Mike DeWine

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, the Hutchison amendment recognizes that there are arts programs, arts projects, that are of national significance and that they should be supported. The amendment does this while at the same time addressing the huge geographic disparity in funding that the NEA elite, the NEA bureaucracy, has consistently and arrogantly refused to address or, for that matter, even to acknowledge. This inequality in funding is unconscionable. When you have States such as New York getting $21 million from the NEA, California, $8 million, while States such as Ohio with our 11 million citizens receiving only $1.6 million, clearly something is horribly wrong. Ohio comes in 46th in per capita NEA funding. New York gets $1.18 per person; Wyoming, $1.24, Alaska, $1.21. Ohio gets 14 cents per person. Again and again, the NEA has failed to address this problem. Let me say this failure on the NEA's part points to broader problems at the NEA. For years now, Congress has been trying to set priorities for the NEA but nothing really has changed. I have grown increasingly frustrated because of the seeming ease with which the NEA flouts congressionally enacted policies. It sometimes seems as if the NEA uses as much, or maybe more, creativity in skirting our guidelines as NEA- funded artists do in creating their works. The NEA funds do support a number of worthwhile projects. However, I believe that NEA funding should really be targeted for programs for children and for underserved populations. Our scarce Federal dollars should be used to bring the arts to our children and to the poor. I congratulate my colleague, Senator Gorton, for including language in the underlying bill to indicate this priority, and also to Senator Jeffords for including it in the authorizing bill. I certainly hope the NEA takes today's debate seriously. If, however, the NEA continues to remain unresponsive to legitimate concerns, concerns voiced by the people who are paying the bills, we can certainly expect even more support for moves to abolish the endowment outright. That, Mr. President, would be a great shame--for everyone who loves the arts, and indeed for all Americans. It would be a shame that the greatest country in the world, with some of the most talented and creative artists in the world, could not intelligently and responsibly run a national arts agency. Mr. President, we can--and must--do better.

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Madam President, as a member of the Senate Labor and Human Resources Committee and chairman of the Subcommittee on Employment and Training, I have spent the last few years examining our Federal job training programs. During this examination, it has become clear to me as well as many others, that these programs are in dire need of reform. The status quo is just plain unacceptable. What we are faced with today is a fragmented and duplicative maze of narrowly focused programs administered by numerous Federal agencies that lack coordination, a coherent strategy to provide training assistance, and the confidence of the two key consumers who utilize these services--those seeking the training, and those businesses seeking to hire them. Despite spending billions of tax dollars each year on job training programs, most Federal agencies do not know how their programs work and if their programs are really helping people find jobs. Here is what we do know. Today's job training system is no system at all--it is a complex patchwork of numerous rules, regulations, requirements, and overlapping bureaucratic responsibilities. As a result, programs are largely ineffective. Frustration and confusion is widespread throughout the system--by program administrators and employers, and most important, by those seeking assistance. People have difficulty knowing where to begin to look for training assistance because there are no clear points of entry and no clear paths from one program to another. This is frustration at the breaking point. Frustration to the point that business community participation, which is absolutely necessary for success, is waning. Frustration to the point that community activists, again whose participation is absolutely necessary for success, are becoming disenchanted. Frustration to the point that we have begun to question our commitment to job training. Fragmentation, duplication, ineffectiveness, and frustration--these are the words that describe the current Federal job training apparatus. That is the status quo. That is unacceptable. That is largely why reform is needed now. There are other important reasons why reform is necessary. The economic future of our country depends on a well-trained work force. I have heard from employers at every level who find it increasingly difficult to attract and find qualified employees for high-skilled, high-paying jobs as well as qualified entry level employees. If we are going to remain economically competitive, we must address this growing shortage of workers. Reform also is needed if the welfare reform bill Congress passed last year is going to have any chance of succeeding. We need to provide States with the tools necessary to develop a comprehensive system to assist people make work, not welfare, their way of life. To achieve all of these goals, job training is the key. The bill that I introduce today with Senators Jeffords, Kennedy, and Wellstone represents a bipartisan belief that we can do better and we can achieve these goals. We can replace the current system of frustration and provide a framework for success. By removing or reforming outdated rules and regulations, we can remove the barriers that have stymied reform in the past. We can empower States to boldly move forward, transforming the current patchwork of programs into a comprehensive system to make it easier for all consumers seeking assistance to receive assistance. Just like we did with welfare reform, job training reform is about recognizing the leadership of States that have shown innovation and initiative over the last few years, even in the midst of numerous Federal barriers and obstacles. It is about allowing them and encouraging them to continue with the innovations they have implemented without Federal reform legislation. We can establish a framework for a system that provides consumer choice. Individuals seeking assistance should have a say in where, how, and what training they will receive. At the same time, the Federal bureaucracy should not engage in micro-management by mandating vouchers or any other specific local delivery system. This is a decision that belongs to the States and localities. This bill takes the opposite approach--it provides States and localities the flexibility to develop training programs that meet the real needs of those seeking training. It is to the consumer that these programs should be tailored to, not Washington. We can establish an accountable system. Training programs must demonstrate their effectiveness to be certified as eligible programs. This means proving that training leads to meaningful, unsubsidized employment--showing how many people were placed, at what cost, and how many people remained employed 6 months to a year later. We owe this to the individuals seeking assistance and to the American taxpayers who pays for these programs. We can establish a framework that not only allows for business community involvement, but business community leadership. The private sector must outline their employment needs and assist in the design of training programs. The Workforce Investment Partnership Act incorporates all of these principles. The programs incorporated in the legislation include job training, vocational education, and adult education. Additionally, it provides strong, mandatory linkages to welfare to work, Wagner-Peyser, Job Corps, Older Americans, Vocational Rehabilitation, the Bureau of Apprenticeship and Training, veterans, Trade Adjustment Assistance, as well as other training related programs. While separate funding streams will be maintained for each of the activities, in recognition of their function, States and localities will be empowered with the tools and the flexibility to implement real reform in order to provide comprehensive services to those seeking assistance. Under this bill, States will have the ability to submit a unified plan for all of the programs incorporated in and linked to this legislation to the appropriate Secretary describing how they will coordinate services in order to avoid duplication. Statewide and local partnerships, led by the business community, will be established to assist in the development of such a plan, set policy for training, and generally advise the appropriate elected official overseeing the system. At the local level, all services provided must be accessible through a one stop customer service system. Consumers, both employers and job seekers seeking assistance, will be able to receive comprehensive information regarding the availability, eligibility, and quality of the programs. With this kind of system, we can remove the confusion and frustration inherent in the current programs. Finally, training will be delivered under a framework of an individual training account which will be used to ensure the principle of consumer choice. The specific nature of the individuals training account will be determined by States and localities. In conclusion, I would like to thank my colleagues, Senators Jeffords, Kennedy, and Wellstone, as well as the other members of the Subcommittee of Employment and Training for their cooperation and dedication in developing a piece of legislation that moves us forward. This has been a bipartisan effort from Day One. I believe that level of cooperation and leadership is essential if we are to have a chance to pass real reform. There have been a number of orgnizations--both public and private-- who have participated in an open and constructive process used to develop this legislation. Their input has been vital. Again, the Workforce Investment Partnership Act is designed to address and reform the Federal Government's role in providing job training assistance to Americans. For too long, that role has been to foster confusion, frustration and complication. With this bill, we offer a new foundation, and a positive framework for success. Instead of rules that tie the hands of States and localities, this bill provides the tools to empower them to develop comprehensive work force investment systems that address the needs of job seekers and employers. This bill is a road map to a better system, and if we are to achieve the goals we have set--a stronger economy, a better-trained work force, and welfare reform--we need to begin that journey today.

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Madam President, as a member of the Senate Labor and Human Resources Committee and chairman of the Subcommittee on Employment and Training, I have spent the last few years examining our Federal job training programs. During this examination, it has become clear to me as well as many others, that these programs are in dire need of reform. The status quo is just plain unacceptable. What we are faced with today is a fragmented and duplicative maze of narrowly focused programs administered by numerous Federal agencies that lack coordination, a coherent strategy to provide training assistance, and the confidence of the two key consumers who utilize these services--those seeking the training, and those businesses seeking to hire them. Despite spending billions of tax dollars each year on job training programs, most Federal agencies do not know how their programs work and if their programs are really helping people find jobs. Here is what we do know. Today's job training system is no system at all--it is a complex patchwork of numerous rules, regulations, requirements, and overlapping bureaucratic responsibilities. As a result, programs are largely ineffective. Frustration and confusion is widespread throughout the system--by program administrators and employers, and most important, by those seeking assistance. People have difficulty knowing where to begin to look for training assistance because there are no clear points of entry and no clear paths from one program to another. This is frustration at the breaking point. Frustration to the point that business community participation, which is absolutely necessary for success, is waning. Frustration to the point that community activists, again whose participation is absolutely necessary for success, are becoming disenchanted. Frustration to the point that we have begun to question our commitment to job training. Fragmentation, duplication, ineffectiveness, and frustration--these are the words that describe the current Federal job training apparatus. That is the status quo. That is unacceptable. That is largely why reform is needed now. There are other important reasons why reform is necessary. The economic future of our country depends on a well-trained work force. I have heard from employers at every level who find it increasingly difficult to attract and find qualified employees for high-skilled, high-paying jobs as well as qualified entry level employees. If we are going to remain economically competitive, we must address this growing shortage of workers. Reform also is needed if the welfare reform bill Congress passed last year is going to have any chance of succeeding. We need to provide States with the tools necessary to develop a comprehensive system to assist people make work, not welfare, their way of life. To achieve all of these goals, job training is the key. The bill that I introduce today with Senators Jeffords, Kennedy, and Wellstone represents a bipartisan belief that we can do better and we can achieve these goals. We can replace the current system of frustration and provide a framework for success. By removing or reforming outdated rules and regulations, we can remove the barriers that have stymied reform in the past. We can empower States to boldly move forward, transforming the current patchwork of programs into a comprehensive system to make it easier for all consumers seeking assistance to receive assistance. Just like we did with welfare reform, job training reform is about recognizing the leadership of States that have shown innovation and initiative over the last few years, even in the midst of numerous Federal barriers and obstacles. It is about allowing them and encouraging them to continue with the innovations they have implemented without Federal reform legislation. We can establish a framework for a system that provides consumer choice. Individuals seeking assistance should have a say in where, how, and what training they will receive. At the same time, the Federal bureaucracy should not engage in micro-management by mandating vouchers or any other specific local delivery system. This is a decision that belongs to the States and localities. This bill takes the opposite approach--it provides States and localities the flexibility to develop training programs that meet the real needs of those seeking training. It is to the consumer that these programs should be tailored to, not Washington. We can establish an accountable system. Training programs must demonstrate their effectiveness to be certified as eligible programs. This means proving that training leads to meaningful, unsubsidized employment--showing how many people were placed, at what cost, and how many people remained employed 6 months to a year later. We owe this to the individuals seeking assistance and to the American taxpayers who pays for these programs. We can establish a framework that not only allows for business community involvement, but business community leadership. The private sector must outline their employment needs and assist in the design of training programs. The Workforce Investment Partnership Act incorporates all of these principles. The programs incorporated in the legislation include job training, vocational education, and adult education. Additionally, it provides strong, mandatory linkages to welfare to work, Wagner-Peyser, Job Corps, Older Americans, Vocational Rehabilitation, the Bureau of Apprenticeship and Training, veterans, Trade Adjustment Assistance, as well as other training related programs. While separate funding streams will be maintained for each of the activities, in recognition of their function, States and localities will be empowered with the tools and the flexibility to implement real reform in order to provide comprehensive services to those seeking assistance. Under this bill, States will have the ability to submit a unified plan for all of the programs incorporated in and linked to this legislation to the appropriate Secretary describing how they will coordinate services in order to avoid duplication. Statewide and local partnerships, led by the business community, will be established to assist in the development of such a plan, set policy for training, and generally advise the appropriate elected official overseeing the system. At the local level, all services provided must be accessible through a one stop customer service system. Consumers, both employers and job seekers seeking assistance, will be able to receive comprehensive information regarding the availability, eligibility, and quality of the programs. With this kind of system, we can remove the confusion and frustration inherent in the current programs. Finally, training will be delivered under a framework of an individual training account which will be used to ensure the principle of consumer choice. The specific nature of the individuals training account will be determined by States and localities. In conclusion, I would like to thank my colleagues, Senators Jeffords, Kennedy, and Wellstone, as well as the other members of the Subcommittee of Employment and Training for their cooperation and dedication in developing a piece of legislation that moves us forward. This has been a bipartisan effort from Day One. I believe that level of cooperation and leadership is essential if we are to have a chance to pass real reform. There have been a number of orgnizations--both public and private-- who have participated in an open and constructive process used to develop this legislation. Their input has been vital. Again, the Workforce Investment Partnership Act is designed to address and reform the Federal Government's role in providing job training assistance to Americans. For too long, that role has been to foster confusion, frustration and complication. With this bill, we offer a new foundation, and a positive framework for success. Instead of rules that tie the hands of States and localities, this bill provides the tools to empower them to develop comprehensive work force investment systems that address the needs of job seekers and employers. This bill is a road map to a better system, and if we are to achieve the goals we have set--a stronger economy, a better-trained work force, and welfare reform--we need to begin that journey today.

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I am very pleased to join my colleagues here today in recognizing Hispanic Heritage Month. Americans of Hispanic descent are in this country because they, their parents, or grandparents, or great-grandparents, or even more distant ancestors, made a choice. They were decisive, motivated individuals who made an act of faith in America. They came here, much as my own great-great-grandfather, Denis DeWine, did back in the 1840's--because they wanted a chance at a brighter future. And in return, they were willing to work hard to build up this country. That same spirit lives on in today's U.S. Hispanic community--and we ought to look at that spirit as an inspiration to ensure that America remains the kind of place people would want to come to. There's one area of law I'm working on that is especially important in this context. I'm talking about the attempts to change America's immigration law and make it more restrictive. I read one article in which advocates of restriction repeatedly called new Americans ``aliens''--not ``immigrants'' but ``aliens,'' as if they were a different kind of people from us, who come from someplace as strange as outer space. I call these people something else. I call them Americans. Now, we all know that there's nothing new about anti-immigrant movements. We've had them again and again, throughout American history. But we have established a proud tradition in this country of overcoming them, of resisting the temptation to turn inward to ourselves--of welcoming new people and new ideas, and choosing hope over fear. When Franklin Roosevelt reminded America that even those who came over on the Mayflower were immigrants--when John F. Kennedy wrote a book called ``A Nation of Immigrants''--when Ronald Reagan moved the Nation with stories about how the light from Liberty's torch was keeping hope alive for millions of people in oppressed countries--they were expressing something truly fundamental about what it means to be an American. And make no mistake about it--that same spirit is still alive and well in today's America. Ohioans of Hispanic ancestry have helped build the Buckeye State into an economic and cultural powerhouse. We are grateful to these fellow Ohioans, because they took the talents they or their ancestors were born with to a foreign land, and chose to bestow their benefits to us. In fact, next week the Hispanic Youth Foundation [HYF], an organization that provides financial assistance to undergraduate and graduate students seeking degrees in areas of political science or other fields related to government of public service, will meet in Washington, DC, to distribute scholarships to only seven outstanding students. I am proud to announce that one of the seven students receiving this scholarship award is from the great State of Ohio. I join all my fellow citizens in saying thank you--and saluting Ohio's Hispanic community on the occasion of Hispanic Heritage Month.

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. I thank my colleague for his work on this bill and for his commitment to pursue this issue in conference. I appreciate that very, very much. It means a great deal to me and to our community and to our State. I thank him very much. I yield the floor. Mr. ABRAHAM addressed the Chair.

Mr. DeWINE. Madam President, I would like to take a moment to discuss a project of great importance to me and to the people of the State of Ohio. I am referring to funding for the Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park. This project is currently included in the House version of the bill that we are currently debating. I am very hopeful that it will receive full consideration by the conference committee and be included in the final bill that is reported by the conference committee. Madam President, on October 16, 1992, Congress established the Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park to commemorate the legacy of two Daytonians, Orville and Wilbur Wright and their significant contribution to human history through their pioneering exploration of flight. Madam President, in an effort to create a single coordinated facility recognizing the Wright Brothers' work in Dayton, in 1994 the National Park Service assumed responsibility for the remains of the brothers' bicycle company. And then 2 years later, in 1996, the Park Service obtained the surrounding property which is known locally as the Hoover block. Madam President, the Hoover block has been designated as the core site for Federal management of the Dayton Aviation Park and will be the park headquarters and will also be the primary visitor center. From 1890 to 1895, this very site served as the location of the brothers' print shop, the print shop called Wright & Wright Job Printers, which, by the way, printed the Tattler, a newspaper founded by the famous Daytonian and Ohioan black poet, Paul Laurence Dunbar. Madam President, timely restoration of these sites is critical to ensure the building will be renovated and open to the public by the year 2003 when Ohio and the rest of the Nation and the world will celebrate the centennial of powered flight. Trying to meet this deadline, Madam President, I have been working with my colleagues in the Ohio delegation in the House, most notably, Congressman Ralph Regula, Congressman David Hobson, and Congressman Tony Hall, working with them to ensure and secure funding for the upcoming fiscal year so that renovations can proceed without delay. Madam President, I think that this project has national significance. It has significance for my home community, the Miami Valley in Ohio, and the entire State of Ohio. I grew up about 20 miles from where the Wright Brothers really learned to fly and where they did their pioneer work, where they did their studies, and where they prepared to fly. Madam President, I note the presence on the floor of my good friend from Washington, Senator Slade Gorton, who is of course the chairman of the appropriations Subcommittee on the Interior. I already have had several conversations with my friend and colleague regarding this particular project. He knows well of my personal interest in the project. I really wish to express to him my appreciation for his willingness to pursue this matter in the conference committee. Mr. GORTON addressed the Chair.

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I rise today to support an amendment offered by my colleague from Illinois, Senator Durbin. The Senator's amendment calls for a report to identify the best ways to recover organs and tissue from those who have died suddenly so that the lives of others can be saved through organ transplants. Today, more than 54,000 Americans are waiting for an organ transplant; and 10 Americans will die each day before an organ can be found. And the sad fact is that these deaths are preventable. We have the technology to give these people a second chance through transplants--but while we have the technology, we don't have the organs. I am convinced that much of this problem can be solved by making people aware of this problem and educating them about the need for organ donation. And I have been working on that for some time. However, just as important is looking at the system we have in place for organ procurement--to see if there are structural hurdles that we can help remove. The law today requires hospitals to have a protocol in place for organ procurement. Not all do. Those that do don't necessarily work with the organ procurement organizations [OPO's] in their local areas. These are the hurdles that Senator Durbin's amendment tries to address. The study that this amendment requires is an important one. I hope that it will provide us all with information about how best to identify appropriate organ donors and then, how best to approach their families. I would hope that this study would take into account the fact that these best practices may well be different in different parts of the country. To the extent the Secretary can identify these differences in her report, I think it would be meaningful to the hospitals and their respective OPO's. When we fail to identify a potential donor or bungle our communication with a potential donor's family, we compound an already tragic situation. Already someone's family member--a mother, brother, or sister--has died. The second tragedy is that--despite that person's willingness to donate and save another's life--that wish is ignored or the request to the family is handled poorly, raising unnecessary doubts about donation. I'd like to thank Senator Durbin--I appreciate his thoughtful efforts toward increasing organ donation and improving organ procurement. I also want to thank him for accommodating my concerns in his amendment. I look forward to working with him in the future on this issue that is so important to both of us. amendment no. 1086

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I would like to begin by thanking Senator Specter and the members of the Labor, Education, HHS appropriations subcommittee for bringing this bill to the floor. This bill contains a much needed funding increase for the National Institutes of Health. Earlier this year I joined with 97 of my colleagues in this Senate body in voting for a sense-of-the-Senate amendment calling for a doubling of NIH funding over the next 5 years. The bill that we have in front of us today represents a substantial step forward. It increases funding for NIH from $12.7 to $13.69 billion. This funding, simply, Mr. President, will save lives. There are two measures in this bill that I would like to call to the attention of my colleagues, and that I believe deserve special mention. Earlier this year I introduced, along with Senator Kennedy and Senator Bond, a bill which would establish a pediatric research initiative within the Office of the Director of NIH. Senator Kennedy and I and Senator Bond, along with many sponsors of that bill, have worked hard to develop a proposal that we feel helps place appropriate emphasis on pediatric research while at the same time supporting the scientific judgment so important to the success of NIH. The value of this initiative really is without question. Research breakthroughs to treat pediatric illnesses have been enormously effective both in reducing costs and, more important, in freeing young children from a lifetime of illness and disability. From vaccines to treat polio to surfactant replacement to prevent respiratory distress syndrome, research has saved hundreds of millions of dollars and improved the lives of millions of children. Recently, the Public Health and Safety Subcommittee of the Labor and Human Resources Committee held a hearing on NIH reauthorization. During the hearing, a distinguished panel of pediatric researchers from NIH and also from the private sector described some of the enormous opportunities that now exist for scientific progress in combating and in preventing diseases affecting children. Their testimony dramatically underscored the critical need for additional emphasis and increased support for pediatric research. Last year, the Labor, Education, and HHS appropriations subcommittee, chaired by Senator Specter, allocated $5 million as an initial downpayment toward the pediatric research initiative. This year the appropriations subcommittee has allocated $20 million toward this initiative. I personally thank Chairman Specter and the members of his subcommittee for their continued commitment to pediatric research. By recognizing the critical need to encourage and promote pediatric research, the committee has really helped ensure the next generation of Americans grows up to be healthy, productive members of our society. Mr. President, the second provision I would like to talk about in this bill is the funding for substance abuse and mental health services. Without the provision contained in this bill, some States would have faced massive cuts in the funding for their programs to help people with substance abuse and/or mental health problems. My own State of Ohio would have faced a devastating funding cut of more than 20 percent, our neighboring State to the north, Michigan, would have received a cut of 19 percent, and other States would have also been seriously hurt. Among the important programs threatened by these cuts would have been the agencies promoting early intervention with young people to help them find alternatives to getting involved with drugs and crime. I have long believed that the problem of at-risk youth in this country is one for which an ounce of prevention truly is worth a pound of cure. The sooner we can reach these young people, the better off we will be in our efforts to help them avoid the tragedy of lifetime addiction. The SAMHSA provision contained in this bill averts the awful consequences of the proposed funding cuts. It is a good measure and deserves strong support of the entire U.S. Senate. I yield the floor. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I rise to note the passing, today, of an Ohio legend. Early this morning, an Ohio legend died. Here is how Lee Leonard, the dean of the Ohio statehouse press corps, began his report in this morning's Columbus dispatch: Vernal G. Riffe, Jr., who rose from a Scioto County insurance salesman to become one of the most powerful figures in Ohio's political history, died today at 1:30 a.m. He was 72.'' Vern Riffe served a record-breaking 20 years as Speaker of the Ohio House of Representatives, from 1975 to 1995. From the first day that he was elected Speaker, he was ``The Speaker'' and will always be, Mr. President, ``The Speaker.'' He came to the Ohio House in 1959, spent 16 years learning the skills that would make him the most effective as well as the longest-serving speaker of the Ohio House of Representatives. He studied the approaches of legislative veterans. He learned a lot. He learned that, in a legislative body, you get a lot further by helping your colleagues move their own legislation forward than you do by grandstanding. As a result, Vern Riffe quickly became the person both Republican and Democratic Governors turned to to make things happen. Vern Riffe was a pragmatic, results-oriented Speaker. He was a partisan, but his greatest victories came from his willingness to work with Republican Ohio Governors to get things done for the people of Ohio. When Vern Riffe retired from the Speakership, he said this: If I was 20 years younger, I might be in the mood for forming my own party, called the Moderate Democrats or the Middle of the Road Democrats. That was Vern Riffe. These are the lessons of Vern Riffe: Hard work, learn the details, build consensus, and put the interests of Ohio ahead of the interests of your political party. Vern Riffe grew up in politics. his family was highly political, and from an early age he loved the nuts and bolts of making government work. He used to say, ``I love being Speaker.'' Political scientist Samuel C. Patterson of the Ohio State University summed up Riffe's style:. Riffe loved working with his members, doing favors for them, helping them get reelected, and assisting them in fulfilling their own ambitions and their own objectives as legislators. As a political leader, he was supportive, and his success depended on his reliability and trust. Riffe's friendliness and his southern Ohio, small town, 'down home' demeanor, endeared him to his supporters and disarmed most of his opponents. He was not stridently partisan, a quality underscored by the fact that the two prominent Republicans, former long-time Governor James A. Rhodes and former house Republican leader Corwin Nixon, are among his closest personal friends. That is the Vern Riffe that I remember. He used to spend time at the Galleria across the street from the Statehouse, meeting with members of the house and senate in a very informal way, reaching agreement on literally countless issues. When he retired from the house a couple of years ago, this is what one State representative said: Vern Riffe is the Woody Hayes of Ohio politics. Without his strong leadership, not just the Ohio House, but all of State government will be fundamentally different. I think that is right. Vern Riffe was a legend, a man who cared about using the power he had to help the people of Ohio. In conclusion, Vern Riffe never lost sight of the values he learned from his closest political adviser, and, as he told me, his closest friend. That was his dad, Vernal G. Riffe, Sr., who was a former railroader who served as mayor of the town of New Boston. Vern Riffe's dad used to tell him: ``Son, if you're going to be a leader, you've got to lead.'' Mr. President, Vern Riffe always led. Another Ohio legend, John Mahaney, president of the Ohio Council of Retail Merchants, put it best. He said about Vern Riffe: ``It's like you get in the Hall of Fame by batting .300, 15 out of 20 years. It's longevity and consistency. And (Vern Riffe) passes both tests.'' Mr. President, we will miss him a great deal. In March of this year, he and his wife Thelma began their 50th year of marriage. On behalf of the people of Ohio, I express my condolences to Thelma and to their children--Cathy Skiver, Verna Kay Riffe, Mary Beth Hewitt, and Vernal G. Riffe III, and to their seven grandchildren. Mr. President, he was a good man. I yield the floor and thank my colleagues.

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I thank the chairman of the committee, Senator Roth, for the fantastic job that he has done. I congratulate also our majority leader, the chairman of the Budget Committee, Senator Domenici, as well as the Chairman of the House Budget Committee, John Kasich, and the Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, Bill Archer--all of the people who have been involved in this really historic piece of legislation. I rise today in strong support of this conference report, the Taxpayer Relief Act. This historic budget agreement is an important step forward for fiscal responsibility, fiscal responsibility that will balance the budget for the first time in 30 years. And it will provide much-needed tax relief for working families. When we implement this budget agreement, the result will be the first balanced budget since 1969. That is great news for the U.S. economy as well as for the working families who will see a decline in the interest payments they have to carry. This bill will give working families some long-needed, much-needed, much-deserved tax relief--$90 billion of tax relief over the next 5 years. Today, the working families of Ohio and the rest of America are paying record-high taxes. All across America, total taxes eat up 38 percent of the typical family's budget--38 percent. That is more than the typical family spends on food, clothing and shelter combined. On these family necessities they only spend 28 percent of their income. The people who are particularly helped by this are the lower middle class, the middle class, the working American. A family of four, two children, two adults, with an income of $30,000, will see tax savings of 53 percent--53 percent. A family with a $40,000 income, that same family, would receive a 30 percent tax savings. That same family, at $50,000, would still receive a 21-percent tax savings. That is real money. That is very, very significant. The education tax incentives will also help the next generation. It will help Ohio families, it will help American families. We all know education is getting more and more important as we move to a skill- based economy. We also know it is very expensive. This tax relief bill will help Ohio's families save and pay for their children's education. It will expand the IRA's available for education and create tax-free prepaid tuition plans. It makes interest on student loans deductible from Federal taxes. It also encourages employers to invest in the education of their workers by giving them a tax deduction for employee training and employee education. This historic tax bill will help families make ends meet over the short term, and will help them educate their children over the long term. In my view, this is a modest bill, but it is a very important bill. It is a historic bill. It is important because it helps America as a nation reverse course. Mr. President, 50 years ago Americans paid 2 cents out of every dollar they earned to the Federal Government. Today they are sending 25 cents to Washington alone, and that is not counting all the other State and local taxes. That's going in the wrong direction. What we do with this bill is change course and begin to go in the right direction. The $500 per child tax credit, in particular, will help ease the burden of working families who need to hold down two or more jobs to make ends meet. The tax relief in the agreement will also do a great deal for small business men and women. The capital gains cuts and the lowering of the estate tax will help promote economic growth and help preserve family owned and operated businesses. All of these policy changes in my view are extremely positive. They represent substantial progress over where we are today. I hope that we soon will address the long-term problem, though, of runaway entitlement spending. We begin to make progress with this bill. Clearly we have to go further. To balance the budget by the year 2002, as the budget agreement would in fact do, is very, very important. In fact, it's a prerequisite for any other progress we intend to make in economic policy. However, while it is essential, it is only a first step. We need to view what we are doing today, really, as just that, a first step. Our next necessary step is to prepare the Federal budget for the fiscal tidal wave that will occur when the baby boomers start to retire and become eligible for Social Security and for Medicare. In my view, we have to start reforming the entitlements in a responsible and bipartisan way. Congress has been talking about this for years. It is essential that we make it happen and we make it happen as soon as possible. But, for today, this bill and its companion measure are an excellent step forward, a first step. I am proud to vote yes on both of these historic conference reports. Mr. DORGAN addressed the Chair.

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. I appreciate your leadership on this important issue, and believe that you have improved this important law. However, the attorney general of Ohio has raised an issue shared by a majority of States that I am compelled to address. Current law under the Jacob Wetterling Act requires that States create a special State board. This board must be composed of experts in the field on the behavior and treatment of sexual offenders, victims' rights advocates, and representatives of law enforcement to determine when someone is a sexually violent predator. Currently, according to the Department of Justice, 37 States would not meet this requirement.

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, it is also my understanding the Senator from New Hampshire is working with the Department of Justice to assure that your proposed language in the bill before us would provide a waiver for impacted States, such as Ohio, who for differing reasons, may not specifically meet the requirements of having a special State board. My State, as well as many others, however, have alternative methods that fairly, efficiently, and scientifically make the determination when someone is a sexual predator. Is that correct?

Mr. DeWINE. I thank my colleague from New Hampshire for his fine work to ensure States have the administrative flexibility to meet the goal of the Jacob Wetterling law.

Mr. DeWINE. Is it my friend from New Hampshire's intention that his language would allow for States like Ohio and New Hampshire a waiver by the attorney general in these types of situations?

Mr. DeWINE. I wish to ask my colleague from New Hampshire a question. It is my understanding that the Senator from New Hampshire has authored language in this appropriations bill that amends the Jacob Wetterling Crimes Against Children and Sexually Violent Offender Registration Act?

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, my amendment excludes Haitians from the U.S. who have been involved in extrajudicial and political killings in Haiti. Specifically, it does this by denying funds for the issuance of visas to these persons. There have been numerous cases of politically-motivated assassinations in Haiti. Some of these extrajudicial killings occurred while former President Jean-Bertrand Aristide was in exile. Many others took place after he returned to power. Unfortunately, these killings have continued after Mr. Aristide left office and Rene Preval became President. The Haitian Government has assigned over eighty extrajudicial and political killing cases to the Special Investigative Unit. The Haitian Government claims that they have fired several government employees who are suspects in these killings. But the sad fact remains that to date, no one has been convicted for any of these assassinations. Simply stated, there has been no substantial progress in these investigations. We need to encourage the Haitians to bring these killers to justice. We need to let them know that these killings cannot be tolerated. My amendment denies funding for the issuance of visas to those who have been credibly alleged to have ordered, carried out, materially assisted, or sought to conceal these extrajudicial and political killings. The amendment exempts persons for medical reasons, or if they have cooperated fully with the investigation of these political murders. The legislation also includes a reporting requirement. The Administration would be directed to submit, to the appropriate congressional committees, (1) a list of those who have been credibly alleged to have ordered or carried out the extrajudicial and political killings; (2) a list of those refused entry to the United States as a result of this provision; and (3) a report on this matter, to be submitted once each year, until such time as the Government of Haiti has completed the investigation of these extrajudicial and political killings and has prosecuted those implicated in these murders. It is an unfortunate reality that political violence has been a way of life in Haiti. Too many Haitians have died due to acts of political violence. The adoption of this amendment will not solve their problems overnight. But it can help. I believe this legislation sends a strong signal that violence must not be used as a political tool in Haiti. It also sends a message to the Haitians that we will vigorously support those who want to end political violence and create a lasting society of peace and prosperity in Haiti. Mr. President, I urge the adoption of this amendment. amendment no. 1018 (Purpose: To improve the bill) On page 114, strike lines 14-23.

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, my amendment is simple and to the point. It urges the U.S. Agency for International Development to maintain the same level of resources for orphan feeding programs in Haiti in fiscal year 1998 as it provided in fiscal year 1997. The total funding level for Public Law 480 title II food programs is projected to stay the same for fiscal year 1998 as was appropriated for fiscal year 1997. Therefore, I believe that keeping the same level of such resources for this particular program should not be contentious, especially when my colleagues understand who the beneficiaries of this program are. Mr. President, many facilities in Haiti have to care for a truly vast number of orphans--and also for an increasing number of abandoned and neglected children. In the Port-au-Prince area alone, Christian Relief Services provides Public Law 480 title II food assistance to 70 orphanages. The Adventist Development and Relief Agency also supports some 46 orphanages in the southern rural areas. Simply stated, there are numerous orphanages throughout this country which take care of thousands upon thousands of orphaned and abandoned children. I have traveled to Haiti four times in the last few years and have visited many orphanages. I can give you a first-hand account of some of their heart-breaking stories. The flow of desperate children into these orphanages is constant--and these institutions face an increasing challenge in accommodating all of these needy children. Take the case of Notre Dame de Victoires, an orphanage run by Sister Veronique. She will not turn down a single child that is dropped off at her facility. She also makes frequent visits to the local hospitals where babies, after being born, are abandoned. This particular orphanage takes care of the sickest of the sick. They get no means of support other than the food administered to them through CRS, which in turn receives its resources through AID. Mr. President, let me make it clear what this amendment does. The current program guarantees one meal a day to these orphans. My amendment would ensure that these meals keep coming. I am not talking about medical assistance, clothing, or anything else. Just one meal. These orphanages still have to find sources of support for the other meals and other necessary assistance for these children. According to AID, $238,000 worth of food went indirectly to orphanages in fiscal year 1996. If this figure is accurate, this is less than 1 percent of the total food resources allocated by AID for Haiti. Specifically, in fiscal year 1996 only 506 metric tonnes of food--out of a total of 50,000 metric tonnes provided by AID--went toward feeding children in orphanages. This is just a drop in the bucket of AID resources. Now, I have urged AID to maintain the current level of resources allocated for feeding orphans in fiscal year 1997 through fiscal year 1998. AID officials assured me that they will do just that. In fact, they spoke to the relevant relief agencies about the situation and confirmed that this could be done. My original intent was to earmark this program, requiring AID to implement what has been promised. After numerous conversations between my staff and AID, and after their repeated assurances, the amendment I am offering states that AID simply should honor its commitment. This amendment would make AID's commitment not a personal assurance to me, but a commitment to the U.S. Senate. And if this language is kept in conference and signed into law, the commitment will be thus extended to the entire U.S. Congress. Mr. President, I am not asking for any more money than the orphanages are currently receiving from AID. This is essential for the survival of many thousands of Haitian children living in overcrowded orphanages. I urge my colleagues to vote for this important amendment.

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I would like to take a moment to discuss several other projects that currently are funded in the House version. I am hopeful these will get full consideration by the conference committee, and be included in the final bill. Mr. President, I believe that it is our responsibility to ensure that Federal research and its subsequent data is shared, whenever possible, with the taxpayers who fund these research programs. To this end, I would like to state my support for the $5.8 million provided in the House bill to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's [NASA] Commercial Technology Program. These funds would be used to support existing successful program goals, as well as new initiatives to link businesses from distressed communities to NASA commercial technologies. It is critical to the competitiveness of our economy that we promote the shared use of research material between Federal agencies such as NASA and the private sector. Support for this program is an important step in that direction. The program will allow highly successful outreach efforts such as the NASA Lewis Business and Industry Summit to be carried forward and will help to ensure NASA Lewis' long-term viability as an economic force in northeastern Ohio. Mr. President, I also believe it is our responsibility to use the success of Federal investments in technology to improve, whenever feasible, our education system. Therefore I hope the conferees will agree with the House Appropriation Committee's decision to increase NASA's Science, Engineering, Mathematics, and Aerospace Academy [SEMAA] and Mobile Aeronautics Education Laboratory [MAEL] programs $3.3 million. This increase would enable the NASA Lewis Research Center and Cuyahoga Community College to expand their already successful programs to the Cuyahoga Community College's western campus. In addition, the workstations included in the Mobile Aeronautics Education Laboratory can be replicated in Cleveland area schools. Mr. President, as we are all too well aware, flooding disasters tragically struck the Midwest this past spring. While there is little we can do to prevent natural disasters, we must take every step possible to respond to these disasters in order to minimize potential loss of life and property. I sincerely hope the conferees will agree with the House Appropriations Committee's decision to provide $5 million to support the replacement and upgrading of outdated Federal Emergency Management Agency [FEMA] emergency response equipment. Upgraded, functional equipment is critical to protecting our citizens from unfortunate natural disasters and I strongly believe safety issues such as the support of this equipment should be a priority in our budget discussions. I specifically believe the mobile emergency response support and mobile air transportable telecommunications deserve particular attention. Mr. President, I note the presence on the floor of my good friend from Missouri, Senator Bond, chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on VA-HUD. I would hope that he, and the Senator from Maryland, Senator Mikulski, will give serious consideration to the programs I described.

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I thank the chairman of the subcommittee for his comments. Were it not for the fact that the hospital is scheduled to close at the end of the year, I would be content to seek funding for this project through traditional funding channels. However, the hospital is set to close in just a few months. Therefore, I have little choice but to request that the chairman of the subcommittee take a very close look at this project as he proceeds to conference with the House on the final version of this appropriations bill. Specifically, what I am seeking is consideration for support of funds to allow for renovation and conversion of this space. What I am trying to avoid is seeing this hospital close and having this wonderful facility stand empty. Should this happen, I am concerned that it stands vulnerable to deterioration, and even vandalism, to a point that the only option left for the community is to tear down the structure.

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, that is satisfactory and I thank the distinguished chairman for his willingness to work with me and the members of the Ohio congressional delegation, as well as the community of Lorain to turn the closure of the hospital into a new, positive beginning for the people of Lorain.

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I see my friend from Missouri, the chairman of the VA-HUD Appropriations Subcommittee, on the floor and would like to call to his attention an important project in Ohio that I believe is deserving of funding under the Community Development Block Grant [CDBG] Program. Specifically, I am interested in the economic development initiative funding for various community development projects. A number were listed by the committee in its report on the bill. I am very interested in a community-wide effort in Lorain, OH, to convert a soon- to-be-closed hospital into a community resource center. This is an area that is economically depressed, and in addition to the economic losses associated with the closure of the hospital, the community recently discovered that the local Ford production plant will soon be closing its doors. Would the Senator from Missouri agree that an initiative which attempted to convert the hospital space into a community resource and training center be a worthy candidate for funding under the committee's EDI provision?

Mr. DeWINE. I thank my distinguished friend, and I yield the floor.

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, let me take just 1 minute to explain this amendment. This amendment is a very simple one. A ``yes'' vote means that we continue the current law. A ``yes'' vote on the amendment would continue in force the current prohibition on the taxpayer subsidy of abortions for Federal workers. It would permit Federal employee health plans to cover abortion only in the cases of rape, incest and threats to the life of the mother. This has been the law for most of the last 14 years, from 1984 to 1993, and from 1995 until the present. A ``yes'' vote continues current law. Mr. President, in 1996 the Federal Government paid an average of 74 percent of the cost of a Federal employee's health premium. That is taxpayer money. And the Senate has twice voted to be sure tax dollars were not used to fund abortions. In 1995, this body endorsed this policy by a vote of 50 to 44. In 1996, we approved it again by a vote of 53 to 45. It is good policy. It ought to remain in force, consistent with the well-being of the American people. I urge a ``yes'' vote. Mrs. BOXER addressed the Chair.

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I send a bill to the desk now, a bill on behalf of myself and Senator Wellstone. Mr. President, this bill is the Quality Child Care Loan Forgiveness Act and it is intended to, at least in part, deal with a very serious problem in this country. That problem simply is that more and more children, more and more of our children, are every day in child care. There is a real concern about the quality of child care. This bill does not solve every problem in regard to child care, but I think it is a start and I think it would make a significant impact. Today, more than 70 percent of mothers are in the labor force. Almost 75 percent of married couples with children have both spouses working. All of these working parents, plus parents moving from welfare to work, have to find someone to care for their children if they are going to go out and support their families. Yet today, child care is often very hard to find and quality child care is even harder to find. In just 20 years, the last 20 years, the percentage of children enrolled in some form, in some manner, of child care has gone from 30 percent to 70 percent. Quality child care is a concern to virtually every family in this country. More and more parents are working. More and more children are in child care. I think the very least we can do is to try to assure those families that, while they are at work, their children will be taken care of by qualified and by competent individuals. This, unfortunately, is not always taking place today. There are many qualified people in child care. There are very many dedicated people in child care. But I think we can do better. This is what this bill intends to address. Scientists tell us that the largest indicator of a child's intelligence is the mother's education level. While a mother is at work, then it becomes the education level of the child care provider that the child deals with for, sometimes, an extended period of time during the day. With all the new research that we see on the brain and early childhood development, I think we have to reemphasize this particular aspect of child care. We need well-educated, well-trained child care providers. One of the ways we can achieve this, one of the things that we can do to raise the quality of child care, is to say to individuals who are inclined to go into the child care profession that we will in fact help them if they want to make this a profession. We have to let people know, if they are going to earn a degree to take care of our children, we will help them. Our bill, the bill introduced today by Senator Wellstone and myself, will do this. Our bill would help repay the student loans of an individual who earns an early childhood degree and would help repay the loan of that person who goes to work in a licensed child care facility. The Quality Child Care Loan Forgiveness Act would pay off a student loan at the rate of 15 percent a year for people who earn an early childhood degree and who work in a licensed child care facility. This bill will help bring more qualified individuals to the child care profession. It would also help to decrease the high turnover levels caused, many times, by very low wages. Let me conclude. The Quality Child Care Loan Forgiveness Act is an important way to improve the quality of child care. American parents need it for their peace of mind, and American children need it for their mind development. I thank the Chair and ask unanimous consent at this time that the full text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. DeWINE

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I send a bill to the desk now, a bill on behalf of myself and Senator Wellstone. Mr. President, this bill is the Quality Child Care Loan Forgiveness Act and it is intended to, at least in part, deal with a very serious problem in this country. That problem simply is that more and more children, more and more of our children, are every day in child care. There is a real concern about the quality of child care. This bill does not solve every problem in regard to child care, but I think it is a start and I think it would make a significant impact. Today, more than 70 percent of mothers are in the labor force. Almost 75 percent of married couples with children have both spouses working. All of these working parents, plus parents moving from welfare to work, have to find someone to care for their children if they are going to go out and support their families. Yet today, child care is often very hard to find and quality child care is even harder to find. In just 20 years, the last 20 years, the percentage of children enrolled in some form, in some manner, of child care has gone from 30 percent to 70 percent. Quality child care is a concern to virtually every family in this country. More and more parents are working. More and more children are in child care. I think the very least we can do is to try to assure those families that, while they are at work, their children will be taken care of by qualified and by competent individuals. This, unfortunately, is not always taking place today. There are many qualified people in child care. There are very many dedicated people in child care. But I think we can do better. This is what this bill intends to address. Scientists tell us that the largest indicator of a child's intelligence is the mother's education level. While a mother is at work, then it becomes the education level of the child care provider that the child deals with for, sometimes, an extended period of time during the day. With all the new research that we see on the brain and early childhood development, I think we have to reemphasize this particular aspect of child care. We need well-educated, well-trained child care providers. One of the ways we can achieve this, one of the things that we can do to raise the quality of child care, is to say to individuals who are inclined to go into the child care profession that we will in fact help them if they want to make this a profession. We have to let people know, if they are going to earn a degree to take care of our children, we will help them. Our bill, the bill introduced today by Senator Wellstone and myself, will do this. Our bill would help repay the student loans of an individual who earns an early childhood degree and would help repay the loan of that person who goes to work in a licensed child care facility. The Quality Child Care Loan Forgiveness Act would pay off a student loan at the rate of 15 percent a year for people who earn an early childhood degree and who work in a licensed child care facility. This bill will help bring more qualified individuals to the child care profession. It would also help to decrease the high turnover levels caused, many times, by very low wages. Let me conclude. The Quality Child Care Loan Forgiveness Act is an important way to improve the quality of child care. American parents need it for their peace of mind, and American children need it for their mind development. I thank the Chair and ask unanimous consent at this time that the full text of the bill be printed in the Record.