Dianne Feinstein

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, on January 3rd, 2000, Charles Schulz published his last daily ``Peanuts'' comic strip ending a remarkable fifty year run. To commemorate Charles Schulz's extraordinary career, I urge my colleagues to join me in awarding him a Congressional Medal of Honor. Charles Schulz's body of work in the ``Peanuts'' strip deserves recognition as a national treasure. For half a century, his cartoon illustrations have inspired millions of Americans with its wry humor and endearing cast of characters. Who has not been touched by the trials and tribulations of Charlie Brown, Snoopy, Linus, Lucy, and the rest of the ``Peanuts'' family? At its peak, Peanuts appeared in close to 3,000 newspapers in 75 countries and was published in over 20 different languages to more than 355 million daily readers. Charles Schulz's television special, ``A Charlie Brown Christmas,'' has run for 34 consecutive years. In all, more that 60 animated specials have been created based on ``Peanuts'' characters. Four feature films, 1,400 books, and a hit Broadway musical about the ``Peanuts'' characters also have been produced. Charles Schulz's achievements are all the more remarkable because, throughout his career, he has worked without any artistic assistants, unlike most syndicated cartoonists. Schulz has painstakingly drawn every line and frame in his comic strip for 50 years, an unparalleled commitment to his art and profession. In 1994, while speaking before the National Cartoonists Society, Charles Schulz said of his comic strip, ``There's still a market for things that are clean and decent.'' Charles Schulz has given generations of children a cast of colorful characters to grow up with and to teach the small and large lessons of life. Seventeen Americans from the arts and entertainment world have been awarded the Congressional Gold Medal for their achievements in the enrichment of American culture. I urge that Charles Schulz become the eighteenth individual so honored. Please join me in recognizing the lifetime contributions of Charles Schulz by awarding him the Congressional Gold Medal.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce this legislation to permit the National Park Service to expand the boundaries of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GGNRA) by acquiring critical natural landscapes and scenic vistas. This includes land in San Mateo County, as well as land in San Francisco and Marin County. A key component of this legislation is that about half of the total cost of purchasing these lands will be donated by the local community. This legislation specifically provides that all land transactions involve a willing seller and willing buyer. In introducing this bill, I am joined by my esteemed colleague from California, Senator Barbara Boxer. This bill also has the bipartisan support of the entire Bay Area Congressional Delegation including original co-sponsors in the House, Representatives Tom Lantos, Nancy Pelosi, and Lynn Woolsey. Furthermore, this bill also has the strong support of local environmental and advocacy and preservation groups, the Point Reyes National Seashore Advisory Commission, and the National Park Service. I know of no opposition to this bill. The three Marin County properties lie in the Marin headlands. Preservation of these lands will protect habitat, ridge-top trails and scenic views of San Francisco Bay and the Pacific Ocean. The San Francisco land along the pacific coastline, the city of San Francisco would like to donate to the federal government and has authorized $100,000 for the restoration of this site. The legislation also proposes to include land near Labos Creek, adjacent to the Presido-West Gate, which was damaged during a severe storm in 1997. The American Land Conservancy intends to acquire this land and donate it to the National Park Service. Lobos Creek is the key source of the Presidio's water supply and a unique ecological resource. Together, these parcels offer beautiful vistas, sweeping coastal views and spectacular headland scenery and the preservation of unique bayland ecosystems with added public access. Much of this land also protects the habitat of several species of rare or endangered plants and animals. Several of the vegetation communities is home to at least 18 endangered or threatened species including the winter-run chinook salmon, American peregrine falcon, the mission blue butterfly and the southwestern pond turtle. I urge my colleagues to support passage of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area Boundary Adjustment Act.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce this legislation to permit the National Park Service to expand the boundaries of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GGNRA) by acquiring critical natural landscapes and scenic vistas. This includes land in San Mateo County, as well as land in San Francisco and Marin County. A key component of this legislation is that about half of the total cost of purchasing these lands will be donated by the local community. This legislation specifically provides that all land transactions involve a willing seller and willing buyer. In introducing this bill, I am joined by my esteemed colleague from California, Senator Barbara Boxer. This bill also has the bipartisan support of the entire Bay Area Congressional Delegation including original co-sponsors in the House, Representatives Tom Lantos, Nancy Pelosi, and Lynn Woolsey. Furthermore, this bill also has the strong support of local environmental and advocacy and preservation groups, the Point Reyes National Seashore Advisory Commission, and the National Park Service. I know of no opposition to this bill. The three Marin County properties lie in the Marin headlands. Preservation of these lands will protect habitat, ridge-top trails and scenic views of San Francisco Bay and the Pacific Ocean. The San Francisco land along the pacific coastline, the city of San Francisco would like to donate to the federal government and has authorized $100,000 for the restoration of this site. The legislation also proposes to include land near Labos Creek, adjacent to the Presido-West Gate, which was damaged during a severe storm in 1997. The American Land Conservancy intends to acquire this land and donate it to the National Park Service. Lobos Creek is the key source of the Presidio's water supply and a unique ecological resource. Together, these parcels offer beautiful vistas, sweeping coastal views and spectacular headland scenery and the preservation of unique bayland ecosystems with added public access. Much of this land also protects the habitat of several species of rare or endangered plants and animals. Several of the vegetation communities is home to at least 18 endangered or threatened species including the winter-run chinook salmon, American peregrine falcon, the mission blue butterfly and the southwestern pond turtle. I urge my colleagues to support passage of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area Boundary Adjustment Act.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise to ask my colleagues to support a bill to name the Santa Ana, California Post Office as the ``Hector G. Godinez Post Office Building.'' Hector Godinez, who passed away in May of 1999, was a true leader in his community of Santa Ana, California. He was a pioneer in the United States Postal Service rising from letter carrier to become the first Mexican-American to achieve the rank of District Manager within the United States Postal Service. He served with honor in World War II, was a ardent civil rights activist and an active participant in civic organizations and local government. After graduation from Santa Ana High School, Mr. Godinez enlisted into the armed services and was a tank commander in World War II under General George Patton. For his service, he earned a bronze star for bravery under fire and was also awarded a purple heart for wounds received in battle. Upon his return home in 1946, Mr. Godinez started his first of 48 years of distinguished service as a United States postal worker. Hector Godinez was a true pillar within the Santa Ana community devoting his tireless energy to such civic groups as the Orange County District Boy Scouts of America, Santa Ana Chamber of Commerce, Orange County YMCA and National President of the League of United Latin American Citizens, one of the country's oldest Hispanic civil rights organizations. On behalf of the Godinez family and the people of Santa Ana, California, it is my pleasure to introduce this bill to name the Santa Ana, California Post Office in his honor.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise to ask my colleagues to support a bill to name the Santa Ana, California Post Office as the ``Hector G. Godinez Post Office Building.'' Hector Godinez, who passed away in May of 1999, was a true leader in his community of Santa Ana, California. He was a pioneer in the United States Postal Service rising from letter carrier to become the first Mexican-American to achieve the rank of District Manager within the United States Postal Service. He served with honor in World War II, was a ardent civil rights activist and an active participant in civic organizations and local government. After graduation from Santa Ana High School, Mr. Godinez enlisted into the armed services and was a tank commander in World War II under General George Patton. For his service, he earned a bronze star for bravery under fire and was also awarded a purple heart for wounds received in battle. Upon his return home in 1946, Mr. Godinez started his first of 48 years of distinguished service as a United States postal worker. Hector Godinez was a true pillar within the Santa Ana community devoting his tireless energy to such civic groups as the Orange County District Boy Scouts of America, Santa Ana Chamber of Commerce, Orange County YMCA and National President of the League of United Latin American Citizens, one of the country's oldest Hispanic civil rights organizations. On behalf of the Godinez family and the people of Santa Ana, California, it is my pleasure to introduce this bill to name the Santa Ana, California Post Office in his honor.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, this afternoon Senators will come to the floor to speak about a problem we believe is a very serious one; that is, the HIV/AIDS epidemic in Africa. I know the distinguished Senator from Illinois, Mr. Durbin, will speak, and the Senator from Wisconsin, Mr. Feingold will speak. I believe others will as well. Mr. President, I rise to join my colleagues here this afternoon to address what I consider to be one of the most pressing and important national security and international health issues that we will face in the coming decades: The HIV/AIDS pandemic, which is currently sweeping Africa. I wish to begin by giving my colleagues a sense of the scope and scale of this problem. Sub-Saharan Africa has been far more severely affected by AIDS than any other part of the world. Today, 23.3 million adults and children are infected with the HIV virus in Africa, which only has about 10 percent of the world's population, but nearly 70 percent of the worldwide total of infected people. Worldwide, about 5.6 million new infections will occur this year, with an estimated 3.8 million in sub-Saharan Africa--3.8 million people will contract HIV. Every day, 11,000 additional people are infected--1 every 8 seconds. All told, over 34 million people in Africa--the population of my State of California--have been infected with HIV since the epidemic began, and an estimated 13.7 million Africans have lost their lives to AIDS, including 2.2 million who died in 1998. Each day, AIDS buries 5,500 men, women, and children. We saw a very compelling documentary made by the filmmaker Rory Kennedy, which showed the burials of some of these children as well as the enormous cultural problems that exist in Africa because of HIV/AIDS. By 2005, if policies do not change, the daily death toll will not be 5,500, it will be 13,000--double what it is now--with nearly 5 million AIDS deaths that year alone, according to the White House Office of AIDS Policy. AIDS has surpassed malaria as the leading cause of death in Africa, and it kills many times more people on that continent than war. The overall rate of infection among adults is about 8 percent, compared with a 1.1-percent infection rate worldwide. In some countries of southern Africa, 20 to 30 percent of the adults are infected. AIDS has cut life expectancy by 4 years in Nigeria, 18 years in Kenya, and 26 years in Zimbabwe. As these numbers suggest, AIDS is devastating Africa. AIDS is swelling infant and child mortality rates, reversing the declines that had been occurring in many countries during the 1970s and 1980s. Over 30 percent of all children born to HIV-infected mothers in sub-Saharan Africa will themselves become HIV infected. Let me say again, 30 percent of all of the children born to HIV-infected mothers will become HIV infected. There are many explanations for why this epidemic is sweeping across sub-Saharan Africa. Certainly the region's poverty, which has deprived much of Africa from effective systems of health information, health education and health care, bears much of the blame. Cultural and behavioral patterns, which have led to sub-Saharan Africa becoming the only region in which women are infected with HIV at a higher rate than men, may also play a role. HIV/AIDS is becoming a major woman's issue. AIDS has largely impacted the heterosexual community in Africa, and it has established itself in such a way that it sweeps across and wipes out entire villages. Because of the region's poverty, all too often treatment of AIDS sufferers with medicines that can result in long-term survival has not been widely used in Africa. But I strongly believe that if the international community is to be successful, we must make every effort to get appropriate medicine into the hands of those in need. For too many years there were no effective drugs that could be used to combat HIV/AIDS, but now, thanks to recent medical research, we do have effective drugs. For example, some recent pilot projects have had success in reducing mother-to-child transmission by administering the anti-HIV drug AZT, or a less expensive medicine, Nevirapine, during birth and early childhood. New studies indicate that Nevirapine can reduce the risk of mother- to-child transmission by as much as 80 percent. NVP is given just once to the mother during labor, once to the child within 3 days of birth. Taking three or four pills can mean that a child is prevented from being born with HIV. In fact, for $4 a tablet--a little more than the cost of a large latte at Starbuck's, which is not a lot here, but a great deal in Africa--this drug regime has created an unprecedented opportunity for international cooperation in the fight against AIDS. I, frankly, believe it is the single most cost-effective thing that can be done. Currently, however, less than 1 percent of HIV-infected pregnant women have access to interventions to reduce mother-to-child transmission. Administered in a treatment regimen known as HAART--highly active antiretroviral therapy--antiretroviral drugs can allow people living with AIDS to live a largely normal life and use of the drugs can lead to long-term survival rather than early death. Such treatment is proven highly effective in developed countries, including our very own. My understanding is that most antiretrovirals are relatively inexpensive to produce. AIDS Treatment News recently reported: AZT in bulk can be purchased for 42 cents for 300 milligrams from the worldwide suppliers; this price reflects profits not only to the manufacturer, but also to the middleman bulk buyer. The same drug retails at my local pharmacy for $5.82 per pill. This ridiculous price bears no relation to the cost of production. Unfortunately--and inexplicably, in my view--access for poor Africans to costly combinations of AIDS medications, or antiretrovirals, is perhaps the most contentious issue surrounding the response to the African epidemic. As the U.S. Development Program head, Mark Brown, said at the U.N. Security Council meeting on AIDS in Africa last month: We cannot lapse into a two-tier treatment regime: drugs for the rich, no hope for the poor. While the emphasis must be on prevention, we cannot ignore treatment, despite its costs. I agree with that. Although it is true that the cost of combination therapy is beyond the means of most people living with HIV/AIDS and governments in sub-Saharan Africa--combination therapy in South Africa, incidentally, was estimated at $334 a month, or $4,000 per individual per year, and UNAIDS reports that Brazil treated 75,000 people with antiretrovirals in 1999 at a cost of $300 million--or, again, $4,000 a person. I believe we have a strong moral obligation to try to save lives when the medications for doing so exist. There are several things the United States can do to increase access to lifesaving drugs. First, the U.S. should work with others in the international community to provide support to make these drugs affordable and to strengthen African health care systems so that drug therapies can be effectively administered. The plan for combating HIV/AIDS in Africa recently put forward by the President and Vice President goes a long way towards seeing that the U.S. meets its commitment to this goal. Second, it should be possible for African governments and donor agencies to achieve reductions in the cost of antiretrovirals through negotiated agreements with drug manufacturers. The British pharmaceutical firm Glaxo Wellcome, a major producer of antiretrovirals, has already stated that it is committed to ``differential pricing,'' which would lower the cost of AIDS drugs in Africa. Third, I strongly believe that the United States must work to advocate ``parallel imports'' of drugs and ``compulsory licensing'' by African governments to lower the price of patented medications so that HIV/AIDS drugs are more affordable, and more people in Africa will be able to have access to them. Through parallel importing, patented pharmaceuticals could be purchased from the cheapest source, rather than from the manufacturer. Under ``compulsory licensing'' an African government could order a local firm to produce a drug and pay a negotiated royalty to the patent holder. Both parallel imports and compulsory licensing are permitted under the World Trade Organization agreement for countries facing health emergencies. There can be little doubt that Africa is facing a health emergency of monumental proportions. That is why I, along with my colleague from Wisconsin, introduced an Amendment to the Africa Growth and Opportunity Act last year to allow the countries of Sub-Saharan Africa to pursue ``compulsory licensing''. Without ``compulsory licensing'', which would allow access to cheaper generic drugs, more people in Sub-Saharan African will suffer and die. For those of my colleagues who may be concerned that this Amendment may undermine wider Intellectual Property Rights, this Amendment acknowledges that the World Trade Organization (WTO) Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property (TRIPS) is the presumptive legal standard for intellectual property rights (IPR). The WTO, however, allows countries flexibility in addressing public health concerns, and the compulsory licensing process under this Amendment is consistent with the WTO's approach to balancing the protection of intellectual property with a moral obligation to meet public health emergencies such as the HIV/AIDS epidemic in Africa. In other words, this Amendment does not create new policy or a new approach on IPR issues under TRIPS, nor does it require IPR rights to be rolled back or weakened. All it asks is that in approaching HIV/AIDS in Africa, U.S. policy on compulsory licensing remains consistent with what is accepted under international trade law. By doing so, this Amendment will allow the countries of Sub-Saharan Africa to continue to determine the availability of HIV/AIDS pharmaceuticals in their countries, and provide their people with affordable HIV/AIDS drugs. These drugs exist. We need to get them to where this epidemic is reaching monumental proportions. I was pleased to work with the Managers of this bill when the African Growth and Opportunity Act was on the floor of the Senate last November, to modify my Amendment to meet some of their concerns, and to have their support in seeing it included in the final Senate-passed version of this bill. Unfortunately, several pharmaceutical manufacturers are strongly opposed to this measure, and, as I understand it, there are efforts to have this Amendment taken out of the final bill that will be reported out of Conference. I believe that such efforts are reprehensible, and I am determined not to allow this to happen. And if, behind closed doors, this amendment is indeed removed from this bill, I intend to do all I can to--I hope I will be joined by my colleagues--make sure that an African Growth and Opportunity bill without this provision does not pass this Congress. What good is an African trade bill if Africa is going to get wiped out from AIDS? It is clearly in the interest of the United States to prevent the further spread of HIV/AIDS in Africa, and I believe that the ``compulsory licensing'' amendment was a necessary addition to the Africa Growth and Opportunity Act if we are to continue to assist the countries of this region in halting the number of premature deaths from AIDS. Antiretroviral drugs can do much to improve quality and length of life. The United States has the power to make these life-saving drugs more affordable and accessible to Africans. We cannot turn our backs on Africa. Our assistance is truly a matter of life and death. I thank the Chair. I yield the floor.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for such time as I may require as in morning business and that, by unanimous consent, Senator Feingold be recognized to speak directly following the conclusion of my remarks.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a fellow by the name of Charity Bracy be given floor privileges.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise to support the underlying goal of the bankruptcy bill, which is to promote personal financial responsibility. Bankruptcy filings have increased at an astonishing pace since the last overhaul of the Bankruptcy Code in 1978. In 1978, there were 182,000 consumer bankruptcy filings. Twenty years later in 1998, 1,444,812 people filed for bankruptcy. Bankruptcy has become so commonplace that more than one in a hundred households will file for bankruptcy this year. The rise in bankruptcy filings is particularly disconcerting given the record expansion of our economy, which this week became the longest expansion in our Nation's history. Bankruptcy should be a last-resort legal option, and not a vehicle for avoiding personal responsibility. People should not be able to file bankruptcy if they can easily pay back their debts. Another key aspect of bankruptcy reform is the need to address the growth of consumer credit. It's a simple matter of arithmetic. The typical family filing for bankruptcy in 1998 owed more than one-and-a- half times its annual income in short-term, high-interest debt. This means the average family in bankruptcy with a median income of just over $17,500, and $28,955 in credit card and other short-term high interest debt. There are over a billion credit cards in circulation--a dozen credit cards for every household in the country. Three-quarters of all households have at least one credit card. Credit debt has doubled between 1993 and 1997 to $422 billion from just over $200 billion. A constituent from Lakewood, California describes the situation aptly: ``What really bugs me about this is that credit card companies send out these solicitations for their plastic cards and then when they get burned, they start crying foul. They want all kinds of laws passed to protect them from taking hits when it's their own practices that caused the problem.'' This legislation has taken some steps to address the problem of consumer credit, but more needs to be done. One of the major reasons that I am supporting the bill is that it includes my amendment to require the Federal Reserve Board to investigate the practice of issuing credit cards indiscriminately, without taking steps to ensure that consumers are capable of repaying their debt, or in a manner that encourages consumers to accumulate additional debt. The amendment allows the Federal Reserve Board to issue regulations that would require additional disclosures to consumers, and to take any other actions, consistent with its statutory authority, that the Board finds necessary to ensure responsible industry-wide practices and to prevent resulting consumer debt and insolvency. In addition, I am pleased that the bill requires credit card companies to warn consumers about interest costs, and provide a toll- free phone where they can find out how long it would take to eliminate a balance when just paying the minimum balance each month. Credit card companies also are required to better explain teaser rates and late fees in their solicitations. The Senate also has made important improvements to this bill, both in the Judiciary Committee and on the floor. In my home state of California, for example, we have suffered from the abusive practices of bankruptcy mills including price gouging of debtors, incompetent service, and fraud. The bill includes an amendment to curb this abusive practice. However, I remain very concerned about the minimum wage and tax amendments attached to this bill. Let me first say that I am strong supporter of raising the minimum wager. In the four years since Congress last past a minimum wage increase, the U.S. economy has continued to surge at an unprecedented rate. Nine million new jobs have been added to the economy. More than a million of those are in the retail sector. Unemployment is down and the number of jobs for women, African-Americans, Hispanic Americans, and teenagers has grown. Clearly the increase in the minimum wage has helped working families and it is time to do so again. The problem with the minimum wage increase in this bill is that it is spread out over too long a period of time. The amendment would raise the minimum wage by $1 in three steps of 35 cents, 35 cents, and 30 cents. California's minimum wage is $5.75. Under this proposal, working families there would not benefit at all in the first year, receive only a 10 cent wage increase in the second year, and would not feel the full increase until 2003. That is simply unacceptable. The time to raise the minimum wage is not when the economy is ailing. It's when the economy is flush and that time is now. Congress should raise the minimum by $1 over two years as proposed by Democrats and we should do it now. The bill also contains a $77 billion tax package whose benefits are skewed toward upper-income taxpayers. Specifically, the package has health insurance and long-term care provisions which would disproportionately benefit higher income taxpayers. I am also concerned about the fairness of the package's pension provision which would principally benefit highly-compensated employees. In summary, I think there is a lot of good in the bankruptcy bill, and I intend to vote for it because it can still yield a worthwhile final product. However, extensive improvements are still needed in conference. The Conference negotiations must resolve the minimum wage and tax problems, and other deficiencies is the bill. I need to work with my Senate colleagues to implement these needed changes.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, after much deliberation, I am voting in favor of tabling the Feingold amendment on the use of the automatic stay in eviction proceedings. In California, we have had very serious problems with bankruptcy mills, fly-by-night firms that have advised tenants to avoid eviction by filing for bankruptcy. These firms have even gone so far as to place ads in newspapers which encourage renters to ``stop evictions from one to six months by filing for bankruptcy,'' or promise to ``legally stop your eviction for up to 120 days at rock bottom prices.'' In 1996 alone, the Los Angles County Sheriff's Department reported 3,800 cases in which the tenant filed for bankruptcy after all state eviction proceedings were exhausted--causing an extra $ 6 million in costs. While the Feingold amendment is well-intentioned, it does not adequately address the misuse of the ``automatic stay'' in eviction proceedings. Let me explain why: First, once an individual files for bankruptcy, the Feingold amendment only permits an eviction to go forward if the tenant subsequently fails to pay rent again. Thus, a debtor could refuse to pay debts for many months, and when the landlord begins the eviction proceeding, the landlord's hands would be tied if the debtor then starts paying the rent. This in effect gives a renter the ability not to pay rent, go through bankruptcy, and, by agreeing to pay future rent, get to keep the apartment even if no back rent is paid. In the meantime, he could have had eight or ten or twelve months of free rent. Second, the amendment gives landlords the incentive to evict tenants immediately upon non-payment. If, according to the Feingold amendment, the landlord begins eviction proceedings more than 10 days after non- payment of rent and then the tenant files bankruptcy, the eviction would be subject to the automatic stay. This quirk in the amendment could deter landlords from entering into negotiations with tenants and lead to quicker evictions. Finally, I have concerns about the impact of this amendment on small landlords. I have received letters from small, private landlords about the burden of current bankruptcy law. These landlords, who may own just one or two apartments, report that the non-payment of rent by tenants threatens their own ability to meet mortgage payments. I believe strongly in protecting the rights of tenants. However, the Feingold amendment tips the scales too far. A more balanced approach is needed.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Madam President, as January 2000, National Biotechnology Month, comes to a close, I want to recognize the importance of the biotechnology to the nation and to commend this industry for its innovations in disease diagnosis, treatment, and prevention. The United States is the leader in the biotechnology industry, and I am proud to say that California has the nation's largest concentration of health care technology companies. California, alone, is home to over 2,500 biomedical companies and employs over 241,000 people in health care technology and biomedical and clinical research fields. California's health care technology companies are producing leading edge products, for example, the first new therapy for cystic fibrosis in 30 years, Genetech; technology that enables doctors to do heart surgery without opening the chest cavity, Heartport; a cancer drug that is genetically engineered and stimulates the bone marrow to produce important white blood cells, Amgen; linear accelerators for treating cancer, Varian; and intraocular eye lenses, Allergan. Biotechnology has enabled us to reduce hospital stays, to detect cancer and other life-threatening illnesses earlier in order to begin treatments earlier; to attack diseases cell by cell to eliminate unnecessary side effects, and to use vaccines to prevent abnormal cell growth. This is a critical time in biotechnology, as scientists continue to make strides in cellular and genetic research, and I am hopeful that this work will improve our health and well-being. I am confident that as this industry continues to grow, we will see treatments to greatly improve the lives of millions of Americans, and we will see cures to illnesses that we did not think were possible. I commend the more than 150,000 employees of the biotech industry nationwide and join them in observing January as National Biotechnology Month.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, as a grandmother, and as a member of the Senate Immigration Subcommittee, I want to say a few words about the case of Elian Gonzalez, and particularly to indicate my strong support for the concurrent resolution Congressman Rangel has introduced in the House. Senator Dodd has just submitted a similar resolution in the Senate this afternoon, of which I am a cosponsor. As you know, this resolution expresses the sense of the Senate that Elian Gonzalez should be reunited with his father, Juan Gonzalez of Cuba. I have been in California, but nonetheless I have been following, as closely as anyone could over the television, the events surrounding this youngster--the very tragic events. Based on my understanding of the situation, Elian has enjoyed a very close and loving relationship with his father and his grandparents in Cuba. As a grandmother, this has a lot of meaning to me. Those who know Juan Gonzalez have described him as an ``ideal father'' who spent as much time as he could with his son. Elian has been living in his father's home, where his grandparents also play a role in raising him. Although Elian's mother and father shared joint custody of the child, he actually spent 5 out of every 7 days of the week in his father's home. It is my understanding that his father can support him, that he can provide a good home for him, and, above all, he is a good and loving father. Both he and Elian's mother had joint custody of the youngster. To the best of my knowledge, there is no evidence that Juan Gonzalez was either neglectful or abusive in his relationship with his son. After all, a strong parental bond should be the overwhelming test for reunification--that and the fact that the touchstone of U.S. immigration policy has been to protect and reunite the family. Elian's maternal grandparents also took part in raising their grandchild, often keeping him when either parent was working. Despite the divorce of Elian's mother and father, both parents and their respective families maintained, warm relations and continued to play an active role in the youngster's life. We cannot know of the mother's true motivations or intentions when she and Elian left Cuba. Elian's father has maintained, however, that Elian's mother, Elizabet Broton, took their son without his knowledge or consent. Elian's fate should not be subject, I believe, to the politics of any one party or political ideology. I urge all of us--in Florida, in Cuba, and in the Halls of Congress--to cool the rhetoric, to set aside any political views, and commit ourselves to seeing this process to a rightful conclusion. The central issue in this case should not be America's policy toward Cuba but, rather, the sanctity of the family bond between a parent and his child. Without evidence of abuse or neglect on the father's part, no government has the authority to disrupt that bond, no matter if the bond is in the United States or Cuba, or any other place. The father is the father and should have lawful custody. In addition to my concerns about the negative impact of legislation to grant citizenship to Elian on him and his family, and what that does to the pending court case, I also have deep concerns about the impact this would have on our own immigration policy. It would certainly, at the very least, reflect an uneven application of immigration policy by the United States. It would be, I believe, a case of major political first impression and set a precedent all across this land in virtually every case from anywhere. It could also create a precarious situation for an American child abroad. The INS continues, to this day, to send back children to their home countries, even those with repressive regimes. Several months ago, two Haitian children were sent back to Haiti while their mother remained in the United States to file for asylum. Here you have a mother in the United States filing for asylum, and during that period the children were sent back to Haiti. It is true that, after protests and several weeks of separation from their mother, Federal authorities did permit the children to reenter the United States. Or you can look at the case of a 15-year-old Chinese girl who today is being held in juvenile detention and has been held in juvenile detention for 7 months. At her asylum hearing, the young girl could not wipe away her tears because her hands were chained to her waist. According to her lawyer, her only crime was that her parents had put her on a boat so she could get a better life over here. She remains in detention to this day. I think that is a terrible wrong. Here is a youngster who was put on a boat by her parents, who is now in a jail on the west coast of the United States and goes to a hearing chained like a common criminal. In cases such as these, I believe we should review and perhaps even change immigration laws as they relate to minors in certain situations. I am in the process of writing a letter to the chairman of my subcommittee, the Senator from Michigan, asking that he hold hearings on some of these cases as well as on whether immigration law with respect to children should, in fact, be changed in certain circumstances. I believe our immigration policy must be consistent and fair. In any given year, the INS handles more than 4,000 unaccompanied minors, and the vast majority are sent back to their families. Others are detained. I have received scores of phone calls from citizens in California who say, if this child were Salvadoran, if he were a Mexican child, if he were a child from China, the child would be sent back to his country. Why is this child different? Because political organizations in a couple of States want to make a point with this child's situation? I think the point is, granting American citizenship in this manner will affect every other situation. We might as well know what we are doing when we do this. I think the only way to look at it is to take a look at all of our immigration laws, as they affect children, in an orderly way over a period of time. But in the meantime, current law should be followed with respect to this youngster. I think granting U.S. citizenship in this manner, which is really without any precedent, would be a very far-reaching action. It would also play out negatively for U.S. children who might be taken to foreign countries without the consent of the U.S. citizen parent. I have actually tried to help in a case involving a child in Saudi Arabia and found it most difficult. Once we begin to violate that law, what does it say for other American children who might find themselves in a similar circumstance in a foreign country? As a grandmother, I must say, I shudder to think how I would feel in this same situation. In conclusion, I don't believe our role as a national legislature is to interpose ourselves in a decision that should rightfully be made by a father. I thank the Chair and yield the floor.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to be recognized to speak as in morning business.

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

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, no matter what our party affiliation, no matter what our beliefs, no matter whether we are Members or staff, we are all here for one purpose--that is, we believe in the nobility of public service. And while the enormity of the issues before this body bring it, and us, much notoriety, it is to the many thousands of dedicated public servants at the State and local level that we owe a debt of gratitude. San Francisco has been fortunate for the last 25 years to have had the services of a public servant of great ability and dedication, Andy Moran. Andy's talents first came to my attention when I was Mayor. He has risen through the ranks of municipal government and has, for the last six years, served as the General Manager of the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission. For those who do not know, our PUC includes the Hetch Hetchy Water and Power Division, the Water Department and San Francisco's Clean Water Program. As one might imagine, the challenges of this job are many, and they are varied. Andy has met those challenges with practice, intelligence, good humor, and a sense of fairness. His accomplishments are too numerous to mention here, but I would be remiss if I don't pay special tribute to his expertise on the all-important issue of California water. Water is our lifeblood in California, and the demands on our water supply and our water supply system have increased dramatically in the last generation. Andy has been a part of that evolution. He has an institutional memory and an understanding of those issues which are born of first hand experience. He has played pivotal roles in such landmark agreements as the Bay-Delta accord and the settlement of Tuolumne River water rights with Turlock and Modesto Irrigation Districts. His accomplishments have been widely recognized by his peers, and he has served on numerous California water committees, including a term as Chair of the Association of California Urban Water Agencies. Mr. President, we do not know what the future holds for Andy Moran, but we do know that his future will be met with continued success. He has been a mainstay of San Francisco's municipal government and will be greatly missed. We owe Andy a tremendous debt of gratitude, and we wish him the very best in his life ahead. Andy Moran is a true public servant.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I am pleased to offer today, legislation to provide lawful permanent residence status to Tony Lara, a remarkable young man from El Salvador who has lived in the United States since he was 10 years old. Tony's story is particularly compelling. In less than twenty years of this young man's life, Tony has faced one tragic setback after another. However, through his optimism, intelligence, and hard work, he has bravely confronted challenges that most would view as insurmountable. In spite of enormous odds, Tony has become a high school graduate, a California State Wrestling Champion and an inspiration to his community. An unfortunate chapter in Tony's story is that he faces deportation and separation from his younger sister because at age nineteen, Tony is an orphan. Immigration law prohibits permanent legal residency to minor children under the age of twenty-one without their parents. Ten years ago, Tony Lara and his younger sister Olga were brought to the United States by their parents who were fleeing the civil war in El Salvador. That same year, Tony's mother was deported back to El Salvador. She tragically died in a drowning accident while trying to reenter the United States. Tony's father turned to drugs, abandoned his children and was eventually deported in 1994. He has not heard from him since. At age 11, Tony became a surrogate father to his younger sister. Tony and his sister were taken in by an uncle who had neglected to care for them. Eventually, Tony's neighbors, Philip and Linda Bracken, invited the children to live with them. The Brackens later adopted Olga, who now has permanent residency in this country. The couple lacked the resources, however, to adopt Tony and at age 16, Tony was left without a home. Unfortunately, the adults to which Tony turned for advice counseled against turning himself in to the Department of Children Services. They feared he could be deported and would never see his sister again. Tony could not bear losing the only family he had left; thus he remained on his own. In 1996, Tony met his high school's wrestling coach, Terrence Fisher. Mr. Fisher knew little about Tony's circumstances, but he noticed his slight build and extreme sadness. When the coach had discovered Tony was homeless and hungry, he invited him to live with his family. Mr. Fisher also invited Tony to try out for the school's wrestling team. Although he had never wrestled before, Tony was truly a natural. By his senior year, Tony had worked hard and captured the California state wresting championship for his age group and weight class. He had also excelled socially and academically. After Tony graduated from high school, he continued to win wrestling championships and has become a role model in his community. He is continuing his education by studying business at West Valley Occupational Center. Tony has been featured on two television programs. In 1998, he was featured on an NBC news program called ``Beating the Odds,'' which was about young people of great achievement who have overcome enormous obstacles. Last year, Tony was featured on a Univision hour-long special program, which also spoke to Tony's special circumstances. I can think of no one more deserving of permanent residency in this country. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the attached bill be entered into the record with this statement. Mr. President, I also ask unanimous consent that the bill and a letter from Terrence Fisher, high school coach, which illustrates the compelling nature of young man's circumstance, be printed in the Record.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I am pleased to offer today, legislation that would provide lawful permanent residence status to Guy Taylor, a Canadian national who was orphaned at age 16. Guy is now 18. Guy Taylor was born in Canada but spent the first half of his life in the United States attending school and living with his mother. Guy's father died before he was born. In the summer of 1998, his mother died of a drug overdose. This left him without any other family except for his extensive family in Southern California. Upon his mother's death, Guy's grandmother, Oleta Hansen, flew to Canada to secure her daughter's body and bring her grandchild back to the United States. The Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) allowed Guy to temporarily enter the United States by granting him a one-year humanitarian parole. Once the parole expired, the INS extended for one more year. This is a very rare act on the INS' part. Initially, Guy had sought to obtain permanent resident status by being declared a dependent of a United States court. However, the Orange County, California Social Services referee declined to name Guy a court dependent because he was considered to be under the guardianship of his grandmother. Because the INS has declared Guy too old to be a dependent of his grandmother, Guy is unable to obtain permanent residence in the United States. Immigration law prohibits permanent legal residency to minor children under the age of twenty-one without their parents. Guy's dream is to join the United States Army. Although Guy's Army recruiter said he has successfully tested and is qualified for enlistment, without permanent resident status, Guy will be unable to join. Today Guy, a first-year college student and a young man willing to fight for his adopted country, faces deportation. News about this young man's imminent deportation has shaken the community in southern California. More than 1,000 of Guy's friends and neighbors have signed a petition calling for legislation on his behalf. I hope you support this bill so that we can help Guy rebuild his life and continue to contribute to his community in the United States. Mr. President, I also ask unanimous consent that the bill and a recent news article depicting the compelling circumstances of Guy Taylor's life be printed in the Record.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I am pleased to offer today, legislation to provide lawful permanent residence status to Tony Lara, a remarkable young man from El Salvador who has lived in the United States since he was 10 years old. Tony's story is particularly compelling. In less than twenty years of this young man's life, Tony has faced one tragic setback after another. However, through his optimism, intelligence, and hard work, he has bravely confronted challenges that most would view as insurmountable. In spite of enormous odds, Tony has become a high school graduate, a California State Wrestling Champion and an inspiration to his community. An unfortunate chapter in Tony's story is that he faces deportation and separation from his younger sister because at age nineteen, Tony is an orphan. Immigration law prohibits permanent legal residency to minor children under the age of twenty-one without their parents. Ten years ago, Tony Lara and his younger sister Olga were brought to the United States by their parents who were fleeing the civil war in El Salvador. That same year, Tony's mother was deported back to El Salvador. She tragically died in a drowning accident while trying to reenter the United States. Tony's father turned to drugs, abandoned his children and was eventually deported in 1994. He has not heard from him since. At age 11, Tony became a surrogate father to his younger sister. Tony and his sister were taken in by an uncle who had neglected to care for them. Eventually, Tony's neighbors, Philip and Linda Bracken, invited the children to live with them. The Brackens later adopted Olga, who now has permanent residency in this country. The couple lacked the resources, however, to adopt Tony and at age 16, Tony was left without a home. Unfortunately, the adults to which Tony turned for advice counseled against turning himself in to the Department of Children Services. They feared he could be deported and would never see his sister again. Tony could not bear losing the only family he had left; thus he remained on his own. In 1996, Tony met his high school's wrestling coach, Terrence Fisher. Mr. Fisher knew little about Tony's circumstances, but he noticed his slight build and extreme sadness. When the coach had discovered Tony was homeless and hungry, he invited him to live with his family. Mr. Fisher also invited Tony to try out for the school's wrestling team. Although he had never wrestled before, Tony was truly a natural. By his senior year, Tony had worked hard and captured the California state wresting championship for his age group and weight class. He had also excelled socially and academically. After Tony graduated from high school, he continued to win wrestling championships and has become a role model in his community. He is continuing his education by studying business at West Valley Occupational Center. Tony has been featured on two television programs. In 1998, he was featured on an NBC news program called ``Beating the Odds,'' which was about young people of great achievement who have overcome enormous obstacles. Last year, Tony was featured on a Univision hour-long special program, which also spoke to Tony's special circumstances. I can think of no one more deserving of permanent residency in this country. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the attached bill be entered into the record with this statement. Mr. President, I also ask unanimous consent that the bill and a letter from Terrence Fisher, high school coach, which illustrates the compelling nature of young man's circumstance, be printed in the Record.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I am pleased to offer today, legislation that would provide lawful permanent residence status to Guy Taylor, a Canadian national who was orphaned at age 16. Guy is now 18. Guy Taylor was born in Canada but spent the first half of his life in the United States attending school and living with his mother. Guy's father died before he was born. In the summer of 1998, his mother died of a drug overdose. This left him without any other family except for his extensive family in Southern California. Upon his mother's death, Guy's grandmother, Oleta Hansen, flew to Canada to secure her daughter's body and bring her grandchild back to the United States. The Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) allowed Guy to temporarily enter the United States by granting him a one-year humanitarian parole. Once the parole expired, the INS extended for one more year. This is a very rare act on the INS' part. Initially, Guy had sought to obtain permanent resident status by being declared a dependent of a United States court. However, the Orange County, California Social Services referee declined to name Guy a court dependent because he was considered to be under the guardianship of his grandmother. Because the INS has declared Guy too old to be a dependent of his grandmother, Guy is unable to obtain permanent residence in the United States. Immigration law prohibits permanent legal residency to minor children under the age of twenty-one without their parents. Guy's dream is to join the United States Army. Although Guy's Army recruiter said he has successfully tested and is qualified for enlistment, without permanent resident status, Guy will be unable to join. Today Guy, a first-year college student and a young man willing to fight for his adopted country, faces deportation. News about this young man's imminent deportation has shaken the community in southern California. More than 1,000 of Guy's friends and neighbors have signed a petition calling for legislation on his behalf. I hope you support this bill so that we can help Guy rebuild his life and continue to contribute to his community in the United States. Mr. President, I also ask unanimous consent that the bill and a recent news article depicting the compelling circumstances of Guy Taylor's life be printed in the Record.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise in strong support of the Coverdell-Feinstein Drug Kingpin bill, which is contained in modified form within this Intelligence Authorization Conference Report. That bill, also co-sponsored by Senators Lott, Torricelli, DeWine, Helms, Craig, Graham and Reid, is designed to strengthen the President's hand in combating foreign narcotics traffickers around the world. Senator Coverdell and I have worked for months to answer questions about the bill, iron out remaining problems, and satisfy the concerns of the Clinton Administration over how the bill will work. We and our staffs met with representatives from the White House, the Justice Department, the Treasury Department, the Department of State, the National Security Council, other Senate offices and many others during that time. I am gratified to report that we now have the support of this Administration, as well as both Houses of Congress. Let me speak a bit about this provision and why it is so important. This provision is patterned after an Executive Order issued by President Clinton in 1995, which targeted the assets of the powerful Colombian drug kingpins. That Order expanded the International Emergency Economics Powers Act to include ``Specially Designated Narcotics Traffickers.'' As issued, the President's Executive Order applies to four drug traffickers affiliated with the Colombian Cali cartel. The goal is to completely isolate the targeted drug traffickers. The Executive Order blocks any financial, commercial and/or business dealings with any entity associated with the four named drug traffickers--to include criminal associates, associated family members, related businesses and financial accounts. Under the Coverdell-Feinstein provision now contained in this Conference report--as under the President's Executive Order--the Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) would develop a list of Specially Designated Narcotics Traffickers in consultation with the Department of Justice, the CIA and the Department of State. Now, this list can contain traffickers throughout the world, and not just in Colombia. By focusing on the financial relationships between drug cartels and their associated business relationships, the Executive Order--and now this new provision--is directed toward the entities that are creating the drug problem in our country--the drug cartels. Now, this provision will codify and expand that Presidential directive to include other foreign narcotics traffickers considered a threat to our national security--Colombia was a good start, and we believe it is time to set our sights elsewhere around the world. The goal is to isolate targeted drug traffickers and their affiliated businesses by freezing their assets under U.S. jurisdiction and cutting off their ability to do business in the United States. Under the Executive Order, more than 400 companies and individuals affiliated with drug trafficking have been targeted by the Treasury Department. These entities are denied access to banking services in the U.S. and Colombia, and existing bank accounts have been shut down. As a result, more than 400 Colombian accounts have been closed, affecting over 200 companies and individuals engaged in drug trafficking. By February 1998, over 40 of these companies, with an estimated combined annual sales of over $200 million, had been forced out of business. Drug cartels today are more powerful, more violent and have a far greater reach than traditional organized crime organizations ever had been in the past. And, I believe they pose a major threat to our national security. Indeed, measured in dollar value, at least four-fifths of all illicit drugs consumed in the U.S. are of foreign origin, including virtually all the cocaine and heroin. With the authority to reach countries beyond Colombia, the President can work to isolate major criminal drug syndicates around the world, and impose upon them and their associates a similar fate as that of the Cali cartel. It is my hope that with new emphasis on this expanded authority, and with a concerted intelligence effort to develop sufficient data about the cartels and their associates, in this country and abroad, the United States will be able to work with our allies to expose, isolate, and cut off the major drug trafficking syndicates that pose a tremendous threat to our societies. This crucial mission can only be accomplished together, and we must work together to see that our governments are properly equipped to carry it out successfully. To that end, this amendment establishes clear procedures through which the various parts of our own government will be able to share information with their counterparts, and make recommendations to the President as to those cartels that represent the greatest risk to our nation. Coordinated by the Office of Foreign Assets Control in the Department of Treasury, the expanded program will target new international drug cartels with the same successful financial choke holds that worked so well in Colombia. And let me also be clear about one thing. Nothing in this provision should in any way be read to say that the United States Government should stop cooperating with other governments in the fight against drugs. To the utmost extent possible, the United States under this provision should continue and even expand upon its current agreements with other nations in the fight against drugs. While valid concerns over the compromise of national security, sources and methods, or ongoing investigations must be taken into account, we must also make sure that we continue to work cooperatively with those governments also intent on solving this drug crisis. This will not be an easy process, and the results will not be immediate. But over time, we hope that the flow of drugs across our borders will be diminished. Before I yield the floor, I want to address one concern that has been raised about due process for American citizens under this bill. Some have expressed a concern that this bill would leave U.S. citizens without redress for blocked assets, in possible violation of their due process rights. Such an outcome is certainly not what we are trying to accomplish with this bill, and I have been assured by the Treasury Department that avenues of redress will remain open to United States Citizens. According to Richard Newcomb, the Director of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), the entity responsible for carrying out the provisions of this bill: Even when assets are properly blocked under U.S. law, a U.S. citizen can petition OFAC for a license unblocking the U.S. Citizens interest in blocked assets. OFAC has a long- established policy of utilizing its licensing authority in sanctions programs to minimize adverse impact on U.S. persons while vigorously implementing the sanctions against targeted foreign persons. Second, according to Newcomb, OFAC will have the ability under section 805(b) of this Act to completely unblock assets: If the U.S. citizen believed that its interest in the foreign person's assets is mistakenly or wrongfully blocked, that U.S. citizen could petition OFAC to have the interest unblocked. Finally, ``Also, as section 805(f) must be read to avoid any Constitutional problems, a U.S. citizen would not be precluded from that section from pursuing any Constitutional claims.'' In other words, Mr. President, U.S. citizens are now, and will continue to be, offered significant protections against wrongful blocking or seizure of their assets. The Treasury Department has assured us that nothing in this bill will eliminate a U.S. citizen's absolute, Constitutional right to due process, and nothing in this bill attempts to do so. The clear purpose of the bill is to seek out foreign drug kingpins and cut off their access to the American economy. I'd like to thank Senator Coverdell for working so tirelessly with me on this bill, and I thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for supporting our efforts. I yield the floor.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, today I am pleased the Senate is considering the Balanced Budget Refinement Act of 1999, to restore some of the unanticipated cuts in Medicare and Medicaid made in 1997 and I commend the Senate leadership, the Finance Committee, Senators Roth and Moynihan, and the Administration for their hard work in developing this bill. The bill includes several important provisions. The Balanced Budget Act of 1997 has been one of several factors threatening the overall stability of the health care system in California, which many believe to be on the verge of collapse. Today I will focus on eight provisions of the bill which are particularly important to California. california's health care system eroding During the past few months, I have met with many California health care leaders who have convinced me that the Medicare and Medicaid cuts contained in the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 have undermined the financial stability of California's health care system. In the past 6 months, I have urged President Clinton, Secretary Shalala, and Senators Roth and Moynihan to join me in addressing the impact the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 is having on our nation's health care system. California's health care system, in the words of a November 15th Wall Street Journal article, is a ``chaotic and discombobulated environment.'' It is stretched to the limit: Thirty-seven California hospitals have closed since 1996, and up to 15 percent more may close by 2005. By 2002, the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 will result in cuts of $5.2 billion for California hospitals. For California's two largest Catholic health systems, Catholic Healthcare West and St. Joseph's Health System, the loss amounts to over $842 million. Over half of my state's hospitals lose money on hospital operations annually. Hospitals have laid off staff. California physician groups are failing at the rate of one a week, with 115 bankruptcies or closures since 1996. Academic medical centers, which incur added costs unique to their mission, are facing margins reduced to zero and below. The University of California's five medical centers will lose $225 million. California hospitals are contending with the impact of BBA while facing a projected margin of negative 7.58 percent by 2002, compared to the national rate of negative 4 percent. For rural California hospitals, because 40 percent of patients receive Medicare and 20 percent receive Medicaid, 69 percent lost money in 1998, according to the California Health Care Association. In short, restoring Medicare cuts is crucial to stabilizing California's health delivery system. Hospitals This bill contains several provisions that will help stabilize California's hospitals by restoring $400 million, according to preliminary estimates of the California Health Care Association. This bill clarifies that Congress' intent was not to impose a 5.7 percent cut in outpatient services, which restores $137 million to California, according to preliminary estimates by the California Health Care Association. Cancer hospitals are held harmless permanently. Since Medicare is a major payer for hospital care, improving payment rates and methods is a significant way to stop further closures and stabilize the system. safety net hospitals I want to thank the Finance Committee and the Administration for including a provision maintaining adequate Medicaid payments to disproportionate share hospitals. California has a disproportionate burden of uncompensated care. We have one of the highest uninsured rates in the country at 24 percent, while the national rate is 17 percent. California has the fourth highest uninsured rate in the country, a rate that has risen over the last 5 years and now totals over seven million people. As a result of Medicaid reductions in the Balanced Budget Act of 1997, California's Medicaid disproportionate share hospital program could lose more than $200 million by 2002, representing a 20 percent reduction in the program, if what is know as the ``transition rule'' for California's public hospitals is not extended. At my urging, this bill continues for California only the ``transition rule'' allowing California DSH hospitals to calculate Medicaid payments at 175 percent of unreimbursed costs. Under this provision, tens of millions of dollars will be restored to California hospitals. Public hospitals carry a disproportionate share of caring for the poor and uninsured. The uninsured often choose public hospitals and frequently wait until their illnesses are exacerbated when they come to the emergency room, making their care even more costly. Without this transition rule, for example, Kern Medical Center, in Bakersfield, would lose $8 million. Alameda County, would lose $14 million. Forty percent of all California uninsured hospital patients were treated at public hospitals in 1998, up from 32 percent in 1993. The uninsured as a share of all discharges for public hospitals grew from 22 percent in 1993 to 29 percent in 1998. While overall public hospital discharges declined from 1993 to 1999 by 15 percent, discharges for uninsured patients increased by 11 percent. Large numbers of uninsured add huge uncompensated costs to our public hospitals. medicaid community clinics Another important provision is the Medicaid payment method for community health clinics. Extending the phase out of cost-based reimbursement for community health clinics over four years will help alleviate the financial burden associated with the more expedited phase-out proposed under the Balanced Budget Act of 1997. BBA 1997 allowed state Medicaid programs to phase-out the previous requirement that clinics be paid on the basis of cost. The phase-out was to occur over 5 years. Under the phase-out, health centers could lose as much as $1.1 billion in Medicaid revenues. California health clinics' could have lost $969 million annually. To halt further decreases in payments to community health, an extended phase-out of cost-based reimbursement has been included in the bill which allows clinics in fiscal year 2000 to be reimbursed at 95 percent and by 2003 at 90 percent of costs. California has over 7 million uninsured, and 306 federally qualified health centers and 218 rural health clinics that rely on federal funding so that they can provide vital health services to some of the state's sickest and poorest. Over 80 of California's clinics are located in underserved areas and provide primary and preventive services to 10 percent of the uninsured people in the state. According to the federal Bureau of Primary Health Care's Uniform Data System, 42 percent of California community health center patients are children, 52 percent are adults ages 21-64, and 6 percent are the elderly. home health I am also pleased that the bill addresses home health care in this bill. For example, the provision which delays the 15 percent reduction in payment for one year will enable home health providers to transition more smoothly and better maintain continuity of services to patients. California will gain $162 million over 5 years as a result of all the home health provisions included in the bill, according to preliminary estimates by the California Association of Health Services at Home. While the intent of the BBA 1997 law was to restrain the growth of Medicare home health expenditures, it is now anticipated that home health expenditures in fiscal year 2000 will be lower than they were projected in 1997. CBO estimated that BBA 1997 would cut $16 billion over 5 years. Recent estimates show cuts of $48 billion over 5 years, which is three times more than originally expected. HCFA's 1998 data shows that total Medicare payments to home health agencies declined between 1997 and 1998 by 33 percent; reimbursements dropped from $1.1 billion to $745 million. California home health providers have suffered immeasurably since passage of the BBA. In California, 230 home health agencies have closed since 1997, which is 25 percent of all state licensed agencies, largely due to the effects of BBA, according to the California Association for Health Services at Home. For example, the home health agency at the San Gabriel Valley Medical Center, which was providing nearly 10,000 patient visits per year, was forced to close this year due in part to the effects of the BBA. Additionally, between 1997-1998 there has been a 12 percent decrease in the number of patients served nationally and a 35 percent decrease in the number of home health visits nationally. As the population ages and families are more dispersed, it is especially important to help people stay in their own homes. medical education I support the provisions included in the bill which alleviate reductions in graduate medical education and begin to restore equity in payment levels. Freezing cuts in the indirect medical education (IME) payment at the current level of 6.5 percent for fiscal year 2000, 6.25 percent in 2001, and 5.5 percent in 2002 and thereafter could help stabilize teaching hospitals and prevent a loss of about $3 billion for teaching hospitals nationwide over five years. For example, freezing indirect medical education payment rates represents $5 million to UCLA's teaching hospital. California's teaching hospitals as a whole will receive approximately $52 million because of this freeze, according to preliminary estimates by the California Health Care Association. The bill also takes a good first step to correct Medicare's direct medical education (DME) formula, a geographic disparity in payments, that has paid California teaching hospitals far less than teaching hospitals in the Northeast so that California's teaching hospitals can begin to receive payments for medical residents closer to those of their counterparts in other states. Currently, California teaching hospitals receive 40% less in Medicare payments for medical education than similar New York institutions. The DME provision in this bill begins to reform a longstanding inequity in the formula that has unfairly compensated medical education in California. California's teaching hospitals will benefit from this provision by approximately $52 million over five years, according to the California Health Care Association. Many of the nation's teaching hospitals, including UCLA in California, are premier research and clinical care facilities and will be forced to close down beds and lower the quality of care they provide if reductions in indirect medical education (IME) payments continues. According to the Association of American Medical Colleges, 30 percent of all teaching hospitals nationwide are now operating in the red, and by 2002, 50 percent of all teaching hospitals will be losing money without this bill. Academic medical centers deserve protection because they have multiple responsibilities--teaching, research, and patient care--which cause them to incur costs unique to such facilities. There are 400 teaching hospitals across the country. Teaching hospitals only account for 5.5 percent of the nation's 5,000 hospitals but they house 40 percent of all neonatal intensive care units, 53 percent of pediatric intensive care units, and 70 percent of all burn units. Our nation's teaching hospitals are providing care to some of the nation's sickest patients. Academic medical centers also provide care to a disproportionate share of the uninsured and underinsured. They provide 44 percent of all care for the poor. The University of California's academic medical centers are the second largest safety net for a state that has the fourth highest uninsured rate in the country. Medicaid disproportionate share payments to hospitals that serve the impoverished were also reduced five percent over five years as a result of the Balanced Budget Act of 1997. Teaching hospitals receive two- thirds of all Medicaid disproportionate share payments, worth $4.5 billion annually. In California, graduate medical education (GME) funding helps support 108 hospitals that train more than 6,700 residents over three-to-five year periods. In 1997, the direct medical education funding in California totaled $95 million. Dr. Gerald Levey, the Medical Provost at the University of California Los Angeles wrote that: In the 5\1/2\ years I have been in my position at UCLA, my colleagues and I have implemented virtually every conceivable cost-cutting measure to keep us financially strong in order to compete in the brutal managed care market and maintain our academic mission of research and teaching. Coming on the heels of these measures, the Balanced Budget Act of 197 has served to literally ``break the camel's back.'' Teaching hospitals' ability to serve their communities, advance research, and train physicians will be compromised if we do not pass this bill. adequately paying doctors I also thank the Finance Committee and Administration for addressing the issue of the ``sustainable growth rate'' factor in payments to physicians under Medicare. The Balanced Budget Act of 1997 changed how Medicare physician payment rates are updated every year, including creating the new sustainable growth rate factor. In the first two years of using the sustainable growth rate, it appears that errors in its calculations were made because projections were used to determine the rate rather than actual data. As a result of these errors, physicians are caring for one million more patients than Medicare anticipated, at a cost of $3 billion according to the American Medical Association. California's doctors have made a compelling case that errors in its estimates have caused unintended reductions in payments to physicians. The bill would require HCFA to use actual data beginning in 2001 to calculate payments instead of projections in order to stabilize payments to physicians who treat Medicare patients. While it does not go far enough, it is a step in the right direction towards decreasing fluctuations in physician payments from year to year. retaining medicaid Another provision included in this bill that is of great importance to California is removing the December 21, 1999 expiration date for the $500 million Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) Fund. The expiration date for these funds must be repealed so that states like California can continue to use TANF funds to enroll low-income children and adults in Medicaid and CHIP. As part of the 1996 welfare reform, Medicaid was ``de-linked'' from cash assistance, and states were given increased matching federal funds for administering a new Medicaid family coverage category. Of the $500 million provided, as of July 1999, states have only spent 10 percent. Unless federal law is changed very soon, 34 states, including California, will lose these funds by the end of this year because under the law, states have to spend the funds within the first 12 calendar quarters that their TANF programs are in effect. Thus, December 31, 1999, California will lose access to the $78 million remaining of the $84 million allocated if we do not act. Fifteen other states will lose access to their remaining funds in December as well. On September 30, 1999, sixteen states lost access their funds due to these time limits. We cannot let these funds lapse in California because we need to enroll more working, low-income people in Medicaid and children in CHIP and ensure that more Californians have access to health services. I thank the Committee and Administration for including this provision. medicare managed care reform I am pleased with the five-year moratorium placed on NCFA's use of health status risk adjuster for payments to managed care plans included in the bill. HCFA has been using hospitalizations as a measure of health, which is not only an incomplete measure of health but also unfairly penalizes states like California that historically have had a heavy penetration of managed care, lower hospital admissions rates and shorter hospital lengths of stay. The way Medicare pays managed care plans deserves a thorough review to determine if both the payment methodology and the payment rats are appropriate. This moratorium could give us time to conduct a review as well as give HCFA time to develop a better measure of health. Under this provision, $130 million over five years will be restored so that managed care plans can pay providers more adequately, according to preliminary estimates by the California Health Care Association. environment post-balanced budget act of 1997 Circumstances have changed since 1997 when we passed the Balanced Budget Act. We have eliminated the federal deficit. Because we have a robust economy, lower inflation, higher GDO growth and lower unemployment, we also have lowered Medicare spending growth more than anticipated. This climate provides us an opportunity to revisit the reductions made by the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 and to strengthen the stability of health care services, a system that in my state is on the verge of unraveling. We should not end this session without passing this bill. Without it, we could have a more severe health care crisis on our hands, especially in my state. I urge my colleagues to join me in passing this bill.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. I want to thank the Chairman and the Ranking Member for their tireless efforts on patent reform. I strongly support passage of S. 1798, which is included in this omnibus measure, because so many companies in California and across the nation depend on a strong and well-functioning patent system. While S. 1798 will provide important protection for inventors and innovators and help reduce needless patent litigation, I do have some concerns regarding the compromise reached regarding the reexamination procedure set forth in Title VI. As I understand it, this section will reduce the burden of patent cases in our federal courts. However, we need to be sure that the procedure fully and fairly protects the rights of all parties, and some concerns about this process have been brought to my attention over the last few weeks. Out of deference to the Chairman and the Ranking Member of the Judiciary Committee, and being sensitive to the compromise that the House reached, I did not seek amendments to this title of the bill. Furthermore, I feel strongly that the bill should move forward without further delay, so I support its final passage. This does not mean, however, that I believe we should cease to be concerned about how the new system will function. Accordingly, I would like to receive assurances from Chairman Hatch that we will keep a close eye on how well this new reexamination system works. In particular, I would like to request that the Committee obtain an interim report from the Patent and Trademark Office under the authority specified in section 606 of S. 1798 not later than 18 months after this bill becomes effective. I would also invite Chairman Hatch to hold a hearing to consider this information, and to obtain views from people who both supported and opposed this compromise system.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today to submit a resolution that commends and remembers events that transpired in Remy, France as its citizens honored the fallen World War II Army Air Corps pilot, Lieutenant Houston Braly. This inspiring story happened over fifty years ago, but its example of compassion and brotherhood remains in our hearts and minds. On August 2, 1944, Lt. Braly's squadron of P-51 fighters on patrol in northern France encountered a German munitions train. After three unsuccessful attack runs at the camouflaged train, Lt. Braly's fire hit a car carrying explosives, causing a tremendous explosion. Airplanes circling 13,000 feet over the battle were hit by shrapnel from the train, haystacks in fields some distance away burned, and nearly all buildings in the small French town were demolished. A 13th century church in the town of Remy barely escaped destruction, but its historic stained-glass windows were shattered. It was this explosion that tragically claimed the life of Lt. Braly at only twenty-two years of age. Despite the near total destruction of the small town, the residents of Remy regarded that young American as a hero. A young woman pulled Braly's body from the burning wreck of the plane, wrapped him in the nylon of his parachute, and placed him in the town's courtyard. Hundreds of villagers left flowers around his body, stunning German authorities. The next morning, German authorities discovered that villagers continued to pay tribute to the young pilot despite threats of punishment. The placement of flowers on Lt. Braly's grave continued until American forces liberated Remy to the cheers of the townspeople. Almost 50 years later, Steven Lea Vell of Danville, California, discovered this story in his research. Mr. Lea Vell was so moved by the story that he visited Remy, France, only to find that the stained glass windows of the magnificent 13th century church which were destroyed in the explosion had never been replaced. He contacted members of the 364th Fighter Group, under which Lt. Braly had served. After hearing how the residents of Remy had honored their fallen friend, veterans joined together to form Windows for Remy, a non-profit organization that would raise $200,000 to replace the stained glass windows as a gesture of thanks to Remy for its deeds. On Armistice Day, November 11, 1995, fifty years after the war ended, the town of Remy paid tribute once more to Lt. Braly. On that day they renamed the crossroads where he perished to ``Rue de Houston L. Braly, Jr.'' I know that my fellow senators will want to join me in commending the people of Remy for their kindness and recognize the comrades of Lt. Braly for their good will. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the resolution be printed at this point in the Record.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, today I am pleased to be joined by Senator Boxer in introducing a bill to designate the United States Post Office located at 14071 Peyton Drive in Chino Hills, California, as the ``Joseph Ileto Post Office.'' This post office would be designated in memory and in celebration of the life of Joseph Santos Ileto, the Filipino American postal worker who was brutally gunned down during his postal route in August by Buford Furrow, Jr., a white supremacist. Only hours earlier, this same assailant opened fire on the North Valley Jewish Community Center, wounding three young children, one teenager, and one elderly woman. Joseph Ileto touched many lives. He was a kind-hearted, intelligent man who gave so much to those he loved and even to those he did not know. He was known for his unselfishness and his willingness to give a helping hand to anyone in need. In fact, the day Joseph Ileto was killed, he was filling in for another mail carrier, as he had done so many times before. His life and death exemplify the ultimate sacrifice of public service, which we too often take for granted. As a U.S. Postal Service employee, he served our nation with honor and dignity and died doing his job. My heart goes out to the Ileto family, who is grieving over the death of their son, brother, and friend. Despite the sadness of their loss, they can be proud that the life and spirit of Joseph Ileto lives on. His death only confirms the urgency in which we as a community must take a strong stand against hate crimes and racism. The number of hate crimes in the U.S. has increased during the last five years, and the time is now to have dialogue and pass meaningful legislation to address this issue. As a first step, it is my hope that we can expedite passage this bill, to remember and honor the life of Joseph Ileto. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

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