Michael Enzi

Mr. ENZI

Mr. ENZI. Thank you for yielding. I appreciate the vast amount of knowledge that you have shared. And I have actually a series of questions that I would like to have answered in regard to the bill. And like I say, I have been very impressed at all the knowledge.

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, would the Senator yield for a question?

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for a couple more questions? I understand the time deadline. I understand how those motions work that lead to this kind of a need for the format for debate. Will the Senator yield?

Mr. ENZI. Yes. Does the Senator feel that the $1.10 or $1.50, as it is $1.50 right now, would have the amount of money the FDA needs to do the kind of enforcement we have been putting on them? Does the Senator think that when we talked about in the Labor Committee, which I am on, the $34 million amount for the FDA and all of the things that would do, and that this bill has considerably more money in it than that for the FDA, does the Senator think that we are doing overkill, perhaps, with the FDA? Will they be able to adequately use the amount of money that we are talking about in this bill for that agency alone? It is a considerable expansion of that agency. Do you think that our agencies are set up in a manner that they can escalate the amount of spending that they are very good at, but can they escalate the amount of spending they are doing to meet these new amounts that are coming in, particularly with the FDA, which is critical to this?

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for a couple more questions? I understand the time deadline. I understand how those motions work that lead to this kind of a need for the format for debate. Will the Senator yield?

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I am anxious to know and hope that the Senator from Missouri has the answer to how this 753-page bill or 482- page bill that we haven't had time to complete the review of yet--I realize the Senator may not have the answer to this and what kind of emphasis it places on the family as playing a role in reducing tobacco use. I have seen the statistics. Whether it is drugs or tobacco, the biggest influence on whether kids use them are the parents and the attitudes that the parents have to them. And the parents, even if they smoke, have a good influence on reducing teen smoking or youth smoking by saying that even though they do it, it hurts them; that it is not right, it seems to me. The bill that is really trying to get at the heart of the problem, and if the statistics all point to the family emphasis, the family attitude, the family direction being the way to reduce smoking, it seems like this bill ought to have something in there that strengthens the family and strengthens their role in doing this. It provides a mechanism for almost everything else in the world, including things that are not health related. So it seems to me like there ought to be something in here that says something to families, ``You can make a difference. How do we get you involved?'' I can't find that. I want to know if the Senator from Missouri is able to find it.

Mr. ENZI. I need to ask how people would expect me to support $1.10 a pack when the State legislature looked at 15 cents a pack totally dedicated to health and turned that down. This one, as you mentioned, has all of these other ramifications. I know that one of the ramifications is to cut down on teen smoking. So I have addressed that in a number of trips I have made to the State. I tried to visit schools on Friday, and I am in Wyoming most of the time. I wonder how $1.10 is going to cause any concern. After all, kids will pay $50 for a pair of tennis shoes--I actually said $50 to see if people were paying attention. They will pay $150--I was in the shoe business for 28 years--$150 for a pair of tennis shoes. The parents can't afford it, but the kids can. In talking to these kids, they seemed to think that $1.10 a pack would be a deterrent for a few days until they realized how they were going to raise the other $1.10 a pack and maybe smoke one cigarette less, but probably not smoke cigarettes less. These kids asked me, and I want to ask you, how the price of a pack of cigarettes going up will deter smoking when the cost of marijuana is extremely high and there is no indication of it going down and there is still an increase in marijuana smoking. That is all black market. So if we think we are doing an elimination of the black market, that creates a great deal of concern to me, and apparently to you. I ask the Senator to give me some kind of an indication of whether the Senator thinks that price will make a difference.

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for another question?

Mr. ENZI. Let me ask another question that deals with this, particularly with the kids smoking, because we have been trying to get at this problem of kids smoking for some time now. I know the Senator is as distressed as I am that 3,000 kids a day are starting this life-threatening addiction. Although I wonder if you know more about where those estimates come from, because as far as I can tell, they are estimates, as is the percentage, that this will drop. We are talking about a 60-percent drop in youth smoking, and I think that is based on Larry Summers, Deputy Treasury Summers, when he said a 10- percent increase in the pack of cigarettes would produce a 7-percent reduction in the number of children who smoke. We seem to be going with the theory that if you raise it high enough, it will get to zero. That doesn't seem to equate with anything else that is happening. I ask the Senator if he has seen--probably not--the latest issue of the George Washington University magazine.

Mr. ENZI. A magazine put out by a university. I am a graduate of that, so I think it is the premier university of the District.

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for another question?

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I am anxious to know and hope that the Senator from Missouri has the answer to how this 753-page bill or 482- page bill that we haven't had time to complete the review of yet--I realize the Senator may not have the answer to this and what kind of emphasis it places on the family as playing a role in reducing tobacco use. I have seen the statistics. Whether it is drugs or tobacco, the biggest influence on whether kids use them are the parents and the attitudes that the parents have to them. And the parents, even if they smoke, have a good influence on reducing teen smoking or youth smoking by saying that even though they do it, it hurts them; that it is not right, it seems to me. The bill that is really trying to get at the heart of the problem, and if the statistics all point to the family emphasis, the family attitude, the family direction being the way to reduce smoking, it seems like this bill ought to have something in there that strengthens the family and strengthens their role in doing this. It provides a mechanism for almost everything else in the world, including things that are not health related. So it seems to me like there ought to be something in here that says something to families, ``You can make a difference. How do we get you involved?'' I can't find that. I want to know if the Senator from Missouri is able to find it.

Mr. ENZI

Mr. ENZI. Thank you, Mr. President. And I say thank you to the Senator from North Carolina. Mr. President, I do rise to support the amendment numbered 2421 which is offered by the Senator from North Carolina, Senator Faircloth. I am very much in support of this amendment. And part of it is as a protection to the attorneys. I know they are very sensitive to the kind of reputation they get in a lot of instances, and this is one of those ``save the reputation of the lawyers'' amendments. I am sure a lot of people out there are not used to making $88,000 an hour, and as a result they are probably a little upset with the attorneys who might get that in some of these tobacco cases. One of the things that people are seeing in this country is a new lottery. And this new lottery is one that requires you have an attorney to scratch your card for you. The tobacco situation is probably one of the new easy targets. In fact, I am predicting that the courts are soon going to be clogged with lawsuits, and part of that is because there are attorneys out there who can see this as a retirement bill as well as an easy target. It has been adjudicated, it has been worked, and it is easy to see that the tobacco companies have been hiding documents and doing a number of other things. Along with these remarks, I want to state I am probably one of the few who has not received any money from the tobacco lobby. I have been very concerned about these issues. I grew up in a house where both of my parents smoked, and my dad paid probably the ultimate price for that, even though he quit before he passed away. The amendment would only require lawyers to provide an accounting of their legal work to the Congress in relation to the legal actions that are covered by the underlying bill, including any fee arrangements entered into, and it would limit the payments of attorneys' fees to $250 an hour. That is not $250 an hour total for the firm; that is for the lawyers that are involved in this, and there may be more than one lawyer involved in it. So it isn't a complete limitation. I have heard some comments that this may just be the start of limiting other kinds of occupations. Perhaps it is, and perhaps it ought to be. Again, I think the people would be appalled to find out that people might make up to $88,000 an hour. And that might not even be the highest case in it. I do have to give some reference to the accountants who were mentioned. In accounting ethics, the amount that you charge cannot be based on what you find or the amount that you are working with. It is based on hours worked. We already have that kind of a limitation. I don't know of any other occupation where you get to find a pot of money and then, without being injured or damaged in the case, be able to share in that pot of money. Usually you have to have some separate arrangement for it, some kind of a limitation. Part of that is to discourage greed. What is happening with the tobacco bill is that there are some wealthy and connected trial lawyers that are lining their pockets from the settlement supposedly made on behalf of the American public. This bill would impose one of the most regressive taxes in American history with outrageous legal fees charged by insider lawyers, some of whom become billionaires as a result of their reputation for the States and class actions. A document here mentions that the attorney general of Mississippi, Mike Moore, got to pick the No. 1 campaign contributor, Richard Scruggs, who received $2.4 million in fees for the State's asbestos litigation. Then he got to lead the Medicaid recovery suit. Minnesota lawyers might want to know why Attorney General Humphrey chose Robins, Kaplan, with a 25 percent fee arrangement when Texas, Illinois, Indiana, and West Virginia all had lower percentages than that. They were the ones that had to do the harder work, the initial action. The Wall Street Journal reported last fall that four lawyers who helped to settle Florida's billion-dollar windfall were now demanding 25 percent of the settlement, or $1.4 billion. Florida Attorney General Bob Butterworth has called that enough to choke a horse. In Texas, Governor Bush has filed a legal challenge to the $2.3 billion contingency fee, part of the recent Texas settlement. He did that in the interests of the taxpayers who may end up paying for that. This is not a defense of tobacco or the executives who run the industry. It is quite the opposite. In fact, I am getting a lot of comments from folks in my State. One lady said, ``Let's see now, the tobacco companies have been abusing my body for all of these years while I have been smoking, and now you are going to punish them, and the way you are going to punish them is to tax me?'' They are figuring that out all over this country. It isn't the companies that are going to be paying the tab. In these lawsuits, it isn't the companies that are going to be paying the tab on that either. Sometimes it is the taxpayers. In a lot of these lawsuits, it comes directly out of the amount of money that the individuals might have gotten. They don't have control over how much those lawsuits are going to be. If that amount of money holds for the State of Texas, those attorneys will earn $88,000 per hour for their legal representation. The American taxpayers are going to be left holding the tab for a number of outrageous fees. I think it is proper for us, again, in defense of the legal institution, to limit those fees so people aren't seeing these as a lottery for attorneys where everybody else gets the pain and the attorneys get the dollars. I ask that you support the amendment.

Mr. ENZI. I ask unanimous consent.

Mr. ENZI

Mr. ENZI. Would the Senator yield for a question? This is clearly a very important issue for members of the Small Business Committee. Would the Senator agree that NSF's coordination with SBA is critical to ensuring a strong SBIR program?

Mr. ENZI. I thank the Senator from Montana and I thank you, Senator Jeffords, for considering this important issue.

Mr. ENZI. I would like to raise an issue that has been brought to my attention since the Labor Committee reported this bill in October. It relates to the Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) program and I want to highlight the fact that recent NSF decisions may have a negative effect on this very successful program. I have worked closely on small business issues with my friend from Montana, Senator Conrad Burns, who also serves on the Small Business Committee with me. It is not my intention to hold up this legislation by offering an amendment at this time, but I want the Chairman, Senator Jeffords, to know that it is a very important issue for me. I would like to yield to Senator Burns for a minute and ask him to describe the situation.

Mr. ENZI

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand in adjournment until 9:30 a.m. on Friday, May 8. I further ask unanimous consent that on Friday, immediately following the prayer, the routine requests through the morning hour be granted and the Senate then begin a period for morning business until 12 noon, with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each, with the following exception: Senator Jeffords, 10 minutes.

Mr. ENZI

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, for the information of all Senators, tomorrow morning at 9:30 a.m., the Senate will be in a period for morning business until 12 noon. Following morning business, the Senate will attempt to enter into several time agreements with respect to energy legislation and may confirm any Executive Calendar nominations that can be cleared for action. As a reminder, no votes will occur during Friday's session. On Monday, May 11, the Senate may consider the agriculture research conference report along with a number of so-called high-tech bills. The Senate may also begin consideration of S. 1873, the missile defense bill. However, no votes will occur during Monday's session. On Tuesday morning, May 12, the Senate will attempt to reach a time agreement on the D'Amato bill regarding inpatient health care for breast cancer. The Senate will also resume and attempt to complete action on any high-tech bills not completed on Monday. Any votes ordered to occur with respect to the agriculture research conference report and the high-tech bills will be postponed, to occur on Tuesday, May 12, at noon. Also, it will be the leader's intention to begin consideration of the Department of Defense authorization bill during the latter part of next week.

Mr. ENZI

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

Mr. ENZI

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, it is a pleasure to be in these Chambers on such a historic day. Many out there might think that I am referring to this final passage of the tax reform bill, and that is truly historic and very significant and allows the American people to be removed from the fear of their own Government. And that is significant, but it is not the most significant historical thing happening. Earlier today, there was a speech in here that recognized something very important that is happening. Last year, I was presiding when Senator Byrd gave his speech about mothers. Today, he spoke about mothers. On Sunday, we will be recognizing mothers. Mothers are probably the most significant historical thing that happen each and every day in this country. ``Mother'' has to be the world's most special word. I want to add to his comments and those of Senator Thomas earlier today. Of course, the person we get to know the best--or at least, probably more correctly worded, who knows us the best--is our mother. That gives them a very special place in our lives. They always set expectations for us. I will have to relate this in terms of my mother. I know it is done by mothers all over the country. I will tell you a little bit about my mother, and you can relate that to your mother and the other mothers in this country who are making a difference and raising families. My mom set expectations. It is one of those jobs of a mom. I remember coming home from a PTA meeting when I was in kindergarten, and they had talked about college, and from that point on she talked about ``when'' I went to college. They had talked about Massachusetts Institute of Technology, MIT, so at that point she was sure I would be an engineer and go to MIT. But it is that expectation of college that sticks, and the other expectations of mom's, for me. She made deals for learning, for education. I remember once an encyclopedia salesman came to the house--the ``Book of Knowledge''--and I got to look at all those dream pages in there on all of those topics. I kind of pleaded with her to have an encyclopedia, and she asked me, if she got the encyclopedia, if I would give up comic books. This was in about second grade. Well, I wound up with the encyclopedia, and she worked hard to make sure we could pay for that encyclopedia. I still have that outdated encyclopedia, and it still gives the same excitement, the same feelings of mystery and adventure, that it did then. And mothers give time. Sometimes they give it in a formal way to service organizations. My mom was a Cub Scout leader, she was my sister's Brownie and Girl Scout leader, and was very active in Sunday school and church, and just did a lot of things that involved us. But all mothers give time, and a lot of times we don't think about the time that they are giving when they are doing the things they are expected to do--organizing schedules, getting the meals together, doing the laundry, sewing a button on, putting a Band-Aid on--all those little things that we come to take for granted. That is time that mothers give--extra time that mothers give. They give encouragement. They dream those dreams for us, and then they help us to fulfill them. It was my mom who encouraged me to be an Eagle Scout. ``Encourage'' is a word for ``insist,'' I think. Without some insistence, sometimes we don't get quite to the place that their vision includes. And they hear about other dreams and visions for each one that we are able to accomplish, and they move us to another level of envisioning. Of course, moms are the chief people for traditions, too. We have oyster stew on Christmas Eve, play instruments around a Christmas tree, have chicken on Sunday. In fact, to this day it isn't Sunday unless I get fried chicken. Nights with popcorn, playing games, listening--I am old enough that we used to sit down and listen to the radio together. ``Fibber McGee and Molly'' was one of the most popular shows. Making sauerkraut, and canning, all of the kinds of meals that mother put together. Of course, the mothers are the ones who really establish that firm foundation of family. They are the ones who watch out for the parents and the grandparents and the kids and the grandkids, and think of the little events that are happening that ought to be special celebrations, and they make them special celebrations, often, by being there. Of course, another part that mothers play is an educational role, passing on the lessons from their moms, and often in very succinct phrases. I have in my Washington office the mission statement that we came up with by which we measure everything that is done in the office. It is a series of phrases that my mom used to use when we were growing up, just so that we knew what we were supposed to be doing. The three easy rules are: Do what is right. Do your best. Treat others as you want to be treated. Even here in the U.S. Senate, if it doesn't fit those criteria, we are not going to do it. Earlier today, Senator Thomas made some comments about my mom. I deeply appreciated those. My mom was selected as Wyoming's Mother of the Year this year. She is 75 years young and still involved in many things, probably most principally still involved in being a mother. I still get the regular lessons, the hopes, the expectations, the dreams. But last weekend I got to go to Atlanta to see the special celebration for the mothers of the year from each of the States in the Nation. I have to tell you, that was a very spectacular collection of women who have done some very unusual things, way beyond the call of duty. And they do that as a celebration of all mothers and the unusual things that mothers do, often without credit. I have to tell you that a lady named Diane Matthews was given the honor of being the Nation's Mother of the Year, and she will spend the next year traveling around at her own expense, helping out mothers' organizations across this country to deliver a message. I wish that I had the time to run through the special attributes that all of these women who were mothers of the year had. They deserve it. But, so does your mother deserve some special accolades, and that is what Sunday is going to be about, making a special day of saying, ``Thanks, mom,'' and maybe mentioning a few of those things that we forget to mention some of the times. I have to tell you a little bit about this organization that does this nationwide thing for promoting mothers, because that is what will change this country more than what we do in this body. Laws will not make the difference in the end--or in the beginning. Mothers are there at the beginning, and they start to form our lives right at that point. I have to tell you that this organization tries to improve motherhood, something that is already excellent. They know that it can be better. They know that if they work together, they can make this country better. I want to pass on to you a few of the suggestions they have for the homes of America. They have a pledge that mothers who join sign on to. It covers some very basic things. They recognize that there are no quick fixes to problems facing families, but they suggest: Pray each day. Establish family traditions; share history. Inspire respect, a sense of belonging, a feeling of gratitude and responsibility. They suggest a daily devotion and having a family meeting once a week. That is included with eating together as a family at least once a day for a chance to compare notes; play together, learn, teach and model life skills, such as time management; love and nurture family members; monitor television viewing; promote patriotism; teach values; plan and spend time with your spouse; and learn the parenting skills. They have some community goals: Reestablish the dignity and importance of being a mother; encourage community-wide needs assessment to identify and solve problems. They recognize that the moms can see the problems in the community, they can identify those needs and get people busy solving them. They suggest implementing a mentor mothers program: Get the mothers who have some experience to help those who don't have experience yet to learn what the jobs are, and that can be done in a neighborhood sort of way. They have a number of suggestions for the neighborhood: Create a nurturing neighborhood; community watch and safe neighborhoods; community cleanliness and beautification; recycling; emergency preparedness; gardens for the hungry; and neighborhood parties to create a sense of belonging. In this country, we have lost the sense of belonging as we get so busy and wrapped up in our jobs, and that is something to which mothers will bring us back. They are emphasizing family time together, mothers helping other mothers, sharing the peace and power of prayer and providing quilts for at-risk babies--they go to hospitals all over the country and give quilts to babies who might otherwise be at risk--and also showing the appreciation of the role of mothers everywhere. It was a tremendous adventure to attend their convention and see all of the different activities in which they are involved, things we ought to have more people involved in all over this country. I encourage everyone to make Mother's Day special this year. Mothers help us to have celebrations. They are cheerleaders for all of the events of our lives. Sunday is a good day to be a cheerleader for the events in their lives. Take a few moments and write down some of the fond memories of your mother and share those with your mother. It will be a pleasant experience for both of you. After all, your mother had the dreams and did the work that makes your day, today, a reality. In a speech I saw once, there were some lines that go something like this: For 9 long months, your mother carried you next to her heart. There is nothing that you will ever be able to do that will exceed her secret expectations of you. And even if your actions sink to the lowest depths of human behavior, you can't possibly sink beneath the love of her for you.

Mr. ENZI

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I understand that H.R. 3717 has arrived from the House and is at the desk. I now ask for its first reading.

Mr. ENZI. I now ask for its second reading and object to my own request.

Mr. ENZI

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, the Congressional Awards Foundation recently held their third annual benefit. At that event, several award winners spoke of their dedication to this program that promotes volunteerism, personal development, physical fitness, and active community involvement by our nation's young people. At the benefit, one of our colleagues, Senator Byrd of West Virginia, was honored. A lifetime of public service and his own commitment to God and Country was noted by the Congressional Awards Foundation with the presentation of their 1998 Leadership Award. The Congressional Awards are near and dear to many a Wyomingite's heart because our state was the first to present these awards and recognize the importance of our young people's contribution to the effort to make our communities better places to live. The program has since become a great success and recognized the efforts of many special people along the way--like Senator Byrd. When he was presented with his Leadership Award, Senator Byrd had some important things to say about his youth, his childhood, and about those things that helped to mold him, shape him and make him what he is today. There is a great deal of food for thought there, which is why I wanted to share those remarks with my colleagues. I was particularly interested in his comments about heroes and about the role models we looked up to when we were youngsters. Unfortunately, as Senator Byrd notes in his speech, the kind of people we drew our inspiration from back then seem to be few and far between nowadays. Still, there is reason for hope. There are still those people, like Senator Byrd, who exemplify the qualities of leadership, strong personal character, and a sense of values and principles, that inspires others to greatness. These are the kinds of examples we need to provide our children. As Senator Byrd points out so well in his speech, ``Each of us has a chance through our personal example to inspire some youngster to greatness. And that is a gift far too precious to squander.'' It is clear from Senator Byrd's many years of public service, and especially from his service in the Senate, that he has not squandered that precious gift. There is no doubt that he has inspired many to greatness by his example. Mr. President, I ask that Senator Byrd's remarks be printed in the Record. The remarks follow: Statement of Senator Robert C. Byrd, April 29, 1998 I am honored to be here tonight before this very distinguished audience, and delighted to have been selected to be the recipient of the 1998 Leadership Award. When I was a boy growing up in southern West Virginia, I loved to read history. I think one of the reasons why I loved it so much was that it provided me with heroes. I thought maybe, if I worked hard enough, I could be as brave as Nathan Hale, or as wise and honorable as George Washington. I had other heroes as well. I wanted to play baseball like the Sultan of Swat, Babe Ruth. I dreamed about piloting a plane like Charles Lindbergh. People in my own small community inspired me too. The old- time fiddle player, who, incidentally, happened to be the father of a pretty blonde girl that I later married, encouraged me to learn more tunes and practice hard. My English teacher instilled in me a desire to learn to write and to speak as well as she. For me, heroes fueled a desire to work on my own personal development--to take whatever talents God gave me and make them better. The fact that there was another person--a great general, a president, an aviator, a good fiddle player, who had achieved something extraordinary--something I wanted to achieve--gave me the confidence to ``go for it'', and the inspiration to work to polish my own skills. Sometimes I look around at our country today and I feel sorry for our young people. Where have all the heroes gone? The idols of today's youngsters seem to be rock stars or rap stars who sing lyrics and push messages that are the very antitheses of everything that used to typify our values in this country. Athletes have always been heroes to young people. But the athletes in my day did not strangle their coaches or spit in the face of the umpire. They tried to exhibit the best sort of sportsmanship because they knew that they were heroes to thousands of young fans. Well, what about public service, then? Are we here in Washington providing our young people with heroes or even role models to inspire them? I think many of us try to do that, at least on a small scale, perhaps within our own states. But in general, on a larger scale, I think we miss the mark. In my view, politics today is often too harshly partisan. Of course, politics has always been, and always will be, partisan. That is nothing new. But, I am talking about the kind of partisan warfare that dominates, and subjugates everything, including the public good, to the goal of political victory for one side or another. It sends a bad message. I wish for less of it. Public service is an honorable calling, demanding hard work, sacrifice, and dedication from those who shoulder the responsibility. And it is good for us to keep in mind that to those young people whom we hope to involve in public service through programs like the Congressional Award, we are among the heroes they look to for inspiration. Programs like this one can be enormously successful in encouraging community involvement and a caring attitude about the problems of others in our young people. But, the living examples we set, all of us right here in this room, through our public statements, our demeanor, the way we live our lives, and the respect that we show for each others' views also make a tremendous impact. Each of us has a chance through our personal example to inspire some youngster to greatness. And that is a gift far too precious to squander.

Mr. ENZI

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I rise in support of the Workforce Investment Partnership Act, offered by Senator DeWine, Senator Jeffords and other members of the Subcommittee on Employment and Training on which I serve. I would like to take a minute here to express my reasons for supporting the bill and explain why this is a good piece of legislation. Our mission in this area was most clearly put before us by the General Accounting Office. In their testimony to the Senate Labor Committee they showed that our current system for delivery of job training and vocational education is broken. The 163 programs across 15 agencies result in a disjointed and uncoordinated system that is a very inefficient use of the taxpayers' money. I have said that we probably need an education program just to teach people how to figure out how to find federal job training assistance. We need to simplify the process and this bill fixes many of the problems that the GAO outlined. This legislation is built around the idea that we need more flexibility for state education and labor programs to work. It builds on local needs and interests, ensuring a fair partnership between business and educators. Importantly, it maintains strong program objectives while at the same time, allowing individuals to make decisions about their own training programs through a voucher system. The goals of the vocational education program are clear--to prepare kids for what happens after high school. Not all kids are college- bound. Not all kids should be college-bound. Those who are not, should have an opportunity to follow educational programs that are relevant to their interests. This bill gives States greater flexibility to design programs that will target the unique needs of their students. The goals of the job training programs are also clear--to prepare people for their jobs in a rapidly changing workplace. Business cooperation and input is critical for that. Flexibility for state and local partnerships is also important so they can tailor programs to meet local needs. This bill accomplishes that flexibility and increases local empowerment. My home State of Wyoming has made a lot of progress in this area. Our Governor, Jim Geringer, has taken a strong interest in developing a coordinated system of education and employment, with an emphasis on individual responsibility. Two years ago, he called for a state-wide conference on the issue. The focus was how to help Wyoming's people meet ever-changing workplace needs and how we could help not only our kids, but our adults, find and keep valuable jobs without having to leave the State. One of the biggest problems we identified in Wyoming was that the federal system was fragmented, had too many narrow categories of eligibility, duplicated effort and had confusing accountability requirements. The bill before us today will resolve these problems. It will improve delivery by enabling states to develop coordinated education and training programs. It gives States the program objectives, but allows them to design their own measurement systems. Most importantly, this bill lets the people in my State focus federal dollars where Wyomingites think they should go. One part of the bill that I strongly support are changes that have been made to the Labor Market Information system. Here we have been able to move towards a state-based data system and ensure that state needs get a priority with the Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics. In the past, the Bureau has paid little attention to state statistics agencies. This is another issue of local control where people in our states know more about what labor information is important to local needs. I want to take a minute to address a few of the specific concerns that have been raised about this bill. First is the difficulty raised by the National Governors Association about coordination with local workforce boards. This does not pose a problem in my state because we do not have any population centers that would qualify for separate local grants. Our State Workforce Board will serve the entire state. On this issue, however, I would say that it is important for State Government to be able to coordinate these activities. I also believe that local government knows best when it comes to the needs of local communities. This bill strikes a sound balance between these two efforts. The second concern I have heard is that ``unified plans'' will allow governors to transfer education money into training. Again, it is my position that local and state government is most responsive to and knowledgeable about local needs. If educators are unable to justify certain spending in the face of greater needs in training areas, then local government should be able to make that decision. That works both ways. Training advocates will have to show the importance and relative value of their programs. This bill provides a great opportunity for state and local governments in Title 5, which provides an option for unified plans. Not surprisingly, this part has caused the most difficulty for ``big government'' types at the Departments of Labor and Education. A third concern I have heard is that this bill will give the Secretary of Education increased powers over the content of state education plans. I want to point out that I am very sensitive to that question. It is one of the first tests I apply in my review of any proposal that affects K-12 education. Local and state control must be preserved. With that in mind, it is important to note that the concerns are not unfounded. This legislation directs the Department of Education to consult with states in developing performance measures to evaluate state programs. The measures relate to student mastery of academic and vocational skills, as well as placement and retention in education and later in job situations. States will then negotiate with the Department to determine expected levels of performance--tailored to meet State differences--but according to the index developed by the Department. The question is--Is it more intrusive than current performance requirements under the Carl Perkins Act? Under the Perkins law, States must submit plans that include descriptions of how they will meet certain federal objectives. But there is one big difference. Carl Perkins empowered state boards to develop the performance measures. States only had to show they were making progress according to their own defined measurements. I am very concerned about allowing the Department of Education into the development of these measurements. I do not believe the federal government is genuinely capable of setting standards for mastery of academic and vocational skills for our kids. That role belongs to elected school boards and state government--not to appointed federal officials. The good Senator from Missouri, Senator John Ashcroft, has expressed real concerns about this part of Title 1 of the bill. While I strongly support the majority of this legislation, I would prefer to see the performance provisions that were included in the House bill, end up in the final version. I do intend to push for the House version in conference. In closing, Mr. President, I want to say that this is a good bill. As with any legislation, though, it is not perfect. There are some parts I would prefer to see removed or changed. But on the whole, this bill is a remarkable improvement over the chaotic maze of existing job training, vocational education and adult education programs. It is a step forward for local and state control of these efforts. It is a step forward in simplifying delivery of these services and making them more responsive to changing needs. And it is a step forward for personal choice and for accountability.