Pete Domenici

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, has Senator Bond finished?

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, in a moment I am going to ask consent on something, but I thank Senator Bond and congratulate him for what he did today. I don't know if we can do anything that is enough in response to the marvelous baseball year that Mark McGwire and others have given to the American people. I suggest that in an America that has grown so cynical about anything, wasn't it a marvelous thing to see how the people responded to the genuineness, the frankness, the decency of both Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa? Just remember, on a number of those very important home runs, those people who caught that ball, without one moment's hesitation--until right at the end, of course--they said the ball belongs to him; they weren't trying to get rich. It was just absolutely marvelous for the United States to see that kind of thing happen. Then to see the friendship between two people who are really at war in a very civil and different kind of way to break this title, which both of them did, which has been there for 37 years, and see how they related to each other. I think they have become genuine friends while they have proceeded, each in their individual way, to try to break one of the most important and difficult athletic standards in all of organized athletics worldwide. I believe if the Senate understands what has happened, they are going to approve that very soon. I commend the Senator for it, and I hope Mark McGwire and his family understand the reason for you doing this and why we are probably going to unanimously accept it. I thank the Senator. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business and then proceed to a unanimous consent request.

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. For the information of all Senators, when the Senate reconvenes on Wednesday at 9:30 a.m., there will be approximately 3\1/ 2\ hours for morning business. It is hoped that following the morning business period the Senate will be able to proceed to the DOD authorization conference report and/or the American Wetlands Conservation Act--hopefully, both items to be considered under time agreements. Members are reminded that no votes will occur during Wednesday's session of the Senate in observance of the Jewish holiday. All votes ordered will be postponed to occur at approximately 10 a.m. on Thursday. All Senators will be notified when votes are scheduled to occur.

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to the consideration of S. 2531 introduced earlier today by Senator Bond.

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill 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 appear at this point in the Record.

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, regarding Senate bill 1677, the North American Wetlands bill, I ask unanimous consent that it be in order for the majority leader, after consultation with the Democratic leader, to proceed to the consideration of calendar No. 417, S. 1677, and that it be considered under the following limitations: The only amendment in order to the bill be an amendment by Senator Chafee regarding membership. I further ask unanimous consent that there be 1 hour for debate on the bill, equally divided in the usual form, and following the disposition of the amendment and the expiration of the debate time, the bill be read the third time and passed, with the motion to reconsider laid upon the table.

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. I thank the Chairman.

Mr. DOMENICI. I appreciate the Chairman's clarification. The study language makes reference to additional or dissenting views. Is it the intent of the Committee that all members of the study group, including CBO, shall have the opportunity to express independent concurring or dissenting views within the context of the preliminary as well as final report to Congress.

Mr. DOMENICI. I would like to call attention to a study of market mechanisms in federal student loan programs, Section 801 of the conference report. I was pleased to see this issue addressed in the context of the Higher Education Act. As you know, Chairman Jeffords, our fiscal year 1999 Senate budget resolution raised concerns about the federal government setting interest rates for student loans and encouraged your Committee to look for a long term solution to the difficult problem of Congress setting these rates. I believe this study is a good first step and hopefully will give a good data on which to access where we go after the newly adopted student and lender rates sunset in 2003. One matter I wish to clarify with the Chairman is the participation of the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) in this study. CBO is a critical non-partisan analytical body on which we in Congress rely. By law they can not recommend specific policies or endorse the policy recommendations of others. I would assume then that the purpose for which you seek CBO's participation in the study for their expertise on student loans, and in general, study design and analysis.

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I rise today in support of the Higher Education Act Amendments of 1998. By reauthorizing the Higher Education Act (HEA) the Senate is making a down-payment on our nation's future. I would begin by saying: it is a simple fact that the future is prejudicial in favor of those who can read, write, and do math. A good education is a ticket to the secure economic future of the middle class. As the earning gap between brains and brawn grows ever larger almost no one doubts the link between education and an individual's prospects. And that is what the Senate is doing today, improving the post- secondary educational system of our country. What does the bill do in a nutshell? It improves financial aid opportunities for students, creates a unified program to promote excellence in the teachers our schools produce, and streamlines HEA by consolidating overlapping programs and eliminating unnecessary regulatory requirements. Mr. President, before I make some specific comments about provisions in the bill, I would like to first talk about how important the bill is for New Mexico. Approximately 100,000 students are enrolled in New Mexico's public colleges and universities, with about 53,000 students enrolled in community colleges and about 47,000 enrolled in universities. However, the number of high school graduates is expected to increase during the next decade and members of the current workforce are also expected to seek additional education during that period. Consequently, the state must have a high-quality, low-cost college education available to a growing number of students, regardless of income level, ethnic background or place of residence. Students attending New Mexico institutions received more than $200 million in financial aid, counting grants and loans from all sources, during the 1995-96 academic year. About 78 percent of that assistance came from federal sources, and during 1995-96, New Mexico students contracted for about $110 million in federal loans. Thus, I believe that educational performance is a crucial element in New Mexico's capacity to prosper in the extremely competitive national and international economy. New Mexico's colleges and universities directly and indirectly contribute to the economic vitality of the state, as they produce graduates with considerable intellectual depth and breadth, workers whose skills allow them to meet the demands of their employers, and first-rate research that helps to expand the boundaries of human knowledge. Mr. President, I would now like to turn and make a few comments about several of the provisions in the bill and especially one that will benefit New Mexico. Title V establishes a new part dedicated solely to supporting the needs of Hispanic Serving Institutions that is authorized at $62.5 million for fiscal year 1999. The funds may be used for construction or maintenance of instructional facilities, support of faculty exchanges and faculty development initiatives, the purchase of books and periodicals, technological and management improvements, and improving and expanding graduate and professional opportunities for Hispanic students. New Mexico has 17 designated Hispanic Serving Institutions that serve more than 23,500 Hispanic students. These school include Albuquerque Technical Vocational Institute, College of Santa Fe, College of the Southwest, Eastern New Mexico University-Roswell, Luna Vocational Technical Institute, New Mexico Highlands University (NMHU), New Mexico Junior College, New Mexico State University (NMSU) Las Cruces, NMSU- Carlsbad, NMSU-Dona Ana, NMSU-Grants, Northern New Mexico Community College (NNMCC), Santa Fee Community College, University of New Mexico (UNM)-Los Alamos, UNM-Taos Education Center, UNM-Valencia County Branch, and Western New Mexico University. Title II, entitled Teacher Quality, focuses on improving teacher quality and the recruitment of highly qualified. First, the bill seeks to improve student achievement, through quality improvement of the current and future teaching force by improving the preparation of prospective teachers and enhancing professional development activities. Second, the bill seeks to increase the number of students who complete high-quality teacher preparation programs. Title III or the Institutional Aid Title creates a new grant program for Tribal Colleges and Universities to strengthen services to Native American students. I am especially pleased with this new program because of my longstanding involvement with the issues affecting Native Americans. Tribally-controlled colleges in New Mexico like the Crownpoint Institute of Technology, the Institute of American Indian Arts in Santa Fe, the new Navajo Community College in Shiprock, and the Southwest Indian Polytechnic Institute (SIPI) in Albuquerque could potentially benefit. Student financial aid is given a huge boost through several changes. First, the bill increases the maximum Pell Grant levels to the following amounts: $4,500 for academic year 1999-2000; $4,800 for academic year 2000-2001; $5,100 for academic year 2001-2002; $5,400 for academic year 2002-2003 and $5,800 for academic year 2003-2004. The Federal TRIO Programs are given a boost through changes to the Student Assistance section in Title IV. I have always been a strong supporter of TRIO and most pleasing is how much the students, schools, and communities of New Mexico will benefit. The 1,900 current TRIO programs provide benefits to 700,000 students nationwide. Two-thirds of participating students come from families where neither parent attended college and whose incomes are below $24,000. The Dissemination/Partnership provision would encourage partnerships between TRIO programs and other community based organizations offering programs or activities serving at-risk students. The Federal Family Education Loan Program (FFEL) is stabilized in the following way. Student loan rates will be equal to the 91-day-T-bill- plus-1.7-percent while students are in school, and plus-2.3-percent during repayment after graduation. The interest amount is capped at 8.25 percent and for PLUS loans, rates will be the 91-day-T-bill-plus- 3.1 percent, capped at 9 percent for borrowers and lenders. An innovative loan forgiveness program is also included for teachers. Up to $5,000 of a teacher's loans will be forgiven after five years of teaching for those choosing to teach in urban or rural school districts that serve large populations of low-income children. Mr. President, in closing I believe we are taking an important step forward today by making an investment in our Nation's future with the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act.

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I now ask that the Senate stand in recess under the previous order.

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Under the unanimous consent agreement, there are other Senators who have time on this bill. I do not know if they are going to use their time. I am informed I can yield----

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, on behalf of the leader, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today it stand in recess until 9:30 a.m. on Wednesday, September 30; I further ask unanimous consent that the time for the two leaders be reserved.

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I note there is a minority Member on the floor. I would not make this request if there was not. I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to the consideration of the conference report to accompany H.R. 4060; that there be 40 minutes for debate, with 30 minutes under the control of Senator Graham from Florida; and that the remaining 10 minutes be equally divided between Senator Reid of Nevada and myself, as ranking member and chairman, respectively, managers of the bill. I further ask unanimous consent that upon the conclusion or yielding back of time, the conference report be adopted and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I had hoped the Senator would have stated the name of the Senator, because he has already talked to us, so we all know who it is.

Mr. DOMENICI. Distinguished Senator Harkin is the Senator who told me he is going to object. He is not here, so the Senator from Montana is objecting. I say to the Senate--in a way to the absent Senator Harkin--frankly, this is a completed conference report on one of the required annual appropriations bills. From what I understand, there is no objection to this bill. From what I understand, it passed the House 389 to 25. We are all engaged in trying to get the appropriations bills passed because that is our duty. We are supposed to have them finished before the fiscal year ends, and there are constant complaints that we don't get it done. Essentially, tomorrow is the end of the year. We worked very hard, Democrats and Republicans, House and Senate, to get this bill done, to meet it, have it within our allocation so it does not break the budget, to do it in the way that most probably will get a Presidential signature. The Corps of Engineers, the Bureau of Reclamation, the entire Department of Energy, both defense and nondefense, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission--they cannot help Senator Harkin. They are all in this bill. They should get their funding. They can't help Senator Harkin solve the problem of the labor, health, and human services bill, which the Senator from Iowa thinks needs a further allocation of resources in order to accomplish what he, as ranking member, thinks should be done. In addition, I suggest, at the request of the President, this bill includes a provision to resolve a dispute between the District of Columbia courts and the Public Defenders Office. We included that provision in the bill because this has to be enacted before the end of the current year. If that does not happen, then the public defenders-- the entire office, which defends those in the District who cannot afford their own lawyers, will not be able to meet its payroll. The leadership of the House and Senate Appropriations Committee wanted Senator Reid and me to address that problem, and we were able to do that with the help of Chairman McDade and his ranking member, Representative Fazio from the State of California. I hope Senator Harkin will reconsider this objection and will let us adopt this conference report. All I can say is, in all honesty, Senator Harkin and those who feel like he does, holding this bill up is not going to help one bit resolve the problem that centers around how much money should Labor, Health, and Human Services have to spend this year on its annual appropriations. It is just not going to help. There is nobody suggesting the money ought to come out of this bill. There is nobody suggesting that the solution to the problem, which is raised by the Senator from Iowa, can be solved by this bill or by this Senator. It has to be resolved, if a problem exists, through the leadership here and the chairmen of both of the Appropriations Committees, and I assume maybe even the White House. Since all of that would be required to resolve the problem, I once again ask, What good does it do to hold this bill up? And I hope that will not be a long-lasting event. I thank the Senate for considering this. I yield the floor. Mr. BAUCUS addressed the Chair.

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, the Federal Reserve today decided to cut interest rates, and this is a very important step toward restoring confidence and stability in the world's financial markets. It shows that the world's policymakers are taking an active role in ensuring that financial contagion does not spread further. It is also an insurance policy against further damage to the U.S. economy from international events which currently are out of our control. However, the U.S. Federal Reserve cannot resolve the current financial crisis alone. Investors are shunning the emerging markets because of a heightened sense of the risk that is there. In order to get money flowing to these regions again, nations must improve their banking regulations and must make information about their financial systems more available. This will assure investors and will help resolve much of the current crisis. As policymakers, we should aid the Fed's effort to restore international confidence by approving the International Monetary Fund's request with appropriate amendments. We should also remain confident that the Fed will continue to act in a way that ensures maximum U.S. long-term growth, as they have done in the past and, as I gather, they decided to do today.

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to consideration of the conference report to accompany H.R. 4060 and that there be 45 minutes for debate, with 30 minutes under the control of Senator Graham of Florida, 5 minutes under the control of Senator Jeffords, and the remaining 10 minutes equally divided between Senator Reid, the minority manager, and myself; further, I ask that upon the conclusion or yielding back of the time, the conference report be agreed to and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Madam President, I do not pass judgment on whether each and every one of these is something we should fund, nor whether each and every one of them is something we should not fund. I merely want to state to the Senate, and to those who are interested, that there seems to be a big argument going on now as to what is happening to the surplus and whether or not the Republicans in the U.S. House who want a tax bill are spending the surplus. Actually, I will tell everybody that in the first year, the 1999 year, that bill spends $7 billion of the surplus--if anybody is interested. The President's request for supplemental funding, emergency funding, not included in the budget--therefore, using the same fund--in the first year already amounts to $14.148 billion, and I believe I can say it is growing, because there is nothing in this number for special moneys that the Defense Department might need. There is some indication of a billion dollars for readiness. But the President's people are quick to say that won't be new money, it will be offset. Well, we will see what they are offsetting it with. The chiefs of staff are meeting here in the Congress to tell us what they think they need for readiness, and I understand their message is not a good one. It is one that says we are really getting behind with reference to the kinds of things needed to keep a strong military which is totally built around voluntarism--such things as getting behind in the amount of pay we are giving them, the kind of pensions we are giving them, and the readiness equipment. So we don't have anything in this accumulation that equals $14.148 billion. There is nothing for that part of anything that would be an emergency. I want to make one observation. Again, on this occasion, in speaking to the Senate and to anybody interested, I am not passing judgment on the use of the surplus for any of these things, I am merely saying that there is one surplus and there are two ways to use it. One is to spend it; one is to cut taxes. They both, in a sense, spend it, or some small portion of it. I just want everybody to know that the President of the United States, who seems to be saying, ``Don't cut any taxes,'' is at the same time saying, however, ``Give me $14.148 billion in new money,'' out of that same surplus for things that the country needs that he calls emergencies. They are all listed and they are all detailed in this statement that has been printed in the Record. I repeat, I don't believe, from the surplus standpoint, that there is any difference between the two. In other words, if you want to spend a huge amount of the surplus and you want to spend it for $100 billion worth of American programs, needed or otherwise, you have diminished it by $100 billion. If you choose to cut taxes by $100 billion, you have diminished this surplus by $100 billion. It is the same diminution. It is the same reduction, the exact same effect. We estimate the surplus to be $1.6 trillion over the next decade. And now we will engage here and elsewhere in a debate with reference to these emergency supplementals, which will be year long, which will spend some of that. We will engage in a discussion of whether there should be some for tax cuts. I repeat. The tax cut bill that the House proposed in the first year is $7 billion. The new expenditures requested by the President is $14.1 billion. It seems to me that deserves consideration when we start saying we shouldn't have tax cuts, but we should spend the money. I yield the floor.

Mr. DOMENICI. Madam President, I come to the floor not to discuss the pros and cons of an urgent supplemental, or any of the ingredients contemplated to be within it, but to render an accounting to the Senate, as best I can, of the request that the President has made for urgent supplemental funding that would come as an emergency funding, which means we would be spending the surplus that we have worked so hard to protect to pay for these items. The calculations that the Budget Committee staff has worked up for me would indicate that, as of now, the President's requests amount to $14.148 billion. That means that the President asks us to spend $14.148 billion for such things as agriculture emergencies, Y2K emergencies-- the computer situation that may result in a disaster if we don't try to use some new system and the purchase of new computers to alleviate the problem that may occur in the year 2000--there is some Bosnia money; embassy security money; interior security, or terrorism money; state embassies money; treasury security; and an economic support fund. They are listed in detail in this statement. I ask unanimous consent that this part of the budget bulletin, issued by the Budget Committee staff on September 28, which encapsulates these and then goes through a narrative as to how each one has occurred, be printed in the Record at this point.

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. I thank the Senator.

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I note the presence of the minority leader in the Chamber. I wish to state for the Senate that I understand the Energy and Water appropriations bill has a hold on the minority side, and I wanted to say if it has to do with the Tennessee Valley Authority, I would like very much to discuss that with the Senator because there is nothing we can do about it in this bill. But there is another thing we are going to do in another bill, and we would like to share that with you, whoever has the hold. I would very much like to do that. If that is the only hold, we can't fix the bill as far as TVA, but we can take some action to try to alleviate the problem in another way before we leave. I yield the floor.

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Madam President, on September 26, people all across America joined in the Juvenile Diabetes Foundation's ``Walk to Cure Diabetes.'' Today, approximately 16 million Americans suffer from diabetes. Heart and kidney disease, strokes, blindness, loss of limbs, and nerve damage are just some of the complications associated with this dread disease. An estimated 179,000 people die from this deadly disease and its complications every year. Unfortunately, diabetes rates are growing worldwide. I rise today to commend the ``Walk to Cure Diabetes,'' which is an effort to increase public awareness about this disease and to raise private sector funding for the search for a cure. In Albuquerque, my hometown, hundreds of New Mexicans participated in the ``Walk to Cure Diabetes.'' They joined thousands of Americans who walked and ran to raise more than $40 million to support research for better diagnosis, treatment and, ultimately, a cure to diabetes. I am heartened by the fact that participation in this grassroots effort is growing in New Mexico, where diabetes hits especially hard among our American Indian and Hispanic people. Among these populations, this disease is exacting a devastating toll. I would like to thank the ``Team Domenici'' runners, most of whom are associated with Albuquerque's Mountainside YMCA, who will represent my support for this endeavor. These ``Walk to Cure Diabetes'' team members included: Mary Howell, Chris Howell, Loretta Koski, Rosanna Thomas, Kim Babb, Loren Schneider, Mike Green, Chrissy Dukeminier, Becky Voccio, Stephanie Browne, Carole Smith, Jim Hughes, Debby Baness, and Lisa Breeden. Where the Juvenile Diabetes Foundation and other organizations work to shore up private sector support, I am pleased that Congress and the administration have strengthened the federal government's investment in diabetes treatments and the search for a cure. When we negotiated the five-year Balanced Budget Agreement in 1997, I was pleased to have initiated $30 million annually for a five-year Indian Health Service (IHS) diabetes treatment effort aimed at American Indian populations where diabetes rates are almost three times the rate in the general population. We also provided another $150 million over five years for the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) for a similar effort aimed specifically at juvenile diabetes. As part of these national efforts, new resources will be put toward understanding Type 1 diabetes, which adversely afflicts thousands of young Americans. This form of diabetes occurs when the insulin- producing cells in the pancreas are inexplicably destroyed. This infusion of federal resources will also allow the IHS and CDC to establish a Diabetes Prevention Research Center in Gallup, N.M., to develop coordinated preventative efforts to help control the growing number of diabetes cases among American Indians. Dr. Gerald Bernstein of the American Diabetes Association has reported that the gene that predisposes a person to diabetes is five times more prevalent in American Indians than in whites, and twice as prevalent in blacks, Hispanics and Asians than in non-Hispanic whites. In the 1950's, the IHS officially reported negligible rates of diabetes among Navajo Indians. In less than 50 years, diabetes has gone from negligible to rampant and epidemic. In part, the diabetes problem in the United States can be helped by lifestyle changes among those people predisposed to the disease. A concerted effort is needed to teach people how proper nutrition, early detection and treatment can help save lives. This will not be easy. In the case of Navajo and Zuni Indians, for example, prevention can be difficult to incorporate into daily reservation life. Exercise programs may not be readily available, dietary changes may be contrary to local custom for preparing foods, or soft drinks may be routinely substituted for drinking water that is not plentiful or potable. These kinds of factors in Indian life will be studied carefully at the Gallup Diabetes Prevention Research Center. Recommendations and CDC assistance will be provided to IHS service providers throughout the Navajo Nation, the Zuni Pueblo, and other Apache and Pueblo Indians in New Mexico and Arizona. The improved diagnostic and prevention programs will flow from this Gallup center to all IHS facilities around the country. Through these efforts we hope diabetes rates will drop, and not continually increase as they have for the past four decades. The number of U.S. diabetes cases reported annually between 1980 and 1994 has risen steadily, from 5.5 million cases to 7.7 million cases. The number of diagnosed cases is up from 1.6 million Americans in 1958. The human toll is devastating and the medical costs of treating diabetes will continue to escalate unless our medical and prevention research efforts are more successful. While we still have not found a cure for diabetes, enough is known today to significantly control the negative end results of diabetes like blindness, amputation, and kidney failure. The ```Walk to Cure Diabetes'' has been helpful in raising public awareness of the growing diabetes problem. I am pleased that we in the Senate join this effort through federal funding, policy initiatives and moral support. Madam President, I would encourage my colleagues to note the 1998 ``Walk to Cure Diabetes.'' It is one step in the American quest to attack this awful disease and improve the situation for all the people who are susceptible to the ravages of diabetes.

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, may I discuss with Senator Dorgan the current situation? We have a unanimous-consent agreement that says at 11:45 a.m. I am to be recognized to move to table the amendment. I am here. I only have 5 minutes to speak, and I don't choose to use that at this moment. What is the Senator's understanding about how we are going to handle this unanimous-consent agreement that sets 11:45 a.m. as a vote time?

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I hereby submit to the Senate the budget scorekeeping report prepared by the Congressional Budget Office under Section 308(b) and in aid of Section 311 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as amended. This report meets the requirements for Senate scorekeeping of Section 5 of S. Con. Res. 32, the First Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for 1986. This report shows the effects of congressional action on the budget through September 21, 1998. The estimates of budget authority, outlays, and revenues, which are consistent with the technical and economic assumptions of the 1998 Concurrent Resolution on the Budget (H. Con. Res. 84), show that current level spending is below the budget resolution by $17.1 billion in budget authority and above the budget resolution by $1.9 billion in outlays. Current level is $1.0 billion below the revenue floor in 1998 and $2.9 billion above the revenue floor over the five years 1998-2002. The current estimate of the deficit for purposes of calculating the maximum deficit amount is $176.4 billion, $2.9 billion above the maximum deficit amount for 1998 of $173.5 billion. Since my last report, dated September 8, 1998, there has been no action that has changed the current level of budget authority, outlays, and revenues. The report follows: U.S. Congress, Congressional Budget Office, Washington, DC, September 22, 1998. Hon. Pete V. Domenici, Chairman, Committee on the Budget, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Chairman: The enclosed report for fiscal year 1998 shows the effects of Congressional action on the 1998 budget and is current through September 21, 1998. The estimates of budget authority, outlays, and revenues are consistent with the technical and economic assumptions of the 1998 Concurrent Resolution on the Budget (H. Con. Res. 84). This report is submitted under Section 308(b) and in aid of Section 311 of the Congressional Budget Act, as amended. Since my last report, dated September 3, 1998, there has been no action that has changed the current level of budget authority, outlays, and revenues. Sincerely, June E. O'Neill, Director. Enclosures.