Dianne Feinstein

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, today is a very special day for millions of women around the world. Today is a day that celebrates the promise of a better future. Today is a day that offers the hope that injustices inflicted on too many women in too many societies will disappear from the earth forever. Today, March 8, 2000, is International Women's Day I rise today to recognize this day's importance to the women of today and to the generations of women to come. I rise to cry shame for our failures in fulfilling this day's promise. And, I rise to direct our attention to three critical issues: the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, CEDAW, international family planning, and the international trafficking of women and girls. These are issues in which the United States, and especially this body, are honor-bound to spare no effort in leading the international community to improve the status of women around the world. In 1948, the United Nations dramatically focused world attention on the international human rights agenda when it adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This historic event aimed at increasing public awareness of the need to better the human condition in many places throughout the globe. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights represented a milestone in human history. Regrettably, it glossed over the needs of over half the world's population--women. Women's rights remained unrecognized as a legitimate concern until the Convention to Eliminate all Forms of Discrimination Against Women, CEDAW, was drafted to redress this oversight. CEDAW organized all existing international standards regarding discrimination on the basis of gender, and established rights for women in areas not previously subject to international standards. The United States actively participated in drafting of the Convention; President Carter signed it on July 17, 1980. Then the U.S. did nothing. For fourteen years, the United States scrutinized CEDAW with an intense scrutiny normally reserved for judging the merits of a technically demanding international agreement, not a document seeking to establish the fundamental human rights of over half the world's population. CEDAW was not sent to the Senate until September, 1994. In 1994, the Foreign Relations Committee recommended by bipartisan vote that CEDAW be approved with qualifications, but acted too late in the session for the Convention to be considered by the full Senate. Now, almost six years later, the Convention continues to languish in the Senate, locked up in the Committee on Foreign Relations. A bi- partisan group of women Senators, among whom I am proud to be counted, has sponsored Senate Resolution 237 which expresses the sense of the Senate that the Senate Foreign Relations Committee should hold hearings on CEDAW and that the full Senate should act on CEDAW by March 8, 2000. Today is March 8, 2000. The date has come, and will go, and this body has yet to take substantive action on CEDAW, even though this Convention contains no provisions in conflict with American law. The Convention has been ratified by 161 countries. Of the world's democracies, only the United States has yet to ratify this fundamental document. Indeed, even countries we regularly censure for human rights abuses--China, the People's Republic of Laos, Iraq--have either signed or agreed in principle. In our failure to ratify CEDAW, we now keep company with a select few--Iran, North Korea, Sudan and Afghanistan among them. Remember, as the old saying goes, we are judged by the company we keep. Is this how we want to be known when it comes to defending the human rights of those unable to defend themselves? In failing to sign on to this Convention, we risk losing our moral right to lead on human rights. By ratifying CEDAW, we will demonstrate our commitment to promoting equality and to protecting women's rights throughout the world. By ratifying CEDAW, we will send a strong message to the international community that the U.S. understands the challenges faced by discrimination against women, and we will not abide by it. By ratifying CEDAW, we reestablish our credentials as a leader on human rights and women's rights. Today, as we commemorate International Women's Day, I call on my colleagues in the Senate to move forward and ratify CEDAW. The second issue I would like to touch on today is one which has seen much congressional attention in recent years: U.S. support for international family planning and reproductive health. The world now has more than 6 billion people. The United Nations estimates this figure could be 12 billion by the year 2050. Almost all of this growth will occur in the places least able to bear up under the pressures of massive population increases. The brunt will be in developing countries lacking the resources needed to provide basic health or education services. If women are to be able to better their own lives and the lives of their families, they must have access to the educational and medical resources needed to control their reproductive destinies and their health. International family planning programs reduce poverty, improve health and raise living standards around the world; they enhance the ability of couples and individuals to determine the number and spacing of their children. Under the leadership of both Democratic and Republican Presidents, and under Congresses controlled by Democrats and Republicans alike, the United States has established a long and distinguished record of world leadership on international family planning and reproductive health issues. Unfortunately, in recent years these programs have come under increasing partisan attack, despite the fact that no U.S. international family planning funds are spent on international abortion. The Fiscal Year 2000 omnibus appropriations bill contained ``Mexico City'' restrictions that prohibit U.S. grants to private foreign non- governmental organizations that perform abortions or lobby to change abortion laws in foreign countries. House leaders insisted on these provisions in exchange for acceptance of arrear payments to the United Nations. I was disappointed that the bill included this language. I voted in favor of the legislation because I thought it critical that we pay our back dues to the United Nations, and because it contained a provision granting Presidential authority--which President Clinton later exercised--to waive the restrictions through the end of Fiscal Year 2000. I am pleased the President took this action and that he announced that he would oppose any attempt to renew the ``Mexico City'' restrictions when they expire on September 30, 2000. International family planning programs have experienced significant cuts in funding in recent years. President Clinton's foreign aid budget for Fiscal Year 2001 calls for $542 million for international family planning programs, restoring funding to Fiscal Year 1995 levels. Today, as we mark International Women's Day, I urge my colleagues to recommit themselves to U.S. leadership in international family planning and support the President's request. Lastly, I would like to focus attention on a vicious, and growing problem for women the world over--forced or coerced trafficking of girls and women for the purpose of sexual exploitation. This is a rapidly growing, highly lucrative international business. The United Nations estimates that every year millions of women fall victims to this international trafficking in human life. Criminal organizations make an estimated $7 billion a year on the trafficking and prostitution of approximately 4 million women and girls. They do some by preying on the fears and economic insecurity created by the grinding poverty, rising unemployment and disintegrating social networks common to many poorer societies, today. The traffickers target women from Eastern Europe and East Asia, women who agree to work as waitresses, models or dancers in the industrialized world to escape the grip of poverty in their native lands. But, once they arrive, their passports are seized, they are beaten, held captive and forced into prostitution. Traffickers and pimps hold these women in bondage, forcing them to work uncompensated as repayment for exaggerated room, board, and travel expenses. These victims have little or no legal protection; they travel on falsified documents or enter by means of inappropriate visas provided by traffickers. When and if discovered by the police, these women are usually treated as illegal aliens and deported. Even worse, laws against traffickers who engage in forced prostitution, rape, kidnaping, and assault and battery are rarely enforced. The women will not testify against traffickers out of fear of retribution, the threat of deportation, and humiliation for their actions. We, as a nation, cannot sit idly and allow this vicious exploitation of women to continue unchecked. We must effectively enforce current laws and implement new laws to protect victims and prosecute traffickers. I am proud to be a co-sponsor of Senator Wellstone's International Trafficking of Women and Children Victim Protection of 1999 which provides more information on trafficking and toughens law dealing with the illegal trade of women. I urge all of my colleagues to support this vital piece of legislation. The issues I have laid before you today are not just women's issues, they are humanity's issues. As First Lady Hillary Clinton has said, `Women's rights are human rights and human rights are women's rights.' They merit attention throughout the year, not just on one day. We must debate and ratify the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women. We must rededicate ourselves and our resources to international family planning programs. And we must enact tough anti-trafficking legislation.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize the great service that Jewish Family and Children's Services has provided the people of San Francisco and the Bay Area for 150 years. Since its founding in 1850, Jewish Family and Children's Services has been dedicated to alleviating suffering and helping people realize their potential. It has grown into one of the region's largest social service organizations, with more than 2,100 volunteers helping more than 40,000 people a year. Jewish Family and Children's Services provides a wide range of services from adoption services and child mentoring programs, to programs aimed at helping seniors. They also have many programs designed to help people with special needs such as AIDS counseling and care management, and alcohol and substance abuse programs. Over the past 150 years, Jewish Family and Children's Services has improved the quality of life for thousands of people. Please join me in honoring this outstanding organization.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I did not have the opportunity to vote on rollcall vote No. 34, the nomination of Julio M. Fuentes to be U.S. circuit judge, for the third circuit. Judge Fuentes is a very highly regarded judge, and had I been present on the floor, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, on behalf of Senators Sessions, Byrd, and Lieberman, I send an amendment to the desk.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I thank my colleague, Senator Boxer from California, for her leadership and for this sense-of-the-Senate resolution, which I am very happy to support fully. Today, I received a packet of letters. They are from fourth and fifth grade children. I want to read just a few parts of these letters: My name is Nikki. * * * I am 11 years old. * * * No one in my household has a gun, not one of them. * * * One day, I saw a neighbor of mine get shot on her way to the candy house. She got shot 4 times. She got shot 3 times in her side and once in her leg. Now she's paralyzed for life. That really hurt me and a lot of other people. She was only 12 years old and she was a nice girl. Here is another one: I am Talia and I am 11 years of age. And when I'm coming home from school, I see little 13 year old teenagers playing with guns like it's a thing to do. I walk across the street to go get some ketchup for my cousin's house and I see people dragged into the * * * park. * * * We're little kids. We need to live in a safer community and this is not safe. So write to all the gun stores and let them know what kids think about guns. Here is another one: My opinion is no people should have guns, because one day in the summer that passed this girl was in her house. Then a man dragged her out of her house up the stairs. After he punched her and shot her in the leg, she had a hole in her leg. The police and ambulance had to come and wrapped her leg up. * * * I want the Senator to make guns no more. No more guns in this world. Here is another one: I am a fifth grader. And mainly every year I hear at least 20 gunshots. I am scared at night because I think it's going to be a drive-by. I even sometimes can't go outside to recess because gunshots are heard. Here is another one: My name is Justin. I am in the fifth grade. * * * At night in my neighborhood there are gunshots and sometimes it keeps me awake. When I walk home from school, there is gangs in one spot and another gang in another spot. Could you please help and make guns illegal? All the kids in my class want you to help. If you help, then I thank you very much. Here is another one: What I know about guns and gun control is to not let guns get into the wrong hands. * * * What I want is to not let guns get in the wrong hands. To let it not go to people that just came out of prison to get payback. That is what I want and I hope you can do something about this and I want support of gun control laws. Here is another one: * * * When I was 3 years old, I saw a black and silver gun. When I saw it, I ran in my house and saw the person get shot by it. I was so scared I cried my eyes out. So please support us. Another one: * * * I think you should stop people from shooting other people. People should have to get a license and people should have to have a background check for getting guns. Please support gun control laws. Another one: * * * My experiences are hearing guns, like one day when it was my Aunt's birthday, we were all in the house looking out the window. We had seen this man on top of the hill. He had a gun. Then he just started to point it and then he started to shoot. We all had to drop to the floor. It was scary. What I want is only the police to have guns because they're the only ones who's using them right. I want you to vote to have only police have guns, it's just right. And if police are not using them right, please take them away. I want gun control over guns. Another one: * * * I am 10 years old. And I have seen people shoot another person. One night I had heard gunshots. I looked out the window and saw a man running, and another man lying on the street. He was shot about fifty times. My uncle was shot on Christmas night on his way home from work. Ladies and gentlemen of the Senate, this is the real world. This is what is happening out there. How can we stand by and not do anything? I speak as a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. I have been on this committee for as long as I have been in the Senate. I am a supporter of the juvenile justice bill. That day when we debated four commonsense, targeted gun measures--all of them, I thought, no- brainers--I was so proud to be a Member of this body. I remember that Senator John Ashcroft moved an amendment to say that youngsters, children, could not buy assault weapons. That was a no-brainer. It went through this body. The second amendment was on trigger locks. My colleague from California and others in this body have championed that--that is, that guns should have trigger locks. That way, a 6-year- old can't use the gun. A 5-year-old from Memphis, TN, took a gun to school to kill his kindergarten teacher because the teacher gave him a ``time-out'' the day before. A simple $15 gun lock, or trigger lock, would have stopped that from happening. That was the second measure. Plugging the gun show loophole so that children from a school can't go to a gun show and buy a gun, no questions asked, was the third one. The fourth one was mine, to prohibit the importation of these big clips that are coming in from all over the world by the tens of millions. Some of them are as big as 250 rounds. Those are four simple, commonsense, targeted gun regulations. And what has happened? Nothing. The children from Columbine came here and they begged for help, as did the children in these letters, and what happens? Nothing. I talk to Members of the Senate and I ask, ``Why is nothing happening?'' They tell me that the Gun Owners of America are really resolved that they don't want any legislation. We say the time has come to recognize that the majority of our people have certain basic rights--that our children have the right to go to school without fear, that our children have the right to sleep without hearing gunshots, that you have the right to walk down the street and not fear getting killed by a drive-by shooter. In Los Angeles, in the last 16 years, over 7,000 people have been killed by drive-by shooters. That is what the plethora, the abundance, the avalanche of guns in this country is doing to the real world outside of this beltway. I say to those who yield to this special, unrelenting interest that says, ``You either vote our way or we will defeat you at the polls,'' that the American people have had enough, and the time has come to pass some targeted, commonsense regulations. The resolution of my colleague from California is a beginning. It at least puts us on record. Hopefully, if it should pass, it will send a message to the Judiciary Conference Committee of both these noble Houses. That message is: Pass the juvenile justice bill, and pass these four targeted measures. I defy any Member of this House or the other House to tell me that the second amendment of the Constitution of the United States prohibits the regulation of firearms. Let me add one thing. Today in gun shops all around this great country they are selling .50 caliber weapons, a military weapon, a weapon capable of sending a bullet 4 miles, a weapon capable of producing a shot that can go through a concrete wall. Tell me that we need weapons such as this in a civilized society. Tell me that the second amendment of the Constitution prevents us from regulating firearms. Tell me that these children begging to be safe and to not hear gunshots at night, to not get shot in the car, and not to stand in a living room and have a bullet come through their wall are wrong. I thank the Senator from California for her good work. I add my support. I yield the floor.*****- -Name: -Payroll No. -Folios: -Date: - Subformat:

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. If it is convenient, 10 minutes.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, today Senators Sessions, Byrd, Lieberman, and I are offering an amendment to address one of the most significant detriments to good education in our public schools. That is the practice of passing children on to the next grade regardless of whether they make passing grades. It is called social promotion. While this practice may be politically correct, it has, I believe, become the single most important factor leading to the decline in quality of public education in America. Under our amendment, in order to receive Federal funds, States would be required to prohibit the practice of social promotion and adopt achievement standards in the core academic subjects. Decisions about how to implement a nonsocial promotions policy would be left to the States and localities. Implicit in the amendment is that remedial education is necessary and can be provided through a number of different Federal, State, and local sources. This amendment is carefully written so that implementation is left with State and local governments. For example, State and local officials would decide all specifics of promotion policy and the criteria for passing and holding back students, achievement standards, subjects that constitute the core curriculum, grades when students would be tested, grading methods, testing methods, and remedial education. The amendment defines social promotion as a formal or informal practice of promoting a student from the grade for which the determination is made to promote or not to promote to the next grade when the student fails to achieve a minimum level of achievement and proficiency in the core curriculum for the grade for which the determination is made. The amendment covers elementary through secondary grades--grades 1 through 12. It is carefully crafted so that reform changes could be made incrementally, grade by grade, or in any fashion the State or local school districts see fit. Social promotion misleads our students, their parents, and the public. Even educators have concluded that it doesn't work. Let me give you the conclusion of a study conducted by the American Federation of Teachers. I quote: Social promotion is an insidious practice that hides school failure and creates problems for everyone: For kids who are deluded into thinking they have learned the skills to be successful, or get the message that achievement doesn't count; for teachers who must face students who know that teachers wield no credible authority to demand hard work; for the business community and colleges that must spend millions of dollars on remediation; and for society that must deal with the growing proportion of uneducated citizens unprepared to contribute productively to the economic and civic life of the nation. The American Federation of Teachers has said that social promotion is rampant and that only 22 States have standards in the four core disciplines of English, math, social studies, and science that are well grounded in content and that are clear and specific enough to be used. They surveyed 85 of the Nation's 820 largest school districts in 32 States representing one-third of the Nation's public school enrollment. None of the districts in the AFT national survey has an explicit policy of social promotion. But almost every district has an implicit practice. According to the U.S. Department of Education, a third of students across the United States perform below the basic level of proficiency; 15 percent who graduate from high school cannot balance a checkbook or write a letter to a credit card company to explain an error on a bill. Mike Wright, a San Diegan, told the San Diego Tribune he continued to get promoted from grade to grade and even graduated from high school even though he failed subjects. At the age of 29, he enrolled in a community college to learn to read. Let me talk for a moment about social promotion in Los Angeles. School officials decided they would end the practice. That is the good news. The bad news was that if it were done all at once, they found that one-half of the entire student population --350 students-- would have to be held back. More than two-thirds of eighth graders would be flunked if social promotion were fully ended. The problem was so massive that they have had to scale back their plans and implement the new policy more slowly. They have taken a multistep, phased-in plan, and this legislation is structured to give school officials the flexibility to do just that. I would like to read a letter sent to me yesterday from the superintendent of that school district, a man who was superintendent of public instruction when I was mayor of San Francisco and whom I respect greatly. He points out: One of the solutions is to institute an intensive program of standards-based promotion, eliminating the dastardly practice of social promotion that has advanced the student from one grade to the next without having learned what was required in his current grade. In its initial phase, we are targeting the second and eighth grade and focusing on reading, because that is the foundation of all learning. Our program is very practical in design, and is based on classroom space, materials, professional development, and the availability of staff. It would be my proudest hope that we can and will provide the education for our children of poverty that they deserve. These are the disadvantaged, who in this district are predominantly children of color. I see the end of social promotion as a way to ensure that all children will have the basic skills to become contributing Members of their community. The Governor of California, Gov. Gray Davis, has endorsed our amendment. In a February 29 letter to me he wrote: I write to express my support for your amendment that provides for achievement standards, assessment of student performance in meeting those standards, and an end to the practice of social promotion. As you know, improving education in California is my first, second, and third priority. Last year, I sponsored the California Public Schools Accountability Act which established a comprehensive high stakes school accountability system, the various components of which will be phased in over the next several years. Your amendment will provide an added impetus to reinforce our State's commitment to ensuring the achievement of all students. Mr. President, at least half of my State's 5.6 million students perform below their grade level. California ranks 36th out of 39 States in fourth grade reading proficiency, 32nd out of 36 States in eighth grade reading proficiency, 41st out of 43 States in fourth grade math performance. Let me speak about Chicago, the major city of the Presiding Officer. On June 1, I took a group of top-level California educators and experts to Chicago and spent the day discussing what was being done. In Chicago, they have abolished social promotion. They have established content standards. They test student performance in meeting the standards. They have adopted a core curriculum, teacher lesson plans. They evaluate schools on a regular cycle. They intervene with failing schools. They have performance criteria for teachers and principals and they put in place extensive remedial and afterschool programs providing the very necessary help for struggling students. The Chicago school district is 90 percent minority and 90 percent poverty. If it can be done in Chicago, it can be done everywhere else. The results are there: Reading, up 12 percent; math, up 14 percent. Scores are improving. Chicago stands as an example, but it takes political will and courage to make these changes. Our legislation provides the incentive. I yield 10 minutes to my cosponsor, the distinguished Senator from Alabama, Mr. Sessions.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I think Members can now see the Catch- 22. Of course, retention without remedial education is not going to work, but there is not one who can say that our public education system is working with the policy of promoting youngsters even when they are failures, of never coming to grips with failure and then promoting them and graduating them when they cannot read or write, multiply, divide, add, recognize China on a map, or count change in their pocket. How do they get a job in the workplace of this new millennium? They do not. That is why we have had employers come in to us and say: You have to raise the H-1B quota. We need more foreign nationals from other countries because we cannot hire public school graduates who can think, who can do what they need to do, and more and more employers have to provide remedial education which should be the job of the public school system. I went to public school for all of my elementary school. There was a policy of no social promotion, and youngsters learned. There was remedial education. Districts are putting that back into play now. We have different statistics. My staff yesterday talked with the superintendent of the Chicago school district, and these are the figures we were given: No. 1, in 1996, 20.5 percent of students performed at or above national norms in 9th and 11th grade reading. In May of 1999, 32.5 percent of students performed at that level. That is a 12-percent increase in performance. No. 2, he told us elementary reading scores are at their highest since 1990. In 1996, 26.5 percent of students were at or above national norms. In 1999, 36 percent were. That is up 10 percent. No. 3, math scores are up, too. In 1996, 30 percent of children scored at or above national norms in elementary math. In May of 1999, they had risen to 44 percent. That is up 14 percent. During this time, the very mayor who put this system into effect was up for reelection, and the people of Chicago reelected him. The day I was there, there was no question in my mind what parents thought about this program. They liked it. They wanted their children to learn, particularly parents of students of color. They know this is the only way their children are going to get the kind of education they need. The President of the United States has called for ending social promotion. The Secretary of Education has prepared guidelines for educators on ending social promotion and guidelines for using Federal funds to adopt sound promotion policies. In 1998, the California Legislature ended social promotion. Districts are now implementing it. For example, San Diego school officials will now require all students to earn a C overall average and a C grade in core subjects for high school graduation, effectively ending social promotion for certain grades for high school graduation. I have a hard time understanding how people can speak against having accountability and excellence as a goal in public education, how they can rationalize this to say that the system that has brought us to be the 39th among 41 industrialized nations in education is one that we should not change. Studies show that title I moneys are not producing the dividends we had hoped they should. Better those funds be spent on remedial education for poor children, better they be spent in teaching youngsters the basic fundamentals than spent diffusely throughout school districts and not achieving any change. Public education, as we know it today, is in deep trouble. The Achilles' heel of education is this path of least resistance: Simply promoting a youngster regardless of whether they are in school, whether they are a truant, whether they are getting Ds or Fs, and not worrying about it because next year the light may go on and they might learn. I think the facts are clear, the light does not go on. I tell you, I do not buy this business about increasing dropouts because you work with them in remedial education. I do not buy that at all. I think that unless our schools have basic standards, hold teachers and students accountable for performance, public education, as we know it today, will simply continue to sink below the waves. I am proud that the largest State in the Union has taken some steps. I think if we were to target and provide the incentive that title I moneys from the Elementary and Secondary Education Act would only go to schools that were willing to observe accountability, and were willing to put in remedial education, and were willing to see the grades mean something, and that students are able to master basic core fundamentals, we would have the enlightened workforce of the future, which would mean that we would not have to continue to increase H-1B quotas to bring foreign nationals into this country to carry out some of the finest occupations we have that should be going to our own students. Mr. President, I reserve the remainder of my time.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. May I make a point of inquiry, Mr. President?

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Point of inquiry: How much time do I have remaining?

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Six minutes. I thank the Chair.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I just read statistics given to me by the superintendent of public instruction of Chicago which showed a 12- to 14-percent improvement in core curriculum grade scores since Chicago ended the policy of social promotion and put in motion remedial education and decreased class size and also set some standards holding students accountable for performance and teachers accountable for performance as well. I have a very difficult time with what the Senator from Minnesota is saying because he is essentially calling this a policy, in a sense, of guaranteed retention. It is not that at all. It is a policy that says there should be standards; that there should be achievement levels set in each of the grades; that there should be a minimum pass requirement for promotion; and that schools should mean something in terms of learning. The problem with the amendment is it obfuscates our amendment. It prevents a clean vote on our amendment, and in effect it would destroy our amendment because it sets up a series of seven conditions which would make it virtually impossible to enact our amendment. For example, the child was taught by fully certified or qualified teachers as defined by the State. In my State, we probably have 30,000 teachers who are not certificated. This would mean under this provision, California should not go ahead and abolish social promotion, put forward standards of accountability for teachers and for students, which, of course, California is now in the process, by the Governor's statement, by the legislature's action, and by individual school districts, of beginning to do. Secondly, that the child's parents had multiple opportunities for parental involvement. I don't know what multiple opportunities for parental involvement are, but it is not just opportunities for parental involvement. It is multiple opportunities for parental involvement, which gives a basis, again, to essentially poison what we are trying to achieve. In addition, that the child has access to high-quality instructional materials and instructional resources to ensure that the child had the opportunity to achieve the highest performance level, regardless of disability, income, and background, that is something we would all subscribe to, but when it is put in this form, it becomes a way of avoiding accountability and avoiding performance. We do not tell a State or a local jurisdiction how to do this. This is up to them. As I have tried to point out, Los Angeles is now doing it in an incremental fashion, in a grade-by-grade fashion. I suspect that schools throughout this country would implement accountability and standards in a different way. That is fine with me. But what this amendment says is, we are not going to waste taxpayers' money by providing money when there is no evidence it is going to provide the remedial education or the kind of opportunity for students that the framers intended in the first place. Mr. President, how much time do I have remaining?

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. I reserve the remainder of my time.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I yield the remainder of my time.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I think it has been pretty clear, at least to me and certainly to the State of California, the city of Chicago, the city of Los Angeles, the city of San Diego, and other cities around this country, that either an implicit or explicit policy or practice of promoting children when they are failing or when they don't even show up in school is probably the leading cause for many of us for the decline of quality public education across this great country. It isn't politically correct to say we will no longer permit social promotion, but it can make a huge difference in where this Nation goes. This amendment is very carefully crafted to say that Federal education dollars will not be available to a jurisdiction if the State does not have a policy to prohibit the practice of social promotion. If we leave the details to the State and local communities, it does not tell them how, when, or where to do it. It simply says that Federal moneys are contingent upon the abolition of that practice. The fact is that the States are moving in this direction. The fact is that there is still no accountable standards. I wish to stress that it does allow for remedial education; it does allow for Federal dollars to be used for remedial education. I thank the Chair.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, today Senator DeWine and I are introducing a bill to provide funds to educational organizations to teach the history of the Holocaust. It is entitled the Holocaust Education Assistance Act. Cosponsoring the bill are Senators Smith of Oregon, Moynihan, Lautenberg, Schumer, Boxer, Wellstone, and Durbin. This bill authorizes $2 million each year for fiscal years 2001-2005 for a competitive grant program under which schools, museums and other non-profit organizations could compete for grants to train teachers, conduct seminars and develop educational materials on the Holocaust. It is the companion bill to H.R. 3105, introduced by Representatives Maloney, Horn, Waxman, and others. The Holocaust is one of the most horrific events in human history. In the 1930s and 1940s, the German Nazi regime systematically slaughtered more than 6,000,000 Jews and other minorities under the guise of achieving a ``racially pure'' society. Hopefully, this bill can help ensure that the next generation of Americans learns some of the crucial lessons of the Holocaust. The most fundamental of these lessons is that racial and ethnic-based hatred endangers each of us, and that the violation of one person's rights threatens the freedom of all of us. Five states mandate that the Holocaust be taught in schools. They are California, Florida, Illinois, New Jersey and New York. Eleven others recommend or encourage teaching the Holocaust in school. They are Connecticut, Georgia, Indiana, Massachusetts, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, and Washington. The bill is needed because most teachers have little training and few resources to teach the history of the Holocaust. This bill does not mandate anything, but it does create a funding source for schools and communities that choose to teach youngsters about this horrible chapter of human history. In my state, the following groups support the bill: Holocaust Center of Northern California. Los Angeles City Human Relations Commission. Simon Wiesenthal Museum of Tolerance. The Asian Pacific American Legal Center of Southern California. The following national organizations support the Holocaust Education Assistance Act: Agudath Israel of America. American Gathering of Jewish Holocaust Survivors. American Jewish Committee. American Society for Yad Vashem, Inc. Anti-Defamation League. Association of Holocaust Organizations. Braun Holocaust Institute. Facing History and Ourselves. Hatikvah Holocaust Education Resource Center. Institute for Public Affairs of the Orthodox Union. Museum of Jewish Heritage. National Catholic Center for Holocaust Education. Rabbinical Council of America. Religious Action Center for Reform Judaism. Simon Wiesenthal Center Museum of Tolerance. United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism. World Jewish Congress. The following regional organizations support the Holocaust Education Assistance Act: Florida Holocaust Museum. Hawaii Holocaust Center. Holocaust Memorial Foundation of Illinois. Holocaust Memorial Resource and Education Center of Central Florida. Holocaust Resource Center & Archives, Queensboro Community College. Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Philadelphia. Jewish Community Relations Council of New York. New Mexico Holocaust and Intolerance Museum and Study Center. Tennessee Holocaust Commission. Tennessee Jewish Federation. West Virginia Holocaust Education Commission. As we enter the new century, we must remain vigilant to ensure that we do not forget the lessons of the last century. The admonition that ``those who forget history are doomed to repeat it'' is as true today as ever. After the Holocaust, survivors and others vowed not to let another such tragedy go unchallenged. Rallying behind the cry: ``Never again!'', Holocaust survivors made a promise to the memories of their mothers, fathers, husbands, wives and children. This bill provides a way for us to join with Holocaust survivors in keeping that promise. It ensures that future generations of Americans will remember that bigotry against any group poses a menace to society at large, and that the violation of an individual's rights places every person's freedom in peril. I urge my colleagues to support this important bill.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, today Senator DeWine and I are introducing a bill to provide funds to educational organizations to teach the history of the Holocaust. It is entitled the Holocaust Education Assistance Act. Cosponsoring the bill are Senators Smith of Oregon, Moynihan, Lautenberg, Schumer, Boxer, Wellstone, and Durbin. This bill authorizes $2 million each year for fiscal years 2001-2005 for a competitive grant program under which schools, museums and other non-profit organizations could compete for grants to train teachers, conduct seminars and develop educational materials on the Holocaust. It is the companion bill to H.R. 3105, introduced by Representatives Maloney, Horn, Waxman, and others. The Holocaust is one of the most horrific events in human history. In the 1930s and 1940s, the German Nazi regime systematically slaughtered more than 6,000,000 Jews and other minorities under the guise of achieving a ``racially pure'' society. Hopefully, this bill can help ensure that the next generation of Americans learns some of the crucial lessons of the Holocaust. The most fundamental of these lessons is that racial and ethnic-based hatred endangers each of us, and that the violation of one person's rights threatens the freedom of all of us. Five states mandate that the Holocaust be taught in schools. They are California, Florida, Illinois, New Jersey and New York. Eleven others recommend or encourage teaching the Holocaust in school. They are Connecticut, Georgia, Indiana, Massachusetts, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, and Washington. The bill is needed because most teachers have little training and few resources to teach the history of the Holocaust. This bill does not mandate anything, but it does create a funding source for schools and communities that choose to teach youngsters about this horrible chapter of human history. In my state, the following groups support the bill: Holocaust Center of Northern California. Los Angeles City Human Relations Commission. Simon Wiesenthal Museum of Tolerance. The Asian Pacific American Legal Center of Southern California. The following national organizations support the Holocaust Education Assistance Act: Agudath Israel of America. American Gathering of Jewish Holocaust Survivors. American Jewish Committee. American Society for Yad Vashem, Inc. Anti-Defamation League. Association of Holocaust Organizations. Braun Holocaust Institute. Facing History and Ourselves. Hatikvah Holocaust Education Resource Center. Institute for Public Affairs of the Orthodox Union. Museum of Jewish Heritage. National Catholic Center for Holocaust Education. Rabbinical Council of America. Religious Action Center for Reform Judaism. Simon Wiesenthal Center Museum of Tolerance. United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism. World Jewish Congress. The following regional organizations support the Holocaust Education Assistance Act: Florida Holocaust Museum. Hawaii Holocaust Center. Holocaust Memorial Foundation of Illinois. Holocaust Memorial Resource and Education Center of Central Florida. Holocaust Resource Center & Archives, Queensboro Community College. Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Philadelphia. Jewish Community Relations Council of New York. New Mexico Holocaust and Intolerance Museum and Study Center. Tennessee Holocaust Commission. Tennessee Jewish Federation. West Virginia Holocaust Education Commission. As we enter the new century, we must remain vigilant to ensure that we do not forget the lessons of the last century. The admonition that ``those who forget history are doomed to repeat it'' is as true today as ever. After the Holocaust, survivors and others vowed not to let another such tragedy go unchallenged. Rallying behind the cry: ``Never again!'', Holocaust survivors made a promise to the memories of their mothers, fathers, husbands, wives and children. This bill provides a way for us to join with Holocaust survivors in keeping that promise. It ensures that future generations of Americans will remember that bigotry against any group poses a menace to society at large, and that the violation of an individual's rights places every person's freedom in peril. I urge my colleagues to support this important bill.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President. I am pleased to introduce this bill today to assist Katy Gill, the owner of KATY radio, a station broadcasting out of a one acre parcel of the San Bernardino Forest and acting as an important public service announcement source for the residents of Idylwood, California. KATY radio has been caught up in some unfortunate circumstances involving an antennae site that the station had at one time, been leasing from GTE. When GTE decided to move out of the area, KATY was no longer able to legally operate. This bill will allow KATY to purchase at fair market value the title to 1.06 acres of land in San Bernardino National Forest so that the station could continue broadcasting. This legislation is supported by the Forest Service and KATY radio station listeners throughout Idylwood, California. I know of no opposition to such legislation. Representatives Mary Bono, Jerry Lewis and Don Young have introduced similar legislation in the House. I look forward to working with my colleagues in the House and the relevant Senate committee members to ensure that we address this issue before the end of the 106th Congress.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President. I am pleased to introduce this bill today to assist Katy Gill, the owner of KATY radio, a station broadcasting out of a one acre parcel of the San Bernardino Forest and acting as an important public service announcement source for the residents of Idylwood, California. KATY radio has been caught up in some unfortunate circumstances involving an antennae site that the station had at one time, been leasing from GTE. When GTE decided to move out of the area, KATY was no longer able to legally operate. This bill will allow KATY to purchase at fair market value the title to 1.06 acres of land in San Bernardino National Forest so that the station could continue broadcasting. This legislation is supported by the Forest Service and KATY radio station listeners throughout Idylwood, California. I know of no opposition to such legislation. Representatives Mary Bono, Jerry Lewis and Don Young have introduced similar legislation in the House. I look forward to working with my colleagues in the House and the relevant Senate committee members to ensure that we address this issue before the end of the 106th Congress.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, on February 12, we lost the creator of the world's most popular comic strip, Charles Schulz. The ``Peanuts'' comic strip was a daily staple for millions of people--not only in America but around the world. While Charles Schulz' legions of fans mourn the loss of his creative genius, he was also a man with a wonderful family who cared deeply about him. I want to express my deep sympathy to his wife, Jeanne Schulz, his five children (Monte, Craig, Meredith, Amy, and Jill), his two stepchildren and 18 grandchildren. Our hearts are with you. For half a century, the ``Peanuts'' comic-strip has been part of the fabric of our national culture. Charles Schulz' illustrations have inspired us 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? Here is what some of Charles Schulz' peers had to say about his legacy. Rob Rogers, editorial cartoonist of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, said of Charles Schulz' legacy to his profession: Schulz revolutionized the comic strip. Not just with his simply and accessible art style but also his strong character development. He combined the innocence of childhood with the cynicism of adulthood to create realistic, idiosyncratic and empathetic icons. Cartoonist Mort Walker, the creator of ``Beetle Bailey'' said of Schulz: What he brought to the strips was a whole new attitude . . . [He] brought in pathos, failure, rejection, all that stuff, and somehow made it funny. As one writer observed, Charlie Brown taught me it's OK to lose. Losing doesn't mean giving up hope. No mater how many times he missed the football, lost the big game, or heard Lucy call him a blockhead, he still believed in himself. This is the lesson that helped me get through childhood and now helps me deal with the tangled kite strings of adulthood. Charles Schulz was born in Minneapolis, MN on November 26, 1922, and was raised in St. Paul. He acquired an interest in cartooning while a teenager, but was drafted as an army infantryman in World War II before he could fulfill his career ambition. In 1947, Schulz started a feature in the St. Paul Pioneer Press called ``Li'l Folks.'' It was syndicated as Peanuts, launching an unprecedented 50-year run of over 18,000 comic strip installments. 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' television special, ``A Charlie Brown Christmas,'' has run for 34 consecutive years. In all, more than 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' achievements are all the more remarkable because, throughout his career, he had worked without any artistic assistants, unlike most syndicated cartoonists. Schulz painstakingly drew every line and frame in his comic strip for 50 years, and 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. In his farewell strip, Charles Schulz wrote, ``Charlie Brown, Snoopy, Linus, Lucy * * * how can I ever forget them * * *'' These characters will stay with us forever and we will certainly never forget their creator, Charles Schulz. There is still something we can do for Charles Schulz and his family. For the past several months, I have worked on legislation to award Charles Schulz the Congressional Gold Medal for his outstanding career and community service. In fact, on Thursday, February 10, just 2 days before Charles Schulz' passing, I formally introduced the legislation to award him the Gold Medal. While Charles Schulz can no longer personally receive this honor, the posthumous award would be the proper gesture to his wife Jeanne, their children, and to the millions of ``Peanuts'' fans around the world. As the world's preeminent cartoonist, Charles Schulz is more than qualified to join the 17 other Americans who have received the Congressional Gold Medal for their contribution to the Arts. I urge my Senate colleagues to join me in posthumously awarding Charles Schulz the Congressional Gold Medal. This would be one small token of our nation's great appreciation of this man who gave us all so much.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President. I rise to introduce legislation to give farm workers what so many of us take for granted--a safe commute to work. Today, many farm workers are still being transported to fields in crowded vans lacking basic safety equipment. There are reports of vans originally designed for 10 people, transporting up to 20 passengers with no access to seat belts. People should not have to put their lives at risk to travel to a job site. According to the latest United States Department of Labor statistics, farm occupations have the second highest work-related fatalities, and 45 percent of these fatalities are vehicular related. Nationally, 533 farm workers were killed in transportation incidents between 1994 and 1998. And farm workers are 4 times more likely to be killed in on-the-job highway traffic accidents than a typical worker. The following are just a few of the recent accidents involving farm workers traveling in vehicles without seatbelts. Just two weeks ago, on February 10, 14 people were injured when a car ran a stop sign and crashed into a van carrying farm workers in Tulare County, California. Authorities cited the driver of the van three months ago for illegally transporting workers--but at the time of the accident, he still had not received certification to transport workers. On September 10, 1999, 13 people were injured south of Fresno when an unlicensed van driver failed to stop for a posted stop sign and collided with another car. The van had seven seats--all with seatbelts--but four passengers were seated on the floor. On August 9, 1999, thirteen tomato field workers were killed when the van transporting them home slammed into a tractor-trailer truck in rural southwest Fresno County, California. Most of the victims in this horrific crash rode on three bare benches in the back of the van. On July 23, 1999, one man was killed and more than 40 people injured when a big-rig crashed into a Greyhound bus and a farm worker van on Highway 99 in Tulare County, California. The victim rode in the farm- labor van, packed with 19 other passengers. This is a national problem which calls for Federal action. Farm workers live all over the country, and have work that frequently carries them across state lines. Unfortunately, existing Federal laws leave farm workers inadequately protected. Regulations issued under the Migrant and Season Agricultural Worker Protection Act (MSPA) prohibit transport of migrant workers unless the vehicles have adequate service brakes, parking brakes, steering mechanisms, windshield wipers, tires, and review mirrors. But, believe it or not, the law does not mandate seating positions or an operational seatbelt for each passenger. The Farm Worker Safety Transportation Act of 2000 will make it illegal to transport farm workers unless each passenger has a designated seat with an operational seatbelt. This applies no matter how the vans are purchased or modified. Federal law now requires vans manufactured with up to 10 passenger seats to have operational seatbelts for each seat. However, after a new van is sold to its first owner, the owner can legally remove the rear seats and install bare benches. Similarly, Federal law permits an individual to purchase a van with an empty cargo hold and install benches without seatbelts. The legislation will direct the Department of Transportation to develop interim seat and seatbelt standards for vans or trucks without seats that are converted for the transport of farm workers. After a seven-year transition period, the commercial vehicles that transport farm workers will have to meet the same seat and seatbelt standards as a new vehicles. A farm worker should have access to a safe commute whether he or she is traveling to a field in Arizona, California, Washington, or Florida. I look forward to working with my colleagues to enact this sensible, practical legislation that will save lives.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, today I introduce a bill to amend the legislation that authorized construction of the San Luis Unit of the Central Valley Project in California. Enactment of this bill would allow water districts in the San Luis Unit of the Central Valley Project to supplement their federal water supplies with purchases of water from the State Water Project. At present, federal law prohibits the delivery of non-federal water to districts in the San Luis Unit until certain conditions are met. The San Luis Unit is the last component created by federal law in the Central Valley Project, which is the largest Bureau of Reclamation project in the United States. Water service to districts in the San Luis Unit is often curtailed because of limitations imposed in pumping in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. It is customary for water districts in the San Luis Unit to supplement their supplies through purchases on the open market. However, current federal law prohibits them from purchasing supplies from the State Water Project and having these delivered over federal facilities. Making such deliveries is relatively easy because state and federal project conveyance facilities are interconnected. Prohibiting purchase of state water for delivery over federal facilities limits the opportunities available for San Luis Unit districts to obtain as large a supplemental supply as they would like. Mr. President, this bill has already passed the House as H.R. 3077. It will impose no additional costs on the federal government. It contains provisions which assure that the additional water obtained by districts in the San Luis Unit cannot be used in a manner that would exacerbate current groundwater drainage problems. It is consistent with the provisions in the Central Valley Project Improvement Act that sought to encourage the exchange of water by willing sellers to provide additional supplies at reasonable cost to willing buyers. I urge the Senate to pass this bill.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, there are few in this body who have worked harder on this issue than my friend from Connecticut, and it has been a real pleasure to work with him on this legislation and on this issue. The Iran Nonproliferation Act is an important piece of legislation which seeks to halt the flow of ballistic missile technology and other weapons of mass destruction from Russia to Iran. I strongly support Senate passage of this legislation. Indeed, even as much of the U.S. focus in the past year--and rightly so, in my mind--has been on the peace process and Israel's relations with Syria and the Palestinians, there may be no greater long term threat to Israel's security and Middle East peace than an Iran actively seeking ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons. That is why I believe that preventing the transfer of illegal nuclear and missile technology from Russia to Iran must be at the top of the U.S. policy agenda. As my colleagues are aware, there have been numerous reports over the past several years of Russian missile technology reaching Iran, sometimes with a semi-official wink from government authorities in Moscow, sometimes by rogue operators. Either way, the Russian government must put a stop to these transfers. As much as we want good relations with Russia, cooperation in this area is crucial. In some ways, I believe it is a litmus test of what sort of player Russia wants to be in the post-Cold War international system. Although Russia has denied that any illegal transfers have taken place, it has taken some tangible steps in response to American concerns--such as the cancellation of a 1997 contract between a Russian missile factory (NPO Trud) and Iran in which rocket engine components were to have been shipped under the guise of gas pipeline compressors. Unfortunately, despite such progress as cooperation with the NPO Trud contract, since issuing an Executive Order in 1998, the United States has been forced to sanction ten Russian entities for continuing to transfer technology for the development of advanced ballistic missiles and weapons of mass destruction, and the Central Intelligence Agency reports that Russian entities continue to provide Iran with assistance. Indeed, there are reportedly over 10,000 Russians in Iran helping Iran with these programs. For its part, and despite some positive signs of moderation in Iran's politics--the recent elections notwithstanding--Iran has not yet moderated any of its policies with regard to the support of international terrorism or the pursuit of advanced ballistic missiles and weapons of mass destruction. Iran has flight-tested the Shihab-3, a missile that can hit Israel and U.S. forces in the Middle East, and is continuing to work on other advanced missile designs, including those capable of delivering nuclear warheads. Because of Russia's mixed record--and Iran's outright dangerous record--I believe that although we should try to build on Russia's record of cooperation, we must also be prepared to take tough action when the situation warrants. In other words, we must be prepared to work with Russia on this issue and offer them a carrot, but, if our interests and those of our friends and allies are threatened, we must also be prepared to use a stick. To that end, last year I offered an amendment on the Department of Defense authorization bill, passed by the Senate, which stated that it is the sense of Congress that the U.S. should increase the quota on commercial space launch services provided by Russia if the Russian government demonstrates a sustained commitment to prevent the transfer from Russia to Iran, or other countries, of nuclear and missile technology. I continue to believe that pending Russian cooperation this quota can be raised to 20 and, if Russia continues to cooperate, incrementally raised again in the coming years. Each launch provides Russia with approximately $100 million in hard currency. A $100 million carrot is a good incentive to cooperate. The bill we consider before us today recognizes that in addition to such carrots, we must also be prepared to take tough action when necessary. The Iran Nonproliferation Act has two parts. First, it requires the President to report credible information about any foreign entity providing dangerous technologies to Iran and authorize the President to sanction these entities in accordance with the President's own Executive Order. Second, it requires that the President must certify that the Russian government opposes the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction to Iran and is taking steps to oppose such proliferation before the Russian Space Agency is provided with any additional U.S. taxpayer money beyond what has contracted for the International Space Station. These are funds which the U.S. is providing to Russia so that Russia can meet its own obligations to the International Space Station. If Russia and the Russian Space Agency cooperates with the U.S. on proliferation, then cooperation between Russia and Iran on the proliferation of advanced ballistic missiles and weapons of mass destruction must stop. If Russia and the Russian Space Agency cooperates with the U.S. on proliferation, then I believe we can work in partnership with them to increase commercial space launch and to provide funding for the International Space Station. But there are few things more dangerous or destabilizing to U.S. interests and peace and security in the Middle East than a nuclear armed Iran which continues to support international terrorism. And if Russia does not recognize this and is not willing to work with the United States to build a more stable and more secure Middle East, then we must not shy away from taking the tough action necessary to get results.

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.