Rod Grams

Mr. GRAMS

Mr. GRAMS. Mr. President, in closing I have talked with many EMT's, paramedics, and emergency nurses, and most tell me that they wouldn't think of doing anything else for their chosen career. So, in honoring them during this National EMS Week, I can think of no better way to recognize their service than through the introduction of legislation that will help them to help others. I ask my colleagues to support them by supporting the Emergency Medical Services Act.

Mr. GRAMS

Mr. GRAMS. Thank you very much, Mr. President, for the time. I yield the floor.

Mr. GRAMS. Mr. President, I am on the floor this morning to introduce a bill called the Emergency Medical Services Efficiency Act. My statement is going to take about 10 or 15 minutes. I ask unanimous consent that I be allowed to have up to 15 minutes, even though I know it is going to run into the time of 10 o'clock.

Mr. GRAMS

Mr. GRAMS. Mr. President, in closing I have talked with many EMT's, paramedics, and emergency nurses, and most tell me that they wouldn't think of doing anything else for their chosen career. So, in honoring them during this National EMS Week, I can think of no better way to recognize their service than through the introduction of legislation that will help them to help others. I ask my colleagues to support them by supporting the Emergency Medical Services Act.

Mr. GRAMS. Mr. President, I rise this morning on behalf of all those who serve their fellow citizens through their active participation in the Nation's emergency care system to introduce the Emergency Medical Services Act. Mr. President, as a Senator who is deeply concerned about the ever- expanding size and scope of the Federal Government, I have long believed Washington is too big, too clumsy and too removed to deal effectively with many of the issues in which it already meddles. However, I also believe there's an overriding public health interest in ensuring a viable, seamless, nationwide EMS system. By designating this week as National EMS Week, the Nation recognizes those individual who make the EMS system work. There is no more appropriate time to reaffirm our commitment to EMS by addressing some of the problems the system is presented with daily. I have been privileged to get to know the men and women who dedicate their talents to serving others in an emergency. We have together discussed problems within the EMS system and concluded there are areas in which the Federal Government can help. The original result of our discussions concerning the Federal role in EMS was S. 238, the Emergency Medical Services Act [EMSEA]. When I introduced S. 238 on January 30, 1997, I acknowledged that it wasn't intended to solve all the problems EMS faces; it was merely a first step toward a meaningful national dialog on EMs. Indeed, this first step was a productive one. Last summer, I assembled EMS and health care leaders in Minnesota, asked them to take another look at the EMSEA, and report back to me with their thoughts. In January, I received a copy of their report. I was extremely pleased with their efforts and have used those suggestions as the basis for the legislative language comprising the new Emergency Medical Services Efficiency Act I am introducing today. I have often said that Congress has a tendency to wait until there's a crisis before it acts, but Congress cannot wait until there's a crisis in the EMS system before we take steps to improve it. There is simply too much at stake. Whether we realize it or not, we depend on and expect the constant readiness of emergency medical services. To ensure that readiness, we need to make efficient and effective efforts to secure the stability of the system. This has been my focus in redrafting this legislation. There are many similarities between S. 238 and the new bill I am introducing today. For instance, we continue to assert that the most important thing we can do to maintain the vitality of the EMS system is to compel the government to reimburse for the services it says it will pay for under Medicare. In the meetings I have had with ambulance providers, emergency medical technicians emergency physicians, nurses, and other EMS-related personnel, their most common request is to base reimbursement on a ``prudent layperson'' standard, rather than the ultimate diagnosis reached in the emergency room. While the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 [BBA] contained a provision basing reimbursement for emergency services on the prudent layperson standard, we have yet to see HCFA's interpretation of the provision and whether it will include ambulance services. I have written letters to HCFA and Senate Finance Committee Chairman William Roth indicating my understanding that ambulance services would be considered part of ``emergency services'' as defined in the BBA. I have been given no assurances from HCFA that they intend to include ambulance services as part of the ``emergency services'' definition in the balanced budget agreement. To illustrate how prevalent this problem is, I want to share with you a case my staff worked on relating to Medicare reimbursement for ambulance services. Please keep in mind that this is the fee-for- service Medicare program. It was back in 1994 that Andrew Bernecker of Braham, MN, was mowing with a power scythe and tractor when he fell. The rotating blades of the scythe severely cut his upper arm. Mr. Bernecker tried to walk toward his home but was too faint from the blood loss, so he crawled the rest of the way. Afraid that his wife, who was 86 years old at the time, would panic-- or worse, have a heart attack--he crawled to the pump and washed as much blood and dirt off as he could. His wife saw him and immediately called 911 for an ambulance. He was rushed to the hospital where Mr. Bernecker ultimately had orthopedic surgery and spent some time in the intensive care unit. In response to the bills submitted to Medicare, the Government sent this reply with respect to the ambulance billing: Medicare Regulations Provide that certain conditions must be met in order for ambulance services to be covered. Medicare pays for ambulance services only when the use of any other method of transportation would endanger your health. The Government denied payment, claiming the ambulance wasn't medically necessary. Apparently, Medicare believed the man's wife--who was, remember, 86 years old--should have been able to drive him to the hospital for treatment. Mr. and Mrs. Bernecker appealed, but were denied, and they began paying what they could afford each month on the ambulance bill. After several years of paying $20 a month, they finally paid off the ambulance bill. Medicare however, later reopened the case and reimbursed the Berneckers. I believe the experience this family had with Medicare's denial of payment for ambulance services happens far too often, and Congress needs to make sure it doesn't happen again. Another similarity between the two versions of this bill is the creation of a Federal commission on emergency medical services to make recommendations and to help provide input on how Federal regulatory actions affect all types of EMS providers. EMS needs a seat at the table when health care and other regulatory policy is made. Few things are more frustrating for ambulance services than trying to navigate and comply with the tangled mess of laws and regulations from the Federal level on down, only to receive either a reimbursement that doesn't cover the costs of providing the service or otherwise a flat denial of the payment. Mr. President, I came across this chart last year, the chart I have with me on the floor this morning, that demonstrates how a Medicare claim moves from submittal to payment, denial, or write-off by the ambulance provider. If you look at this chart, I ask you, tell me how a rural ambulance provider who depends on volunteers has the manpower or the expertise to navigate through this entire mess. And, in the event that it is navigated successfully, ambulance services are regularly reimbursed at a level that doesn't even cover their costs. Now let us talk about how much it costs to run just one ambulance. There is the cost of the dispatcher who remains on the line to give prearrival assistance, the ambulance itself, which costs from $85,000 to $100,000 to put on the road, the radios, beepers, and the cellular telephones used to communicate between the dispatcher, the ambulance, and the hospital, the supplies and equipment in the ambulance, including defibrillators, stretchers, EKG monitors, and bandages, and the two emergency medical technicians or paramedics who both drive the ambulance and provide care to the patient, the vehicle repair, maintenance, and insurance costs, and the liability insurance for the paramedics. As you can see, the list goes on and on. Yes, the costs can be high, but it is clear to me that, with the uncertainty ambulance providers face out in the field each day, they need to be prepared for every type of injury or condition. Mr. President, that is expensive, but we as consumers expect that in the case of an emergency. I am convinced those who complain about the high costs of emergency care would be aghast if the ambulance that arrived to care for them in an emergency didn't have the lifesaving equipment needed for their treatment. Let us be honest with ourselves: We want the quickest and best service when we face an emergency--and the bottom line is that costs money. Mr. President, many of our political debates in Washington center around how to better prepare for the 21st century. I have always supported research and efforts to expand the limits of technology and continue to believe technological innovations and advances in biomedical and basic scientific research hold tremendous promise. Under the new bill I am introducing today, Federal grant programs will be clarified to ensure that EMS agencies are eligible for programs that relate to highway safety, rural development, and tele-health technology. Emergency medical services have come a long way since the first ambulance services began in Cleveland and New York City way back during the 1860's. Indeed, the scientific and technological advances have created a new practice of medicine in just 2 short decades, and have dramatically improved the prospects of surviving any serious trauma. There is reason to believe further advances will have equally meaningful results. Innovations like tele-health technology may soon allow EMT's, nurses, and paramedics to perform more sophisticated procedures under a physician's supervision via real-time, ambulance-mounted monitors and cameras networked to emergency departments in specific service areas. By not considering EMS agencies for Federal grant dollars, we may cause significant delays in the application of current technologies. That would be a mistake. Perhaps the most dramatic departure the reintroduced bill takes from S. 238 related to the designation of a lead Federal agency for EMS. In August of 1996, the National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration and the Health Resources and Services Administration, Maternal and Child Health Bureau issued their report, ``Emergency Medical Services: Agenda for the Future.'' The report outlined specific ways EMS can be improved, and one of the stated goals was the authorization of a ``lead Federal agency.'' My original legislation instructed the Secretaries of Health and Transportation to confer on and facilitate the transfer of all EMS- related functions to the Department of Transportation. While we recognized that there would be some who would applaud the notion and others who would berate it, the suggestion compelled people to consider the issue and offer alternative approaches. The recommendations of the advisory committee and the comments I have received from national groups indicate we have yet to reach a solution to the problematic designation of a lead Federal agency. As such, under the new legislation, we call for an independent study to determine which existing agency or new board would best serve as the lead Federal entity for EMS. The concerns expressed to me about designating the Department of Transportation as the lead Federal agency were virtually identical to the concerns about granting lead-agency designation to the Department of Health and Human Services. It just didn't seem to fit. Therefore, I believe the most appropriate action is to take our time and get it right by conducting this study. Mr. President, in 1995, there were approximately 100 million visits to emergency departments across the country. Roughly 20 to 25 percent of those visits started with a call for an ambulance. Each one of those calls is important, especially to those seeking assistance and the responding EMS personnel. The Nation owes a great deal to the EMS personnel who have dedicated themselves to their profession because they care about people and they want to help those who are suffering. Nobody gets rich as a professional paramedic, and there is even less compensation as a volunteer. The field of emergency medical services presents many challenges--but offers the reward of knowing you helped someone in need of assistance. Every year, the American Ambulance Association recognizes EMS personnel across the country for their contributions to the profession, and bestows upon them the Stars of Life Award. This year, 124 individuals have been chosen by their peers to be honored for demonstrating exceptional kindness and selflessness in performing their duties. I ask unanimous consent to have printed the 1998 American Ambulance Association Stars of Life honorees in the Record.

Mr. GRAMS

Mr. GRAMS. Mr. President, I rise to speak in support of S. 1723, the American Competitiveness Act introduced by Senator Spencer Abraham to increase the cap on H-1B visas to allow our companies to continue to compete. We find ourselves in the midst of a booming American economy, now in its 87th month of the longest peacetime economic expansion experienced, and with the lowest inflation and unemployment (4.9%) in 25 years. However, we find that 350,000 information technology (IT) jobs nationwide are unfilled. As we speak, the ability to bring foreign nationals temporarily into the country on H-1B visas to fill those jobs has been halted as of Monday, May 11. As of last Friday, the 65,000 H-1B visa cap has been reached in this temporary immigrant category. New applications will be turned away and the information technology industry, as well as our universities and colleges will be harmed. Minnesota companies affected by this cap have aggressively supported this legislation. 3M estimates its projected research effort will lack 80 technical employees for slots paying between $60,00 to $100,000. 3M had $15 billion in 1997 worldwide sales. Through the efforts of foreign nationals working in their research and development departments, 3M has been awarded 578 patents. We should continue to encourage this progress. Cargill, another Minnesota-based company, has 10 to 15% of their technology department unstaffed--about 99 to 110 people with a starting salary of $44,000. They have not been able to meet their needs through local labor pools and universities. They have been forced to turn to temporary foreign nationals. Furthermore, they tell me they have a 15% turn-over because of competition from other U.S. companies. Honeywell has 7,500 Minnesota employees and does not hire a large number of H-1B nationals--only those of needed technical skills. However, these shortages affect the productivity of the whole company. Even labor has agreed that there is a temporary need for this adjustment; that it may be warranted due to current market conditions and global demands. Education and training of the U.S. labor pool is being outstripped by racing technological advances and industry competition. The Department of Labor has projected the high tech industry will create 130,000 jobs each year for the foreseeable future. This is at a time when the U.S. Chamber of Commerce tells us our domestic labor pool is shrinking. Baby boomers are leaving a 23 million people labor short fall, and often it is difficult to replace them with employees who have the training and expertise to meet the needs of many highly technical areas. Reports show fewer Americans seeking higher education are choosing the high tech fields of electrical engineering, computer science and mathematics. The number of Americans graduating with engineering degrees has declined 16% since 1985. Ironically, on the other hand, Mr. President, the United States is educating a higher percentage of foreign nationals in these subjects--48% of PHDs are foreign, 22% of undergrads are foreign nationals, and 42% of Master of Sciences candidates are foreign nationals. There is great global competition for all of these graduates. Japan, Germany, India and China are trying to lure them away with better deals and more benefits. However, the American life style and standard of living are a strong incentive in keeping them here. Another sector affected by the H-1B cap is the university/college community. A great deal of research and development is carried on at U.S. schools of higher learning. Temporary visiting scholars and research fellows from abroad have extended our base and expanded our scope of understanding in many fields. The University of Minnesota has written me asking for my strong support of this issue. Their ability to bring foreign scholars and high level faculty to their campus has raised their standards and strengthened their international stature. Their need has become even more critical since the cap has been reached, because they process 40% of their applications for these positions between May and September. They need help now. However, I would like to point out, Mr. President, we do need to look for a more permanent solution to this problem. We cannot rely on foreign expertise forever. We need to educate our young people to fill these vacancies. I applaud the inclusion in S. 1723 of the training and scholarship incentives for educating our own information technology workers. 20,000 college scholarships a year will be made available to low-income students in math, engineering and computer science through the State Student Incentive Grant program. It will increase training for the unemployed and help people cross-train into these fields. After the bill expires in 5 years, I am hopeful the supply of permanent, skilled American workers will be sufficient to meet industry's needs. This bill enhances the current H-1B visas by increasing the penalties five times and improving enforcement against willful offenders, although there have been few enforcement actions in the past. S. 1723, also, provides no-layoff protection for American workers and prohibits underpayment of temporary foreign nationals. In an industry where starting salaries for these skilled workers are between $35,000 and $75,000, by law H-1Bs are to be paid the middle wage of the prevailing scale. This wage is posted at the work site and registered with the Labor Department. Let me close, Mr. President by saying that Minnesota companies such as Guidant, ADC Telecommunication, Ceridian (formerly Control Data), Imation (a 3M spin-off), Medtronic and the Carlson Companies should be able to fill their IT vacancies now with temporary foreign nationals without having to shift production off-shore. We need to keep jobs at home and benefit by the expertise and innovation brought to us by these global technicians. But more importantly, we need to review, upgrade and strengthen our U.S. educational system to the point where it can best serve our need for permanent talent driving the information technology explosion.

Mr. GRAMS

Mr. GRAMS. I could state it at 3. Could I move to have it tabled now with that unanimous consent agreement and have the vote at 3 o'clock? Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on the motion.

Mr. GRAMS. I move to table the underlying Hutchinson amendment and ask unanimous consent that the vote not occur before 3 o'clock.

Mr. GRAMS. Thank you, very much, Mr. President. I yield the floor. Mrs. FEINSTEIN addressed the Chair.

Mr. GRAMS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending amendment be set aside and that we consider the Hutchinson amendment numbered 2387.

Mr. GRAMS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the vote occur at 3 o'clock.

Mr. GRAMS. What is the pending business before the Senate?

Mr. GRAMS. Mr. President, this amendment lies within the jurisdiction of the Banking Committee's International Financial Subcommittee, of which I am chairman, and the Senator from Virginia, Senator Warner, also requested consultation with the committee of jurisdiction on this amendment. I hereby am registering my opposition. This is a controversial amendment. I believe it deserves to be considered through the normal committee process. So, with all due respect to my colleague from Arkansas, and many Senators formally registering concern about these bills, Mr. President, I move to table the underlying Hutchinson amendment but also ask unanimous consent that the vote not occur before 3 o'clock.

Mr. GRAMS

Mr. GRAMS. Mr. President, I rise in strong support of Senator Grassley's bill, S. 1244, which exempts individual tithes to churches from bankruptcy proceedings. The exemption is up to 15 percent of income to prevent abuse. This problem was brought to my attention by the Crystal Evangelical Free Church in Minnesota, which prompted my cosponsor of this important legislation. The Church was sued and required to repay tithes given to it by individuals who had declared bankruptcy. Churches depend on tithes for their income to operate effectively. They should not be liable for debt repayment of their parishioners. This legislation is needed to protect churches from this kind of abuse. It is the right thing to do. I commend the Senator from Iowa for his effective leadership on this issue.

Mr. GRAMS

Mr. GRAMS. Mr. President, I rise in strong support of S. 1260, the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act, which is necessary to preserve the intent of the Public Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. This bipartisan legislation is narrowly drafted to correct an unexpected consequence of the Public Securities Litigation Reform Act and is supported by the White House and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Following enactment of the 1995 Act, it became apparent that trial lawyers were up to their old tricks by circumventing the intent of the law by bringing frivolous class action law suits in state courts, rather than in Federal court. Although brought in a different forum, this action yields the same result--namely raising the cost to investors, workers, and customers. As a member of the conference committee on the 1995 Act, I can assure you that this is not the intent of Congress. As its name implies, S. 1260 preserves the 1995 Act by establishing uniform standards governing private class actions involving nationally traded securities. This bill does not interfere with the ability to bring criminal suits in state courts or for individuals to seek relief in state courts. Rather, this Act simply requires that class action lawsuits against nationally traded securities be filed in Federal court. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation and hope that it will be approved expeditiously so as to preserve the intent of the 1995 Act.

Mr. GRAMS

Mr. GRAMS. Mr. President, I rise in support of the Conference Report to accompany S. 1150, the Agricultural, Research, Extension, and Education Act of 1998. For the purposes of this debate, I will focus on only the research and federal crop insurance provisions contained in this conference report. These are two of the primary issues important to farmers and those involved in agriculture. Among the important research provisions provided for in this conference report is funding for Fusarium Head Blight, or Scab, research. This disease has had a devastating impact on producers in Minnesota and North Dakota and has caused severe economic losses over the past five years. The conference report now before us is an important step in continuing the public/private partnership that has evolved as we attempt to find a scab-resistant variety of wheat. Also contained within this report is funding for genome research. This is important in mapping specific traits of corn and other commodities. Isolating those traits which are resistant to drought and other natural enemies could maximize yields and enhance producer efficiency. The flexibility it provides to research is reason enough to pass this legislation in a timely manner. However, some of my colleagues have expressed concern over the federal crop insurance provisions contained in this conference agreement. While I certainly understand their point, it is important that we look at the ``big picture.'' Currently, there is a budget shortfall in the program which jeopardizes the ability of farmers and agriculture lenders to make management decisions for the upcoming year. I have spoken with hundreds of individuals involved in agriculture who have urged me to support this funding fix, and I am confident they will be just as forthcoming as we explore options to provide producers with greater risk-management tools. It is important to remember that the conference report does not contain any major program reforms. It allows for five years of mandatory funding while market-orientated reforms are phased-in. Once the crop insurance budget issue is resolved, we can begin the process of achieving substantive reform of the federal crop insurance program. Mr. President, we must design alternatives that encourage innovation and competition among insurers with an eye towards moving crop insurance in the direction of privately developed policies. I have already begun this process with agriculture leaders in Minnesota. I look forward to working with Senator Lugar and my colleagues in crafting a program which benefits all taxpayers, while providing farmers the opportunity to craft a risk-management policy that fits their operation. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this important legislation and I look forward to its immediate passage.

Mr. GRAMS

Mr. GRAMS. I further ask that at 10 a.m. Senator D'Amato be recognized.

Mr. GRAMS. I further ask that the Senate recess following the vote on the National Science Foundation reauthorization bill until 12:15 p.m. to allow the weekly party caucuses to meet.

Mr. GRAMS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand in adjournment until 9:30 a.m. on Tuesday, May 12. I further ask that on Tuesday, immediately following the prayer, the routine requests through the morning hour be granted and the Senate then begin a period of morning business until 10 a.m., with Senators permitted to speak for up to 5 minutes each with the following exceptions: Senator Mikulski for 15 minutes, and Senator Lott or his designee for 15 minutes.

Mr. GRAMS. I further ask that at 12:10 p.m. the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. 1046, the National Science Foundation reauthorization bill under a previous consent agreement.

Mr. GRAMS

Mr. GRAMS. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize and to help celebrate the 140th anniversary of Minnesota's admission into the United States of America. Let me begin, Mr. President, by quoting James Hill, founder of the Great Northern Railroad and one of Minnesota's true pioneers. It is said that Mr. Hill proclaimed his reasons for living and working in Minnesota by saying, ``You can't interest me in any proposition in any place where it doesn't snow.'' Well, Minnesota has never had a shortage of snow, which--depending on who you ask and just how many months the winter has lingered--is considered either a blessing or a curse. But even Mr. Hill recognized that snow is just one of Minnesota's many riches. Ever since word began to spread last century about a northern land of promise and prosperity, a land with abundant natural resources and indescribable beauty, people have traveled to Minnesota to live, work, and prosper. And during its 140 years of statehood, Minnesota has produced some of the country's best and brightest, making it a world leader in agriculture, technology, medicine, and business. Along the way, Minnesotans have endured cold winters, hot summers, floods, tornadoes, and any other natural disaster Mother Nature has thrown their way. At no time has the resolve of our people been more tested than with the natural disasters that have plagued our state during the last year. Last spring, the people of northwestern Minnesota were hit with the worst flooding in our state's history. Earlier this spring, the residents of south-central Minnesota lived through one of the largest tornadoes ever to hit our state. Yet, in both cases, Minnesotans worked together to rebuild and recover, and Minnesota is stronger for their efforts. Strangers have labeled that willingness to step forward and help one another as ``Minnesota Nice.'' We think that is just the way things ought to be. Throughout our history, Minnesotans have understood the importance of family, hard work, and personal responsibility. It is not just talk-- they live it. Growing up on a Minnesota dairy farm in a small farming community, I saw those strengths firsthand. I saw how these qualities help make Minnesota one of the world's premiere food producers. Farming and farm-related businesses play a critical role in our state; one of every four Minnesota jobs is tied in some way to agriculture, and 25% of our economy is dependent upon farmers and agri- business. In 1996, Minnesota was ranked 15th in the country in agriculture exports to Asia. Minnesota's world leadership is not limited only to agriculture. Our state is home to some of the world's leading job providers--including 3M, Pillsbury, Honeywell, Cargill, and a list far too long to mention here. Minnesota is also known for its achievements in the area of health care. It is a leader in the medical device industry and home to one of the world's premiere health care facilities, the Mayo Clinic in Rochester. The commitment of Minnesotans to hard work and to producing some of the best products in the world has made Minnesota an active participant not only in the nation's economy, but in the world economy as well. Minnesotans have long understood the importance of America's role within the international community. Our residents have had the insight to understand that we do not live in a vacuum . . . that our economic prosperity depends on our ability to trade freely with the rest of the world. This point was highlighted during a meeting I had last month with farmers in Crookston, Minnesota. Although they asked questions about issues here at home, many of their questions were about IMF, free trade, and the Asian financial crisis. Our farmers and other business people know that what happens in Asia or Europe today can affect business in America and Minnesota tomorrow. One Minnesotan who has helped to shape our leadership role on international issues is former Governor Harold Stassen. Governor Stassen helped to write the charter for the United Nations and at age 91 continues to be an outspoken proponent of free and open relations with the rest of the world. This coming weekend, Minnesota's international tradition will continue when Secretary General of the United Nations Kofi Annan comes to Minnesota to tour the Center for Victims of Torture. Many may be surprised to hear that the Secretary General attended college in Minnesota, at Macalester College in Saint Paul. For the last few minutes, I have been speaking here on the floor, with great pride, about my home state. To some, I am sure it sounds a bit like bragging. But on this day, 140 years after Minnesota became the 32nd State admitted to the Union, I want to express the honor I feel in representing the people of Minnesota in the U.S. Senate--for Minnesota is one of the premier states in the greatest country on Earth. I want to end today with the sentence used by Minnesota author and radio personality Garrison Keillor to describe the fictitious town of Lake Woebegone, Minnesota . . . . because I think it can be applied to all of Minnesota. I am proud to hail from a state ``where all the women are strong, the men are good looking, and the children are above average.''

Mr. GRAMS

Mr. GRAMS. Mr. President, for the information of all Senators, tomorrow morning at 9:30 a.m. the Senate will be in a period of morning business until 10 a.m. Following morning business, Senator D'Amato will be recognized to offer and debate a bill regarding breast cancer, and it is hoped that a short time agreement can be reached with respect to the D'Amato bill. At 11 a.m. under a previous order, the Senate will then proceed to the consideration of the conference report to accompany S. 1150, the agricultural research bill. The time until 12:10 p.m. will be divided among several Members for debate on the conference report. Following that debate, the Senate will proceed to the consideration of the National Science Foundation reauthorization bill under a short time agreement. A rollcall vote is expected to occur on passage of that bill at approximately 12:15 p.m. Therefore, all Senators should be aware that the first vote of Tuesday's session will occur at approximately 12:15 p.m. Also, under a previous order, when the Senate reconvenes at 2:15 p.m. it will resume consideration of the agricultural research conference report. At that time, Senator Gramm of Texas will be recognized to move to recommit the conference report. There will be 1 hour for debate on the motion equally divided, and at the conclusion or yielding back of time the Senate will proceed to vote on or in relation to the motion. Following that vote, it is hoped that short time agreements can be reached with respect to the agricultural research conference report, any of several high-tech bills or any other legislation or legislative or executive items cleared for action. And finally, as a reminder to all Members, a cloture vote will occur on Wednesday on the motion to proceed on the missile defense bill.

Mr. GRAMS

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

Mr. GRAMS

Mr. GRAMS. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to Goodwill Industries on the occasion of Goodwill Industries Week, which began May 3 and continues through May 9. Goodwill Industries Week is a national celebration to honor those who have overcome barriers to employment and become independent members of their communities and to honor the organization that helps make those achievements possible. Goodwill Industries is much more than a business based upon the reselling of used merchandise at a discount price; it is an organization that is based upon volunteers providing leadership, advice, and assistance to those in need everywhere. Goodwill Industries was founded by Reverend Edgar Helms around the turn of the 20th Century under the philosophy of ``a hand up, not a hand out.'' Goodwill Industries was officially incorporated in 1910 and was originally envisioned by Rev. Helms as both an ``industrial program as well as a social service enterprise . . . a provider of employment, training, and rehabilitation for people of limited employability, and a source of temporary assistance for individuals whose resources were depleted.'' Today, Goodwill Industries has expanded upon Rev. Helms' original mission to include people with physical, mental and emotional disabilities, as well as those trapped by socio-economic barriers such as illiteracy, homelessness, advanced age, past substance abuse, lack of work experience or criminal history. Goodwill Industries has grown from its original location in Boston, Massachusetts' Morgan Memorial Chapel into a $1.2 billion nonprofit organization with 187 autonomous members in the U.S. and Canada and 54 associate members in 37 countries outside of North America. In 1997, Goodwill served over 200,000 people nationwide who needed assistance in learning job skills and gaining employment. As for Minnesota, Goodwill first appeared in Duluth, in 1916, and three years later in St. Paul. During its first years in Minnesota, Goodwill provided jobs, low-cost merchandise, and training for young people with disabilities during the Depression era. During World War II, Goodwill Industries aided in the rehabilitation of disabled servicemen. Goodwill has continued to serve Minnesotans throughout the State and has found ways to remain a successful and a profitable industry. The Duluth Goodwill merged with the Duluth Sheltered Workshop in 1979 and continues to serve Minnesota's northland. The St. Paul Goodwill merged with the Easter Seal Society in 1984 and provides services for the rest of the State. With these changes, in 1997 alone, both of Minnesota's Goodwill Industries offices combined to process over 40 million pounds of donated clothing and household goods for salvage and sale. In addition, Goodwill served over 10,000 Minnesotans in need of assistance. Mr. President, I commend Goodwill Industries for its continued service to the American people and especially for its commitment to Minnesota. But most of all, I want to pay tribute to both the countless volunteers who provide a ``hand up, not a hand out'' and all of the participants who use these resources to better themselves.

Mr. GRAMS

Mr. GRAMS. Mr. President, I would like to send an amendment to the desk that has been sponsored on our side by Senator Coverdell and also my colleague from Minnesota, Senator Wellstone, and Senator Boxer of California. It is my understanding it has been cleared on both sides. I send the amendment to the desk.