Bob Graham

Mr. GRAHAM

Mr. GRAHAM. They would not be constrained to the items included in this amendment. They would advocate a total lifting of the embargo against Cuba.

Mr. GRAHAM. I believe it is even more broad. I believe they have advocated a total lifting of the U.S. embargo.

Mr. GRAHAM. For a question.

Mr. GRAHAM. Thank you. I appreciate those kind remarks, and no one is more dedicated to the freedom of the people of Cuba than is our friend and colleague from New Jersey. He has demonstrated that dedication time and time again. As he said in his earlier remarks, not only are we not the source of the blame of the impoverishment of the people of Cuba, in fact, the United States, both governmentally but primarily through the generosity of its people, has provided through donations more humanitarian assistance to Cuba in the last 4 years than the foreign aid of all other governments in the world combined. Now to say blame America first, make us the object and the source of Cuba's poverty is an affront. My final point is that by adopting this policy, we will also be missing the opportunity to adopt a policy that has the potential of making a significant difference in terms of the U.S. national interest, but more importantly the human interest of the people living in Cuba. What is that policy? It is also one to which the Senator from New Jersey alluded in his opening remarks, and that is a policy that says: Let us increase the opportunities for the people of the United States with modest Government assistance to join that philanthropy to provide humanitarian needs to the people of Cuba. But instead of being done on a commercial basis, which means that Fidel Castro will be in control of what is purchased and how it is distributed and how it is used to either reward or punish activities which the state considers to be beneficial, let us use the nongovernmental organizations, such as the religious organizations in Cuba, to be the means of distributing the humanitarian products. Let us use that as a means of assuring that this humanitarian effort will not be perverted for political goals. Let us use it as a means of increasing the strength of those nongovernmental organizations, because they will play a critical role today in the life of the people of Cuba, attempting to lift some of the burden which Fidel Castro has imposed upon those people. Those same nongovernmental organizations will play a critical role during the period of transition in Cuba. One of the key questions for the United States is not whether there will be change in Cuba. Of course there will be change. No one can tell you exactly the hour and the date of that change, but that it will come is assured. What we do not know is whether that change will be more like Czechoslovakia, a ``velvet revolution,'' relatively without bloodshed or conflict, or whether it will be more like the nation whose head of state spoke to us earlier today, Romania, where thousands of people were injured or killed during the course of the transition from an authoritarian to a democratic government. I believe the nongovernmental organizations in Cuba will play a critical role in facilitating a peaceful transition and that by using them rather than, as this amendment would propose to do, the Government of Cuba, as the instrument for the distribution of humanitarian assistance, we have the opportunity to strengthen and elevate those nongovernmental organizations.

Mr. GRAHAM. Yes.

Mr. GRAHAM. I would be very happy if this amendment would ride into the sunset as long as it didn't return. Point 3 does relate specifically to Cuba which is an object case of the point 2, which is that the reason that Cuba is in its desperate economic circumstances is not to be blamed on the United States and our policy, it is to be blamed on Fidel Castro. The reason it didn't happen 20 or 30 years earlier is because as long as there was a Soviet Union, the Soviet Union was subsidizing Cuba to the extent of 20 to 30 percent of its gross domestic product. When the Soviet Union collapsed in the late eighties, its ability to continue to provide that kind of subsidy to Cuba also collapsed and all of the underlying inadequacies of a statist, Communist economic policy surfaced. For us to say that we are responsible for the impoverishment of the Cuban people because we have denied them access to food, agricultural products, medicine and medical equipment, I think, is, frankly, absurd and an affront to the people of the United States of America. It is Fidel Castro who has placed his people in that condition, not the people of the United States. Maybe the most dramatic example of that, just a few years ago when our colleague and visionary, the Senator from New Jersey, was a Member of the House of Representatives, he sponsored legislation which established the modern U.S. embargo policy relative to Cuba. I am pleased to say that I was honored to be the Senate sponsor of that legislation. In that legislation, medicine was excluded from the commercial sanction against Cuba. There is a license policy required in order for a Cuban entity to purchase medicines from the United States, but that is available. Do you know what has happened in the intervening now some 5 years since that access to commercial purchases of U.S. medicines by Cuba has been in effect? What has happened is zero has happened, because Cuba has not availed itself of this opportunity it had. Why hasn't it availed itself? I suggest primarily because Fidel Castro has some higher priorities in terms of his use of Cuban resources, like continuing to fund one of the most oppressive state police in the world, continuing to try to maintain what is left of a military capability. Those have all had higher priorities and, therefore, there were little resources left to use the special access through license policy for U.S. medicines.

Mr. GRAHAM. I think my answer would be no, and my reason would be point 1 of my remarks. I am now about to move to point 3 of my remarks.

Mr. GRAHAM

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that four members of my staff, Catharine Cyr, Jason McNamara, Brandon Young and Sally Molloy, be granted the privilege of the floor for the duration of the consideration of the agriculture appropriations bill.

Mr. GRAHAM

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a congressional fellow in my office, Neymi Aponte, and three interns, Gilberto Sanchez, Rachel Milstein and Jennie Beysolow, be allowed the privilege of the floor for the duration of this speech.

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I would like to conclude by recognizing the person who first brought this issue to my attention, Mr. Ron Atwell, who is the director of veterans benefits at the University of Central Florida in Orlando, FL. While participating in graduation ceremonies at the university in May, Mr. Atwell raised with me the inequity of this circumstance of veterans having effectively the benefits that they deserved to receive, that they had made a partial contribution towards, be diluted by the manner in which other student financial aid was calculated. I thank Mr. Atwell. This is an example of a citizen with a legitimate concern who has made a difference in the lives of potentially many thousands of future veterans who will get the benefit of this removal of an injustice from our student financial aid program. With that, Mr. President, I urge adoption of this amendment.

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, to close, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record a letter dated July 7 from Mr. Steve A. Robertson, director of the National Legislative Commission of the American Legion, in which he states, ``The American Legion urges you to support the Graham amendment to S. 1882, the Higher Education Reauthorization Act.''

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, this penalty, which is currently subjected to veterans' benefits, does not apply to other analogous benefits. For instance, the current law states that those persons who receive benefits under the National Service Program Educational Award Program, which is generally known as the AmeriCorps Program, will not have their financial assistance treated as a deduction in their eligibility for other forms of student financial aid. In fact, Mr. President, the amendment I offer is an amendment to precisely that section of the law adding the Montgomery GI bill to the current exemption for AmeriCorps as the basis of calculating student financial aid. Mr. President, this unjust treatment of veterans' benefits has had a number of perverse affects. Although over 80 percent of persons in the military today are applying to become eligible for the Montgomery GI benefits--in fact, the latest statistics from the Department of Defense are that 94 percent of veterans are signing up for this program--less than 40 percent are actually using the program. And this discriminatory treatment is cited as a significant reason for that low level of utilization. It also is undercutting the ability of those who are attempting to recruit persons into the volunteer armed services by having to state that the real value of these benefits is substantially reduced and, therefore, this major inducement--in fact, the major inducement for many young people to come into the military--is diluted. Mr. President, I offer this amendment today, which has been costed at $85 million over the next 10 years by the Congressional Budget Office, and is offset by reducing accounts in the Secretary's discretionary fund as a step towards achieving the objectives that this Congress sought when it first adopted the Montgomery GI bill in 1987. Mr. President, our country has had a long experience, particularly the experience since the end of World War II, in encouraging returning veterans to continue their education. I believe that the GI bill of 1944 ranks with legislation that has already been referred to by the chairman of the committee, the Morrill Act, that established the Land Grant College system, and Social Security as premier examples of congressional legislation that has had a positive effect on our Nation. I urge the adoption of this amendment which will assure that the full benefits of the Montgomery GI bill, our current national statement of appreciation to those who have served in our armed services, that the injustice that is currently attached to that program be eliminated, and that the full benefits of the program be available to not only the veterans but to all Americans. Mr. President, that concludes my statement. If there are no other statements, I ask for the consideration of this amendment.

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I rise before you today to offer an amendment on behalf of myself and Senators Dorgan, Coverdell, Murray, and Hagel. I offer this amendment to correct an injustice in our current student financial aid policy. Since June 1 of 1987, the Montgomery GI bill has guaranteed basic educational assistance for most persons who are or have been members of the Armed Forces or the selected reserves for significant periods of time. This legislation was created in 1987 to achieve a number of important national objectives. It was to assist veterans in their readjustment to civilian life, to aid in the era of an all-volunteer military, in the recruitment and retention of qualified personnel in the Armed Forces, and to develop a more highly educated and productive workforce. Unfortunately, currently, the Montgomery GI benefits are considered ``other financial aid'' in the determination of a student's need. In other words, when a veteran applies for financial aid, colleges and universities are required to take into account any benefits received under the Montgomery GI bill program in arriving at a judgment as to what resources that student would be entitled to receive. The ultimate result is that the total financial aid award is substantially reduced. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record an analysis of three typical cases of student aid requests and the impact that the requirement to consider Montgomery GI benefits as a resource has on their financial aid.

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration.

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

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, will the Senator from New Hampshire yield for a unanimous consent request for floor privileges?

Mr. GRAHAM

Mr. GRAHAM. I appreciate, as always, the Senator's graciousness. I anticipate that we will have an opportunity to discuss this issue again, I hope soon, and at that time we can actually be making movement toward legislative enactment. I will withhold any further comments until then. But I express my appreciation to the Senator.

Mr. GRAHAM. To my friend from Alabama, I express my appreciation for the kind remarks in bringing this matter to the attention of the Senate, even though, because of the rules of the two bodies, we cannot consider it tonight. But I believe what he has essentially done has put all of us on alert that we are going to be looking for another opportunity to remedy this remaining tax issue with the State college tuition plans and thus give to the families of America the assurance that every dollar they invest in a prepaid college tuition contract will go to the education of their children and thus encourage more families to participate. Mr. President, I hope that with the message the Senator from Alabama has issued tonight we will soon be able to follow his clarion call. Thank you. Mr. BYRD addressed the Chair.

Mr. GRAHAM

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent for a period of morning business for the purposes of making a statement for 10 minutes.

Mr. GRAHAM. I modify my unanimous consent request to first provide for the Senator from Kentucky to proceed as indicated.

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, it had been my understanding that unanimous consent requests could be made after Senator Kennedy's statement, but if the Senator from Vermont would like to have other opening statements, I modify my unanimous consent request that I have 10 minutes of morning business immediately upon the completion of the statements by the Senators from Indiana, Connecticut, Minnesota, and any other members of the committee wishing to do so-- that at that point, I have 10 minutes.

Mr. GRAHAM

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the 10 minutes I reserved previously be available to me at this time.

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

Mr. GRAHAM

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I am very pleased that the President of the United States is going to Florida today, meeting with the victims and thanking the firefighters for their valiant effort. Mr. President, I have lived in Florida for more than sixty-one years. In that time, I have never observed wildfires as widespread and unmanageable as those that have plagued our state for the last forty- four days. On behalf of over 14 million Floridians, I offer my deepest thanks to the thousands of Americans who have voluntarily left their homes and risked their lives so that our state's fire victims might not lose theirs. They are true heroes, and all of us who proudly call Florida our home are forever in their debt. Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. JEFFORDS addressed the Chair.