Robert Dole

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the amendment be agreed to; that the committee amendment, as amended, be agreed to; that the bill then be deemed read the third time and passed; that the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table; and that any statements relating to the bill be placed at the appropriate place in the Record.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, before we have the debate, I ask that the Jeffords amendment be withdrawn. [[Page S 12114]]

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. We will wait until we get to the bill. Mr. THURMOND addressed the Chair.

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, while we are waiting, I ask unanimous consent that upon disposition of H.R. 2002, the Department of Transportation and related agencies appropriations bill, the Senate turn to consideration of S. 1087, the DOD appropriations bill. This has been cleared on the other side.

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, let me just say for the information of all Senators, the Senate will begin consideration of the DOD appropriations bill after disposition of the pending matter. In the meantime, various Senators are still negotiating ABM language that has blocked the Senate from concluding action on the DOD authorization bill. As soon as that language has been agreed to on both sides, if agreed to, it will be my intention to call for the regular order with respect to the DOD authorization bill and complete action on that very necessary authorization bill. Once that has been completed, the Senate will resume the DOD appropriations bill and remain on that item until disposed of. If they do not get an agreement, we will finish the DOD appropriations bill. There are also a number of nominations we have had a number of inquiries about. Depending on what else happens, we may be able to accommodate some of those requests. I know the Secretary of the Treasury, Secretary Rubin, is very, very concerned about Larry Summers, a Treasury Department nominee. As I understand, there are at least 25 holds on that nomination. I am not certain we will be able to accommodate Secretary Rubin. We will be checking on this side of the aisle to see if there is any opportunity.

Mr. DOLE. I think we will wait until we get to the bill first.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. The Senator from North Dakota indicated to me that he would be willing to vote at 2 o'clock unless you want to stack the next amendment and his at the same time. That would save some time, too.

Mr. DOLE. I would suggest that, if we are going to have another amendment by Senator Bingaman which might require a rollcall, we have two at once. Let me indicate to my colleagues who are not here--the managers are here and they are prepared to discuss amendments--that it looks as though now this will be the last bill to come up before we go home. So when it is over, it is over, if we get a very tight time agreement on the DOD authorization bill. If we cannot get that time agreement, we will be back to DOD. But if we get a very tight time agreement, which would not take more than 4 or 5 hours when we come back, we would do that on Tuesday the 5th and then go to welfare reform. So for those people who have come to me and left notes under the door saying ``Let's get out of here,'' and all of [[Page S 12139]] these things, here is their opportunity to come to the floor and offer their amendments and enter into a very short time agreement. It will speed up the process and make the managers very happy, and many others will be pleased, I might add.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. How long?

Mr. DOLE. There is a good chance we can complete our work here if everybody cooperates and does not take too much time. We have listened to two or three Senators all afternoon and they have more amendments. That is certainly their right. I wish they would understand there are Members on each side who have other ideas for tomorrow. One idea is not staying here all day. So if they would like to talk, as I said, go home and make the speech. A lot of people at home never hear the speeches. We hear them every day. Amendment No. 2395, as modified

Mr. DOLE. Before we do that, if I could just say a word.

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I thank my friend the chairman, Senator Stevens for offering an amendment on my behalf. The amendment sets aside $500,000 for the Air Force's Life Sciences Equipment Lab. The Lab is a unique facility within the Department of Defense, and is probably the only facility of its kind anywhere. Established in 1983, it meets three primary functions: (1) provide scientific support to aircraft mishap investigation boards; (2) train personnel in life sciences equipment investigation; and (3) process the everyday technical problems on such equipment, while also conducting related design work and test programs. Additionally, the Lab has assisted Joint Task Force--Full Accounting (JTF-FA) as it endeavors to determine the status of air crew personnel in South East Asia, providing JTF-FA with technical support--involving research into the formal identification of suspected life sciences equipment; artifact analysis to indicated the survival outcome of individuals involved with the equipment; and technical training of personnel being assigned to JTF-FA, to familiarize them with South East Asia era equipment and how to conduct scientific investigations. In short, Mr. President, this funding will help ensure the fullest possible accounting of those lost in South East Asia, while also ensuring the lab's continued attention to investigating military aircraft mishaps and ensuring the effectiveness of the equipment designed to help ensure the safety of our military's air crews. I believe the amendment has been cleared by both sides, and I thank both Senator Stevens and Senator Inouye for their assistance in this matter. b-52

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, before we conclude consideration of the Fiscal Year 1996 Defense Appropriations Bill, I want to commend Chairman Stevens and Senator Inouye for all of their work in preparing this bill. This is perhaps one of the most important appropriations bills we pass each year. With the largest share of defense spending, this bill funds such critical accounts as operation & maintenance, procurement, research & development, and military pay and personnel. Mr. President, I am pleased to support this bill. This year, again, the President submitted to Congress a defense budget which was woefully inadequate. As I am sure most of my colleagues know, long-term readiness is funded through the Procurement and R&D accounts, but under the President's budget, the procurement accounts were down 67.4 percent from their fiscal year 1985 peak. Additionally, the Research, Development Test & Evaluation accounts had fallen every year since hitting an FY 1988 high. Under the President's budget, these accounts would continue to plummet for the next 5 years. For all the administration's rhetoric, procurement spending and procurement rates are at their lowest levels in 45 years. Despite the administration's promises to enhance force capabilities, modernization has come to a virtual standstill. The bottom line is that under the Clinton administration, our forces have simply become smaller, but not more capable. However, the Republican controlled Congress has kept faith with our promise to the American people to restore our national security. We refuse to continue down the path which would lead us back to a hollow military. We have added $7 billion in overall defense spending, turning the corner on defense spending. The Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, under the direction of Senator Stevens has worked to ensure that these additional funds were allocated to ensure not only our near-term readiness, but also to ensure that our forces were prepared to prevail in any future battle. This bill not only increases funding for accounts such as operation and maintenance but also for the Procurement and Research & Development accounts. Let me be clear. This year's increase does not fix all of the Department's funding problems. In fact, the burden for ensuring the readiness of our military again shifts back to the administration and the Department of Defense. In preparing next year's defense budget, the administration should follow the lead of this Congress. In closing, I again thank the chairman and ranking member for their hard work in shaping this defense bill and I am pleased to support it.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, there's been a lot of hype recently about the so-called V-chip. President Clinton has endorsed the chip, touting it as an antidote to the gratuitous violence and sexual innuendo that now permeate prime- time television. A majority of the Senate has voted to require that every new television set contain the V-chip. And the House of Representatives has joined the V-chip bandwagon, by including a V-chip mandate in the recently passed telecommunications bill. [[Page S 12209]] With all this support, one would think that the V-chip has been tested and tested in laboratories throughout the country. But guess what? The V-chip doesn't even exist--and it may never exist. It is purely a drawing-board scheme that may make sense in theory--but it's anybody's guess whether it will ever work in practice. We've never seen one. According to an article appearing in USA Today, ``There Is No Such Thing as a V-chip. And There Probably Never Will Be.'' The San Francisco Chronicle reports that-- No company makes--the V-chip, nor has any company expressed an interest in doing so. In fact, the chip isn't a chip at all. It's really an idea for special circuitry for television, but ``V-circuitry'' doesn't sound quite as omnipotent as V-chip. Is development of V-chip technology just around the hi-tech corner? Well, perhaps not. According to experts cited in the USA Today article, it-- Could take 10 years before a V-chip TV is designed, built, marketed, and sold into enough homes to make a difference. And, in fact, it's likely that the so-called V-chip technology will be overtaken by existing software systems--developed as a direct result of consumer demand--that will give parents more control over what their children watch on television. So, Mr. President, seeing is believing--and perhaps, just perhaps, the White House may want to reconsider its threat to veto any telecommunications bill that fails to include a V-chip mandate. After all, this bill is the key to our Nation's future economic success. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the USA Today and San Francisco Chronicle articles be printed in the Record.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I am proud to be an original cosponsor of the American Family Tax Relief Act of 1995. The American Family Tax Relief Act would provide tax cuts where they are needed most--to families with dependent children. These families have seen their Federal tax burden skyrocket over the years--from 3% of their income in 1948 to well over 20 percent today. The current tax law is designed to counter a rising tax burden on families with automatic increases in the personal exemption to account for inflation. These inflation adjustments have not been enough, though, to counter the growing tax burden on families. The American Family Tax Relief Act addresses this concern by providing a $500 tax credit for each dependent child up to age 18. The act will provide substantial and valuable benefits to thousands of families with children in each State. There are an average of 117,000 children in each congressional district whose families would be eligible for a $500 family tax credit under this bill. That is an average tax benefit of $59 million for each congressional district. Of course, the benefits to each State are substantially larger. In Kansas alone, there are over 650,000 eligible children whose families would receive more than $325 million in family tax credits each year under this bill. Enacting pro-family tax relief, together with balancing the Federal budget, are critical to the well-being of the family and the country. One of the most important things we can do for our children is to stop mortgaging their future--and balancing the budget will do just that. We will cease deficit spending and shrink the size of the government, so the tax burden on Americans can be reduced. When we pass budget reconciliation legislation this year, we will substantially reduce the tax burden on families. We will provide tax credits for families with children, tax credits to defray the costs to adopt a child, and other pro-family measures to increase the amount of after-tax dollars in the pockets of American families. The introduction of the American Family Tax Relief Act of 1995 is an important step forward toward reducing the tax burden on American families. I urge my colleagues to join in cosponsoring this bill to show their support for children and family. And I thank the groups that are promoting this effort, including Concerned Women For America, Christian Coalition, Eagle Forum, Family Research Council, and Traditional Values Coalition.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I am pleased to cosponsor the Multilateral Bosnia and Herzegovina Self-Defense Fund. In the aftermath of the overwhelming votes to lift the arms embargo in the Senate and the House, this legislation is the logical next step in a policy designed to put the future of Bosnia back in Bosnian hands. This legislation will create an international fund for the defense of Bosnia, and will provide for a leadership role for the United States, not only in establishing the fund, but in chairing it. I would like to commend the distinguished chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee in taking the lead and forging legislation to address the critical issue of supporting the Bosnian Government militarily once the arms embargo is lifted--and it will be lifted. I would also add that the chairman has brought together a bipartisan group of distinguished Senators, including Senator Lieberman, in this important effort. During our debates on lifting the arms embargo on Bosnia administration officials have snidely criticized our legislation as lift and pray--alleging to the press and even to the Bosnians that there is no support in the Congress for providing military assistance to them. This bill makes it absolutely clear that we are serious--that we are ready to follow-through. The reality is that the administration's approach is don't lift and pray--pray that the American people will be fooled into thinking that there is a U.S. policy and pray that the Croatian government will get the international community off the hook. Well, the American people are not fooled. They know that the administration does not have a policy. As for the recent Croatian military action--Croatia's ability to retake its territory has demonstrated that with arms, the victims of aggression can successfully take matters into their own hands. In 4 days, Croatian forces accomplished what the United Nations could not do in 4 years. And, they had no help--the NATO no-fly zone was not enforced as Serb jets bombed Croatian towns. The undeniable lesson of the past week is that the arms embargo and the U.N. presence has prolonged the war in the former Yugoslavia by keeping areas of Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina under occupation. Another allegation made by administration officials is that lifting the embargo would Americanize the war. We know from the large votes in support of Bosnia's right to self-defense in the U.N. General Assembly and from discussions with international leaders that this assertion is simply not true. This rhetoric is part of the scare tactics employed by the Pentagon and State Department in order to try to persuade members of Congress that somehow, if the arms embargo is lifted, we alone would be providing aid to the Bosnians. This fund will provide a mechanism for countries, other than just the United States, to provide the Bosnians with military assistance--and to do so before the arms embargo is lifted. I would add, however, that the actual delivery of weapons will not occur until the U.S. arms embargo is lifted which would occur after U.N. forces withdraw. I want to talk for a moment about cost. This bill provides for a $50 million payment to the fund and authorization for $50 million in Department of Defense draw down authority for defense articles and services--for a total package of $100 million, far less than we are currently spending on a failed approach. This year, we are being billed around a half a billion dollars for our share of the U.N. peacekeeping operation. Our share for UNPROFOR next [[Page S 12252]] year will probably be closer to $600 million. We are also providing indirect support to this operation--for example, through NATO--which amounts to about $250 million annually. And, we do not get any discount when UNPROFOR is unable to do its job. The bottom line is that keeping the U.N. in Bosnia is not cost-free. Indeed it is far more expensive than helping the Bosnians help themselves. Furthermore, we have to look at the costs of this failure to our credibility and our principles. As we introduce this legislation today, President Clinton is poised to veto S. 21, the Dole-Lieberman legislation to lift the arms embargo on Bosnia. Administration officials are reportedly in Europe devising new ways to divide Bosnia and Herzegovina and to bribe Serbian President Milosevic, while Ambassador Albright is briefing the Security Council on evidence that more than 2,000 people were buried in mass graves in the wake of the Bosnian Serb take over of Srebrenica. No doubt about it, the international community is partially responsible for these war crimes. It has refused to protect the Bosnians and denied the Bosnians the means to protect themselves. How can America, the leader of the free world, continue to be a part of this immoral embargo? Administration officials even publicly acknowledge that it is immoral. As for the embargo's practical effect, it has been a total failure at achieving its goal of limiting violence and ending the war. America should be leading the way toward a moral and rational policy that has some chance of resulting in a just and stable settlement. Instead, America is following an ineffective, failed approached based on appeasement.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, for the information of all Senators, the Senate is immediately resuming the consideration of the Transportation appropriations bill this morning. Following 4 minutes of debate, the Senate will begin several consecutive rollcall votes on or in relation to the pending amendments to the Transportation appropriations bill. Following the disposition of the Transportation bill, it may be the intention of the majority leader to resume consideration of the DOD authorization bill. There can also be a cloture vote on the DOD authorization bill. But I will not set a time for that until I have a chance to consult with the Democratic leader. I understand they have a meeting this morning. I am certain we will work it out to everybody's satisfaction. Senators should therefore expect further rollcall votes and a late- night session. As a reminder, a cloture motion was filed yesterday on the DOD authorization bill. Therefore, Senators may file first-degree amendments up to the hour of 1 p.m. today. I yield 1 minute to the Senator from Alaska.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, let me indicate that we do have the agreement. All amendments must be debated tonight. The votes will start at 9:15 tomorrow morning. The first votes, if they are ordered, will occur at 9:15. Votes after that will be 10 minutes each. There will be 4 minutes between the stacked votes. As I understand, after the third vote you can have up to 10 minutes, which I trust you would not use. We are on automatic pilot. As soon as everybody finishes making speeches, we can go home for the recess.

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now turn to the consideration of H.R. 2002, the transportation appropriations bill.

Mr. DOLE. After two more. Amendment No. 2330 (Purpose: To reduce the energy costs of Federal facilities for which funds are made available under this Act)

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, let me thank my colleague from Washington, Senator Gorton, and also the distinguished Senator from West Virginia, Senator Byrd, for their expeditious action on a very important and a very, in some areas, contentious bill. They have disposed of the amendments, I think, in very good time. Now we are prepared to move on to the next bill. Let me remind my colleagues, everything is on automatic pilot. The speech you do not make in the next 2 days means you will get out that much earlier. You can make the speech when you get home, and a lot of people have never heard it before and most of us have.

Mr. DOLE. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. That is an understanding we have. [[Page S 11840]] Because I assume the Senator is meeting with his colleagues; we are meeting with our colleagues. We are working out problems, and we would like, where we can, to accommodate different views to those changes. It might save a lot of amendments.

Mr. DOLE. So I ask unanimous consent now that we turn to the consideration of H.R. 1977, the Interior appropriations bill.