contract with Congress to offer insurance to their employees. This requirement would apply to firms that employ 15 or more workers, and that have Federal contracts worth over $75,000. These contractors could buy a private health plan, or they could select a plan from FEHBP. In either case, they would be required to contribute to employees' premiums, just as the Federal Government contributes to its workers' coverage. This would ensure that everyone working full-time for Congress has access to high quality, comprehensive coverage. This kind of action is not without precedent. Several years ago, concern about high turnover among Senate daycare employees led the Senate to give these contract workers FEHBP coverage. And Congress has a long history of taking action to guarantee fair working conditions for contract workers. For 65 years, the Davis-Bacon Act and other similar measures have guaranteed competitive wages to Federal contract workers. This bill complements those efforts. But passing of this measure is not just a humane gesture. It is a practical one. Health costs for uninsured workers who become ill are simply shifted onto others. They are shifted onto public programs like Medicaid; to doctors and hospitals in the form of charity care; and into the premiums paid by those with access to private coverage. Clearly, we're all paying, one way or another, for those who have no insurance. And we're paying more than necessary. The uninsured often forgo preventive care and early intervention only to end up in an emergency room or hospital bed instead. Congress should not tolerate this kind of inefficient cost shifting. We should be setting an example for the rest of the Government and the private sector. Some may say this measure will reduce the cost savings from privatization. I believe Congress should contract out services performed more efficiently by the private sector. But reducing benefits like health coverage to save money is penny wise and pound foolish. And even if outsourcing is the wave of the future, Congress should set an example by protecting rights and benefits of those caught in the transition. Cutting costs by cutting benefits may be easy, but it's not efficient, and it's not responsible. Congress should not save money by denying workers a basic benefit. For many years now, Members of Congress have spoken on the floor about the need to extend coverage to the uninsured. We all recognize there can be no financial security without health security. Let's show the country that what is good for Members of Congress and their employees is also good for the contractors who serve us. I hope my colleagues will join me in support of this bill. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I would like to discuss an amendment that this body passed as part of the Labor, Health and Human Services and Education Appropriations bill. That amendment, S.1101, would have put into motion a strategy aimed at confronting fetal alcohol syndrome (FAS), the number one cause of mental retardation in this country. Even though S.1101 was a modest, non-controversial and wholly beneficial addition to the Labor/HHS bill, the House refused to accept it. There were no funding trade-offs involved, no unresolved policy concerns. Instead, the measure was killed because of ``jurisdictional issues.'' To quote the conference report: ``This matter is one that is more appropriately considered by the authorizing committees; those committees have objected to the inclusion of the provision in the conference agreement.'' Mr. President, those committees have had five years to consider this matter. That's how long there have been bills in both the House and Senate that would do exactly what the amendment aimed to do. While Congress considers this matter, tens of thousands of children are being denied the capacity to live a normal life. Tens of thousands of families are confronting overwhelming obstacles as their children drift in and out of hospitals, mental health institutions, detention centers, and substance abuse treatment. We can label it inertia, a lack of understanding, or bad timing, but there is no sufficient explanation for the lack of attention that has been paid to this issue. Fetal alcohol syndrome and fetal alcohol effects (FAE) are 100 percent preventable, yet new cases are identified every single day. Up to 12,000 children are born with FAS in the United States each year. Thousands more are born with FAE. The incidence of FAS may be as high as one per 100 in some Native American communities. FAS and FAE are characterized by multiple physical, mental and behavioral problems, handicaps that interfere in tragic ways with a child's ability to live a normal, productive life. The costs associated with caring for individuals with FAS and FAE are staggering. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that the lifetime cost of treating an individual with FAS is almost $1.4 million. The total cost in terms of health care and social services to treat all Americans with FAS was estimated at $2.7 billion in 1995. This is an extraordinary and unnecessary expense. Aggressive action to fight back against FAS--to detect it and prevent it and help FAS children and their families cope with it--is long overdue. I am asking this body to work with me to ensure that we pass meaningful, targeted FAS legislation next year. Frankly, I am not particularly concerned about which protocols we follow to get us from here to there. Those details pale in comparison to the magnitude of the problem confronting us and the opportunities we have missed to address it. What I am concerned about is that we finally, finally, get the job done.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I would like to take this opportunity to thank and pay tribute to Major General Lansford E. Trapp, Jr. for his exceptional service to the United States Senate as the Deputy Director and then Director of Air Force Legislative Liaison. Although I am disappointed that General Trapp will be leaving us shortly to become the next Commander of Twelfth Air Force in Arizona, his pending nomination to be a Lieutenant General and challenging assignment are well-deserved. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. DASCHLE

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

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. I want to commend the distinguished chair and ranking member of the Appropriations Committee. Oftentimes we work through these things, and credit isn't allocated as it should be. In this case, this would not have happened were it not for the extraordinary effort on both sides of the aisle, in particular by the chairman and the ranking member. But I thank all Senators for their cooperation and the extraordinary effort they have put forth to get us to this point.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, if I could just suggest, the majority leader has noted that Senator Kerrey would like to speak. If a unanimous consent request is propounded for morning business, I would like it--I do know Senator Dorgan has noted his desire to offer amendments, but if morning business were to occur, I would suggest perhaps it occur after Senator Kerrey's remarks.

Mr. DASCHLE. I concur completely with what the majority leader has just indicated. I think it is our intent to see if we might be able to proceed with an expectation that any additional rollcall votes would occur tomorrow. We can't give that assurance completely yet today. I want to work with the majority leader. If additional rollcalls are required, we will give plenty of notice to all Senators. But our hope is that we can accommodate Senators who have schedules.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, first of all, let me commend the distinguished chairman for the work that they have put into this effort. I must say, this has moved us farther than I would have thought we could have gone in the time that we have had. These are very difficult issues, very controversial in some respects. I think the chairman and the ranking member have done a very good job. I intend to support the work product at the appointed time. But it is multihundred-pages long, and we have, I think, a need to look through it, not necessarily as much for the issue content as it is the grammatical content. And we are doing that now. I think we will be ready to have a vote on it one way or the other in early afternoon. Senator Lott and I have consulted with the distinguished chairman. I personally would be prepared to go to a vote early afternoon. I think we can accommodate that schedule. So I think the distinguished chairman's recommendation is a good one. I hope we can work in good faith in the remaining hours tonight to be able to be ready to have that vote early tomorrow afternoon.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. I am happy to yield to the Senator.

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, let me thank the majority leader for his efforts over the last 24 hours. I also thank the Senator from Oklahoma. Obviously, Democratic Senators need to be on the floor to voice their opposition and to object on the occasions when situations like this arise. We also have to work with good faith, and we intend to do that. There is no reason why we need to be monitoring each other if we are working in good faith. I think this is a misunderstanding. I appreciate very much the cooperation. And we will work with the majority leader to ensure that at some point we have a good debate about the matter that would be addressed by the Inhofe amendment. We will work on this matter in the future.

Mr. DASCHLE. Very good. Again, Mr. President, let me just say that we have a lot of work to do. I look forward to working with the majority leader in the next 48 hours to see if we can complete it. I am pleased that we are now able to move to the Amtrak bill, and nominations. We can do that, and then move on to other things. I yield the floor.

Mr. DASCHLE

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

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I only do so at the request of Senators Kerry and Lautenberg, that they be given 10 minutes each at some point following the introduction of the amendment and comments made by Senators McCain and Hutchison.

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, at the risk of delaying and only to do what the majority leader has just done, I think the Senators who have worked on this as hard and as long as they have do deserve the commendation just given them not only on that side of the bill but ours as well. The Senators have done an extraordinary job, and I only wish there were more occasions when on a bipartisan basis we could see this kind of leadership and effort put forth. This is a tribute to their effort, and I think a very successful one and I think as a result we are going to see an overwhelming vote on this legislation as we should and I appreciate very much their efforts. I yield the floor.

Mr. DASCHLE. I certainly would add that Senator Hollings, in fact, was the last person to sign off on this legislation as is understandable. We appreciate very much the early and perpetual effort he makes on Amtrak matters, and certainly he deserves that recognition as well. I thank the majority leader.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. I think the majority leader has laid it out pretty well. We have had a lot of questions about what the schedule is for the weekend. As the majority leader has indicated, we can expect to be here tomorrow and most likely on Sunday. I think if we can work as we have in the last few hours on appropriations bills and other related legislation, there is at least that 50-50 chance we can complete our work this weekend. One of the concerns that I have been hearing is that at some of the meetings we are not getting the kind of attendance that is necessary in order to complete the negotiations. I urge all Senators, as these meetings are scheduled--sometimes they are with very short notice--that people drop what they are doing and come to the meetings so we can expedite these negotiations. I appreciate everyone's participation and cooperation and, again, we will work with the majority leader to see if we can accommodate what he has laid out for the agenda for this weekend.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, on January 8, 1997, the Senate noted the beginning of Senator Robert C. Byrd's 51st year of public service to the people of West Virginia. On that occasion, I spoke of Senator Byrd's public record, of his service in both houses of the West Virginia State legislature, his service in both houses of the U.S. Congress, of the leadership positions he has held in the Senate, and of the remarkable seven consecutive terms to which he has been elected to represent the people of West Virginia as a U.S. Senator. I spoke of the public man, of the fascinating orator seen edifying Senators and C-SPAN audiences alike with his grasp of history and his love of the Constitution and of this body. On November 20, Senator Byrd will mark another, more personal, anniversary. On November 20, Senator Byrd will celebrate the completion of his 80th year of life. To celebrate this event, along with his current and many of his former staff members, I want to share with this body and the world some of our reflections on the personal man, the side of Senator Byrd we see, respect, and honor every day. If the heart of West Virginia is made of coal--that rich, compressed carbon of long-ago life that breathes fire to warm our homes and light our dark nights--then Senator Byrd is a diamond honed over time to be its purest, clearest core. Years of experience and study have cut many facets in his character, each adding a distinctive sparkle. Robert C. Byrd never forgets the people of West Virginia. He cares, deeply, about living up to the trust and confidence that has been placed in him and about setting the best possible example for others that he can in his own life and behavior. He is a tireless worker. Many of his staff members can tell stories about leaving him in his office late at night, still working, and dragging themselves wearily in the next morning, only to be greeted by his chipper, ``Good morning.'' His energy and drive have not lessened over the years. When added to his own natural bent for self-improvement, this tendency can make him a challenging man to work for, but trying to live up to this challenge has made every member of his staff a better and more committed employee. Senator Byrd speaks often about the old values--about the importance of hard work, the love of family, respect for authority, loyalty to community and country, and about reverence for the Creator. He does not say these things because he believes they are popular or engaging--he talks about them because he believes in them and because he lives by these values. He keeps a King James Bible on his desk and often refers to its passages, seeking ancient wisdom to guide him through the mire of convoluted political issues and diverse viewpoints. Senator Byrd does not take anything or anyone for granted. Being a Senator and working in the Capitol building has lost none of its importance and none of its magic for Senator Byrd. Often, when the Sun is setting behind the Washington Monument, he will invite his staff to look out the window and down the Mall, so that moment--that special vantage point and that sunset--would not be taken for granted. To travel with Senator Byrd in West Virginia is to see up-close the tremendous respect and esteem in which he is held. Yet, his stature as a national statesman has not created a chasm between him and those he serves. On the contrary, all West Virginians feel as if they know him. And, not only do people feel they know him, many have a personal story to tell about him. They often comment on ``the night he spent with our family,'' or when ``he had dinner at our house,'' or when ``he spoke at my commencement,'' or when ``he helped my mother to get her widow's benefits after my dad died.'' As he values each and every citizen of West Virginia, so does Senator Byrd value everyone who works for him--for themselves and for the job that they do for him and the people of West Virginia. He sets high standards, but he never asks more of anyone than he asks of himself. And, his drive is tempered by thoughtfulness. He goes out of his way to smile, greet, and speak gently with everyone in his office. When personal or family tragedies strike, he is also there, offering support and encouragement, and living up to his belief that family must come first. Senator Byrd has seen members of his staff through cancer, the birth and death of children, the loss of parents, and all of life's best and worst experiences with characteristic kindness and understanding. In return, he has a loyal group of employees, who belie the common perception that staff turnover on Capitol Hill is frequent. His current staff combine for a total of over 4 centuries of experience in his service and in service to the Nation and the people of West Virginia, and his former staff remain close to him. Working with Senator Byrd is an honor because he is a legendary figure even in his own time. He is larger than life, not only for the positions he has held and his accomplishments, but for his principles. On many occasions he has quoted Mark Twain: ``Fame is vapor, popularity an accident, riches take wings only one thing endures: character.'' He is a man of principle who is willing to stick to those principles, his experience, and his reason, with his eye always on the unforgiving pen of history and not on polls or interest group calls. He has taken some lonely stands, speaking candidly and thoughtfully about controversial nominations and treaties, and even calling for Senators to step down when their actions were detrimental to the institution of the Senate. Senator Byrd's legacy to West Virginia is not one that will be measured solely in years of service, or in the number of offices held, or, even, as some might cynically suggest, in dollar signs. More than anyone or anything in memory, Robert C. Byrd has provided West Virginians with hope---hope of a better economy, hope that dreams of well-paying jobs and nice homes do not have to be hooked on the back of a bumper on a winding road leading out of State, hope that the way of life cherished among West Virginia's hills will survive and even flourish, to be passed on to future generations. He has made them feel proud--proud of their way of life, proud of their State and proud of him. There is a difference in West Virginia today that can be attributed to a renewed feeling of hope and a sense of belief in the State that Senator Byrd has so unselfishly worked to fulfill. As his 51st year of public service draws to a close, and the beginning of his 81st year dawns, we all offer our heartiest congratulations and best wishes to the man we have been honored to work with, and to learn from. To follow in his example, let us close with a quote, this one from Alexander Pope (1688-1744) in a letter to Mr. Addison, that captures Senator Byrd's essence: Statesman, yet friend of truth! Of soul sincere, In action faithful, and in honour clear; Who broke no promise, served no private end, Who gained no title, and who lost no friend. Working for Senator Byrd is an honor and a privilege of which every member of his staff is mindful each day, and it is a blessing for which each one will always be grateful. The sign of a truly great man is how, by the example of his own daily living, in and out of the public's view, he touches and changes everyone around him for the better. Through him, his staff becomes part of a great and living institution, dedicated like Senator Byrd to the service of the Nation and of the great State of West Virginia. Today, I join Senator Byrd's staff in wishing him a happy 80th birthday and happy 51st year of public service. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a list of Senator Byrd's staff, many of whom contributed greatly to this birthday wish, be printed in the Record.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. The Senator is right. The Federal Government should do more to help commercialize the results of federally-sponsored research. DOE should consider what steps it can undertake to better achieve this objective.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I am looking forward to returning to South Dakota next week to join the citizens of my home state in honoring the men and women who have so faithfully served our nation in the armed forces. While all those who have given themselves to the call of duty will be on our minds on Tuesday, November 11, 1997, there is one family that will especially be on my mind. The Villhauers of Hosmer, South Dakota hold a distinction that may well separate them from any other family in this nation. Mr. and Mrs. Fred Villhauer raised 7 sons in Hosmer, all of whom served this nation concurrently during World War II. Fred Jr., John, Henry, Albert, Arthur, Edmund and Herman Villhauer all answered the call of this country, and laid their lives on the line for the security and ideals of the United States. Six of the brothers would survive the second world war and return to the United States. Albert, unfortunately, was killed during the retaking of the Philippine Islands on January 30, 1945. Fred Jr. returned to my hometown of Aberdeen where he lived until several years ago. The 5 other brothers are all alive today. I should add that an 8th Villhauer brother, Paul, was too young to serve in World War II. But he joined the Army shortly after the war and eventually served during the Korean War. Paul Villhauer has also passed away. Service to the United States seemed to run in the family for the Villhauers. The grandparents of the 8 brothers would have over 20 of their descendants serve in World War II, including 3 at Pearl Harbor. In all, more than 60 members of this family would join the armed forces of the United States of America. Six generations later, this segment of the Villhauer family boasts more than 1,000 descendants. This information was graciously provided by Emil Vilhauer, a former resident of South Dakota now residing in Wisconsin. As Veterans' Day draws near, let us remember all who have served this nation, and especially those who were called to make the ultimate sacrifice to preserve our freedom. But this year in particular, I hope my colleagues and all the citizens of our great nation will join me in remembering one very special family that knows the true meaning of love of country: the family of Fred and Catherine Villhauer of Hosmer, South Dakota.