Howell Heflin

Mr. HEFLIN

Mr. HEFLIN. Mr. President, long-time West Alabama Planning and Development Council Executive Director Lewis E. McCray has announced his plans to retire at the end of this year. He has held the executive director position since October 1, 1967, when he became the first paid director of the council. When he was hired, the agency was known as the Tuscaloosa Area Council of Local Governments and its members consisted of Tuscaloosa County and the cities of Tuscaloosa and Northport. Initially, the agency was funded through a program of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Under Lewis McCray's outstanding leadership, the agency has grown to a membership of 7 counties and 34 municipalities. Due to its expanded membership, its name was changed to the West Alabama Planning and Development Council in 1971. It has been designated an Economic Development District, Local Development District, Metropolitan Planning Organization, and an Area Agency on Aging. The Council also administers the Title V Senior AIDES Program and Community Development Block Grants and provides technical assistance to local governments. Mr. McCray has been active in many civic and professional organizations. His professional affiliations currently include his service as president of the Alabama Association of Regional Councils, member of the board of directors of the National Association of Development Organizations, member of the National Association of Regional Councils, the Chamber of Commerce of West Alabama, the Tuscaloosa County Industrial Development Authority, and the Tuscaloosa Convention and Visitors Bureau. He is a native of Hale County, AL, and was educated in the public schools of Moundville and at the University of Alabama. Before being named executive director of the council, he taught business law and accounting at Shelton State Community College. He also served as the executive assistant to the late U.S. Congressman Armistead Selden. I congratulate and commend Lewis McCray for an outstanding career and for all he has done to benefit his community, region, and State. I wish him all the best for a long, happy, and healthy retirement.

Mr. HEFLIN

Mr. HEFLIN. Mr. President, Mr. William Orr ``Bill'' Graham passed away on September 28 after an extended illness. The Morgan County, AL, native was founder and owner of Graham & Son Piano House and was active in his community and in State politics for many years. Bill Graham attended Auburn University. He once received the Florence Civitan Club's Book of Golden Deeds Award for outstanding community service. He was a charter member of the Florence Chamber of Commerce, president of the North Tennessee Valley Council of the Boy Scouts of America and was an organizer of the Camp Westmoreland Boy Scout Camp and the Kiwanis high school Key Clubs. Bill was elected by the people of the Eighth Congressional District to serve on the State Democratic executive committee. He was also a member of the Alabama Industrial Development Board. He organized the talent contest at the North Alabama State Fair, was youth talent director of the MidSouth Fair in Memphis, a talent scout for the Ted Mack Amateur Hour, and was instrumental in securing college scholarships for many deserving youth in the Shoals area. In addition, Bill was talent coordinator for the Cerebral Palsy Telethon for many years, past president of the Gilbert School PTA, chairman of the administrative board of North Wood Methodist Church, and aide-de-camp to the battalion commander of the Alabama State National Guard. He was also part of the management of the Birmingham Barons baseball team. William O. Graham was truly an outstanding community leader who gave of himself in many years over his long life. He will be sorely missed. I extend my sincerest condolences to his family in the wake of their loss.

Mr. HEFLIN

Mr. HEFLIN. Mr. President, I rise today to congratulate Sammy Howard for his recent election as the new mayor of Phenix City, Alabama, a vibrant community in the east-central part of the State. Still widely called ``Coach'' Howard since he was a high school football coach for so many years, Sammy most recently was a highly successful banker in Phenix City. As a coach, he led his teams to 113 victories out of a total of 140 games. I ask unanimous consent that the text of an article which appeared in the Columbus, GA, Ledger-Enquirer on the life and career of Sammy Howard be printed in the Record after my remarks. It tells about his odyssey from student athlete to coach to banker to mayor. I wish ``Coach'' Howard all the best as he takes over the reins of government in Phenix City.

Mr. HEFLIN

Mr. HEFLIN. Mr. President, I rise today to congratulate Hal Self, who was recently selected as one of the 6 new inductees into the Alabama Sports Hall of Fame for 1996. He was an outstanding football player at the University of Alabama and later revived the football program at Florence State College, now the University of North Alabama. Due to his leadership and dedication, football at North Alabama has emerged as one of the very best small college programs in the entire nation, having claimed the national championship in 1993 and 1994. Sports has always run through the veins of Hal Self. He was a standout in football, basketball, and baseball at Decatur High School before entering the University of Alabama in 1941. He quarterbacked the Crimson Tide teams in 1941, 1942, 1944, and 1945, leading his troops to all four of the major post-season bowls at that time--Cotton, Orange, Sugar, and Rose. He went into coaching after college, serving for 2 years at Athens High, where he went 15-5. In 1949, he began restoring the football program at Florence State and coached there for 21 years, compiling a 110-81-8 record, often playing against much larger schools with older and more established programs. In 1969, he gave up coaching for the athletic director's post, serving there for 2 years. He stayed on as a full professor in the University of North Alabama physical education department until he retired in 1984. I ask unanimous consent that the text of a recent article on Hal Self appearing in the Huntsville Times be printed in the Record after my remarks.

Mr. HEFLIN

Mr. HEFLIN. Mr. President, I want to take a few moments to commend and congratulate Dr. John Thomas ``Tom'' Vaughan, who retired from his position as dean of the College of Veterinary Medicine at Auburn University last month. The fifth dean in the history of veterinary medicine at Auburn, he served from June 1977 until September 1995. A Tuskegee, AL, native, Dr. Vaughan graduated with honors from Auburn's College of Veterinary Medicine in 1955. His affiliation with the field of veterinary medicine as a student, faculty member, department chair, and dean spanned an incredible 42 years. As dean, Dr. Vaughan successfully led the college through numerous challenges. Despite major fiscal limitations, his leadership inspired dynamic instructional changes which made Auburn an internationally recognized institution in animal welfare and computerized teaching. He stimulated plans for curriculum alterations to coincide with the changes inherent to the field. As chairperson of the Auburn University Core Curriculum Commission, his was a pivotal voice in initiatives which led to the school's enhanced overall academic reputation. Dr. Vaughan's strategic vision including the expansion of career opportunities for veterinarians in clinical practice, corporate enterprises, research projects, and in government agencies. He was committed to the Extension Service, agribusiness, and public health. His work has benefitted the public greatly through improvements in the food animal industry, research on diseases and pathology common to animals and people, expansion of graduate programs, and the training of quality veterinarians from all segments of society. Dr. Vaughan served in several capacities on behalf of the National Association of State Universities and Land-grant Colleges. He chaired its Commission on Veterinary Medicine and served on its Commission on Food, Environment, and Renewable Resources. He is a former president of both the American College of Veterinary Surgeons and the American Association of Equine Practitioners. He authored a total of 22 chapters in various veterinary textbooks, wrote numerous professional journal articles, and coauthored two books. He was selected as the Alabama Veterinary Medical Association's Veterinarian of the Year in 1985. Just last year, he received the Distinguished Service Award from the prestigious Tennessee Walking Horse Breeders and Exhibitors' Association. At Auburn University, Dr. Vaughan was an enthusiastic member of the John and Mary Franklin Foundation Lectures Committee and also a member of the University Senate. Dr. Tom Vaughan's outstanding leadership and total dedication to his field have contributed directly in innumerable ways to the distinguished service of many graduates of Auburn's veterinary school, one of the oldest in the nation. He has established benchmarks of service and excellence that will inspire and sustain his colleagues, as well as challenge the profession for many years into the next century.

Mr. HEFLIN

Mr. HEFLIN. Mr. President, I rise today to commend and congratulate James M. Jones, who recently retired from his position as the clerk of court for the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Alabama. Mr. Jones served with the bankruptcy court for nearly 30 years, from September 1966 through his retirement effective September 1 of this year. James began his career as an insurance manager in 1954. After 12 years in the field, he found his true calling as a member of the judicial staff of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court, eventually rising to become clerk of the court for the middle district. He served there for 16 years with distinction, dedication, and consummate professionalism. He was an active member of the National Conference of Bankruptcy Clerks [NCBC], assisting in the incorporation of the organization and in the writing of its original bylaws. He later chaired and served on numerous committees of NCBC, and has been a featured speaker at numerous organizational meetings and seminars on the issue of bankruptcy. James Jones was born June 30, 1930 in Morgan County, AL to James D. and Dora Kilpatrick Jones. In 1950, he married Janene Hocutt, with whom he had four children--Sharon, Steve, Craig, and Lyn. He was educated at Auburn University and Jones Law School in Montgomery. He served in the U.S. Army during the Korean war, and represented the First Army as an observer to the second atomic bomb test at Yucca Flat, NV in 1951. I extend my very best to James and his family as he embarks on his well-deserved retirement. I hope it is as long, healthy, and productive as his career has been.

Mr. HEFLIN

Mr. HEFLIN. Mr. President, I rise to pay tribute to a great U.S. Senator, Senator Sam Nunn. After 23 years, it is difficult to envision a U.S. Senate without our esteemed colleague from Georgia. There is no doubt that had he run again in 1996, he could have won and won easily. Had he decided to stay, he would have remained the most influential Senator on defense and one of the most effective conservative Democrats overall. Senator Sam Nunn's intellectual depth on defense and national security matters is unparalleled in this body. He has been a staunch and unyielding proponent of a strong national defense and has demonstrated a keen interest in the wide breadth of defense issues. His thoughtfulness and dedication to what he thinks is best gives him an extraordinary amount of credibility that the Senate will sorely miss when he leaves. On many occasions he has been mentioned as a possible nominee for Secretary of Defense, Secretary of State, or even as President of the United States. Although Sam Nunn is best known as an authority on defense issues, he has played a prominent role on other major issues as well. He is well known for his indepth knowledge of foreign affairs. His voice on human rights and civil rights has always evidenced a progression and sensitivity in seeking solutions. He is a prominent member of the Governmental Affairs Committee where he held hearings on wrongdoings in many areas and recently pertaining to some in the health insurance industry. Having come from a farming family, he has fought for sound agricultural policy and has been a champion of the often misunderstood cotton and peanut programs. He has been a major moderating influence on our party through his work on the Democratic Leadership Council. He has fought long and hard for a balanced budget and believes in the constitutional amendment requiring the same. His great-uncle, Carl Vinson, served for 50 years in the House of Representatives chairing the Naval Affairs and the Armed Services Committee. Recently in Honolulu, as we were celebrating the 50th anniversary of V-J Day, the end of World War II, we had various ceremonies on the aircraft carrier named for his great-uncle, Carl Vinson. The seat which he now occupies was held for nearly 40 years by the late Richard Russell, who is a revered Senator and who also served as a chairman of the Armed Services Committee. Since he came to the Armed Services [[Page S 14802]] Committee in the 1970's, Senator Nunn has backed a strong national defense. No one in the Senate did more to bring about the breakup of the Communist regimes in the old Soviet Union. He has also attended to the details of defense policy, at one time chairing the Manpower Subcommittee in helping to shape the Reserve Force structure and callup procedures that allowed the United States to respond quickly to Saddam Hussein's aggression in the summer and fall of 1990. He also worked on the Goldwater-Nichols Defense Reorganization Act of 1986, which simplified the military chain of command and granted considerable power to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. In my judgment, Sam Nunn will go down as one of the giants of the Senate. His leadership and foresight will be missed here, but I am confident that we will enjoy those same qualities through other avenues that Senator Nunn undertakes and other projects that he tackles during the years to come. Mr. President, I yield the floor. Mr. THURMOND addressed the Chair.

Mr. HEFLIN

Mr. HEFLIN. Mr. President, I rise today in support of the Cochran amendment which would restore funding for the Agricultural Weather Service Centers at Stoneville, MS, and Auburn, AL. The amendment would require the National Weather Service to continue the operation of these important weather centers. Mr. President, the business of American farmers, ranchers, and foresters is to produce and market the world's safest supply of food and fiber. To do so, they must cope with all of the vagaries of nature. Unlike the vast majority of people in this Nation who cope with everyday weather in the context of a golf game or a picnic, weather is the single most important external element in the production equation. To our Nation's farmers, ranchers, and foresters specific weather information is crucial to the protection of crops, the application of management practices, the timely selection and use of pesticides, the decision to apply expensive freeze protection measures, et cetera. In my opinion, there is no other organization, business, or institution which is capable of gathering and analyzing data either on the scale or to the degree of reliability which farmers, ranchers, and foresters routinely receive from the National Weather Service. The refinement of the data for their specific needs requires specific analysis and employs special knowledge provided by land grant colleges, the Cooperative Extension Service, and other State and Federal specialists. I am aware that there are a number of private weather services offered and that some highly specialized and concentrated segments of agriculture employ them. However, I am informed that these rely totally on the data provided by the National Weather Service as the basis for their specialized services. Regardless, farmers are incapable at the present time to assume the functions of government privately even if they could afford the services. Therefore, I strongly support Senator Cochran's attempt to restore funding for the Agricultural Weather Service Centers at Stoneville, MS, and at Auburn, AL. I urge my colleagues to support the Cochran amendment. amendment no. 2876 (Purpose: To restore funding for trade adjustment assistance centers) On page 68, line 19, insert ``, $7,500,000 of which shall be for trade adjustment assistance'' after ``$89,000,000''.

Mr. HEFLIN

Mr. HEFLIN. Mr. President, whenever I have the pleasure of traveling in north Alabama, I try to visit Bessemer, AL, about a 15-minute drive from the city of Birmingham. One of the many attractions in Bessemer is the Bright Star, one of our Nation's very best family-owned restaurants. Its reputation has been built over the course of this century, with fresh seafood transported from the gulf coast daily, the finest cuts of meat available, and the freshest vegetables and produce. Actually, I have dined at many fine restaurants during my lifetime, but I consider the Bright Star one of the world's very best. It is certainly on a par with the finest restaurants in New Orleans, San Francisco, Washington, New York, Paris, London, Athens, Vienna, Rome, Budapest, and Copenhagen. At one time, it had Alabama rivals in Montgomery's Elite Cafe and Mobile's Constantine's, but these are unfortunately no longer in existence. The Bright Star is well-known for its many specialties, but its Greek-style red snapper is truly one of the most superb seafood dishes I have ever tasted. There are also a variety of steaks featured, and the beef tenderloin--which is marinated in special herbs that the Greeks know how to combine and cook in a Mediterranean style--is simply delicious. There is a variety of broiled and fried fish to choose from, as well as giant seafood platters. One of the specialties is a combination lobster and crab meat au-gratin. The broiled seafood platter is widely considered one of the very best to be found anywhere. One can also enjoy Italian dishes at the Bright Star, such as spaghetti and other types of pasta. Their appetizers are most unique and some of the best include shrimp remoulade, shrimp arnaud, the crab claw platter, and the seafood gumbo. They offer many varieties of salads, but their Greek salad--with or without anchovies--is magnificent. They also have many standard American dishes. Fried chicken and the veal cutlet with spaghetti are popular items on the menu. The chefs have acquired a real knack for preparing vegetables southern-style. They serve everything from turnip greens to black-eyed peas. The desserts include all varieties, ranging from Greek pastries to homemade southern pies, like coconut cream and banana nut. [[Page S 14336]] For a hungry person, there is a truly impressive variety of food to choose from at the Bright Star. The Texas special--consisting of the Greek-style snapper, tenderloin of beef Greek-style, and the lobster and crab meat au-gratin--is an entree that does not escape the memory for years to come. Sunday lunch at the Bright Star is one of its busiest times. After church services, worshipers will flock from miles around, and sometimes delay their Sunday lunch until 2:30 or 3 p.m. in the afternoon, in order to avoid the overflow crowd. After a University of Alabama football game in Birmingham, fans who have come up from Tuscaloosa will stop by on the way back after the game. In years past, it was not uncommon to see legendary Alabama football figures like Coach Bear Bryant, Hank Crisp, and Frank Thomas. At the Bright Star, political figures are frequent guests. On one occasion, I ran into Senator Shelby and former Congressman Claude Harris at separate tables. The history of the Bright Star is rich and quintessentially American. In 1907, Greek immigrant Tom Bonduris established the Bright Star. When its doors opened, it was only a small cafe with a horseshoe-shaped bar, but it soon outgrew three locations, moving to its present site in 1915. Bill Koikos and his brother, Peter, joined in the enterprise when they emigrated from Greece in 1920. Customers were introduced to a new dining atmosphere, complete with ceiling fans, tile floors, mirrored and marbled walls, and murals painted by a European artist traveling through the area, all creating a pleasing effect reflective of that era. While major alterations have occurred since, the same early 20th- century-style atmosphere has been largely preserved. The Bright Star's reputation and success are easily measured simply by the satisfaction of its clientele. A place like home was the kind of climate fostered by Tom Bonduris in 1907 and kept alive today by the Koikos brothers and their descendants--Bill's wife, Anastasia, and children, Helen, Jimmy, and Nicholas. As immigrants, Tom Bonduris and Bill and Peter Koikos knew little of the English language and had few possessions when they arrived in this country, but they worked hard and learned to please their customers. By establishing the Bright Star restaurant as a place of ``philotimo''--a place of hospitality from the heart--the Koikos and Bonduris families drew upon the culture and traditions of their ancestors, striking a resounding chord of acceptance with the public which has never faded. They brought with them certain recipes from Greece, and the Koikos family has continued to use these and secret blends of herbs and spices ever since those early days to make their food unique. Today, the Bright Star is wholly owned and run by the sons of Bill Koikos, Nick, and Jimmy. Nick oversees the general operations of the restaurant, including the kitchen, and Jimmy serves as the greeter of their patrons and as the front man. Their sister, Helen, also plays an active role, working as the cashier on Fridays and Sundays and generally helping out whenever she is needed. The Koikos family has maintained a high level of commitment to hard work over the lifetime of their restaurant. The employees of the Bright Star are an integral part of the family there, and many of them have been with the restaurant for many years. I ask unanimous consent that a list of the employees who have been with the Bright Star for 10 years or more be printed in the Record following my remarks. Among these are Gwendolyn Atkinson, an employee for 32 years; Mary Sherrod, 46 years; Fannie Wright, 33 years; Walter Hoskins, 28 years; and Nita Ray, 27 years.

Mr. HEFLIN. Mr. President, the long, dedicated, and loyal service of these employees is evidence of the type of employers the Koikos brothers are and the type of family atmosphere they foster in their restaurant. As American citizens, business owners, and participants in the democratic process, this family has developed and maintained a reputation envied by all those who look to our shores for a new start in life. Today, Koikos family members are among the best to be found in Bessemer--or anywhere, for that matter--and Alabama has an establishment in which it can take great pride. Likewise, the United States of America is a better nation because of the outstanding contributions of those from other lands like the Koikos family, whose mission has been to contribute, and whose members believe that the American dream can still be realized if one has the courage and determination to work toward that dream. I congratulate all the members of the Koikos family on the tremendous success of the Bright Star, and I personally look forward to enjoying many more dining experiences there in the future. There are still many items on the menu which I have not yet tried, but hope to sample soon. Exhibit 1 Bright Star Employees of 10 Years or More Gwendolyn Atkinson--32 years. Betty Bailey--22 years. Wanda Little--11 years. Mary Sherrod--46 years. Robert Moore--11 years. Dorothy Patton--19 years. Felisa Tolbert--16 years. Carl Thomas--18 years. Fannie Wright--33 years. Aareen Tolbert--16 years. Angela Sellers--13 years. Marlon Tanksley--13 years. Walter Hoskins--28 years. Brenda Adams--12 years. Fumiko Adams--19 years. Elizabeth Gardner--19 years. Nita Ray--27 years. Rita Weems--12 years. Anne Mull--15 years. Marie Jackson--20 years. Sarah Marshall--10 years. Anthony Ross--10 years. Faye Kelley--12 years. Dale Ware--10 years. Jerome Walker--10 years.

Mr. HEFLIN

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

Mr. HEFLIN. Mr. President, I rise in strong support of the international space station program. This program is out of the planning stages and is well underway. The space station is real. Space shuttle missions in support of phase one of the station program began in February 1994. The most recent phase one mission ended with the successful return of astronaut Norm Thagard from his record breaking stay in space. Over 48,000 pounds of station hardware have been manufactured and 75,000 pounds will be completed by the end of this year. The space station is real to communities, students and teachers throughout the Nation. Teachers are already using space station concepts in the classroom. Students have participated in activities including living in a bus outfitted as a space station, complete with living facilities, experiments, and communication to Earth. Today the space station is capturing the imagination of the leaders of the future and encouraging students to study math, physics, chemistry, biology, geography, and Earth science. When I grew up as a boy, we had tree houses, and you would have a lot of activity playing in tree houses. I think you will see space station houses in trees and other locations that kids will be playing in as we move forward and start moving toward the deployment of the space station. Benefits of the station program are already being realized. Researchers seeking to develop a station bioreactor for cell cultures have developed a way to grow tumor tissues outside the body, so chemotherapy and other treatments can be tested without harm to the patient. The space station will create a permanent orbiting science institute in space capable of performing long duration research in a nearly gravity-free environment. Research in medicine, materials and processes, engineering and technology will have immediate, practical application for life on Earth and will create jobs and economic opportunities today and in the decade to come. Information gathered about how humans react and adapt to weightlessness will allow scientists to further understand conditions such as balance disorders afflicting 90 million Americans, osteoporosis affecting 24 million Americans, and cardiovascular disease, the leading cause of death in the United States. Every dollar spent on the station is spent here on Earth and will provide an excellent return on investment. If planned orbital research in combustion science improves combustion processes only a modest 2 percent, then the annual savings would be approximately $8 billion a year in the cost of energy produced through combustion in the United States. In June 1995, the General Accounting Office completed a review of the current estimated cost of the space station program. The GAO concluded that ``the program has made major progress since last year in defining its requirements, meeting its schedule milestones, and remaining within its annual operation budgets. Nevertheless, the program faces formidable challenges in completing all its tasks on schedule and within its budget.'' Of course the station program faces challenges as does any new endeavor. However, we should judge the ability of NASA to meet these challenges on the performance of the station program since it was redesigned in 1993. As the GAO discovered, NASA is performing as promised and is successfully meeting the stated objectives of the station program. It is unfortunate that the biggest challenge the station program faces appears to be the Congress of the United States, specifically a small handful of Members who continue to offer legislation aimed at terminating the station program. Since the inception of the program, votes have been held over 18 times on the station. We must continue to reject these attempts and continue our support of the space station program. We owe this to the future of the citizens of the United States and to all the people of Earth. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. HEFLIN

Mr. HEFLIN. Mr. President, I rise with great sadness to announce that former Homewood, AL, Mayor Robert Waldrop passed away on September 9. Mayor Waldrop spent 24 years at the Birmingham suburb's helm of city government and was an outstanding, progressive leader who moved his community forward in countless ways during his long tenure. One of his crowning achievements was the establishment of Homewood's excellent school system, widely recognized as one of the State's best systems. To Bob Waldrop, being mayor came naturally. His father had served as mayor of the Walker County, AL, town of Parrish, serving until he was 86 years of age. Bob was a native of Parrish, an Army veteran, a Mason, and a member of Trinity United Methodist Church and Zamora Shrine. Since Bob had already retired from his career with the Liberty National Insurance Co. by the time he was first elected mayor in 1968 at the age of 55, he was known as being a full-time mayor for part-time pay. Truly, the city of Homewood was his life. When Bob Waldrop left the Homewood mayor's office 3 years ago, I did a tribute to him on the floor of the Senate. This was on October 3, 1992. The Homewood City Council had just recently passed a resolution in his honor, and I wanted to have it inserted into the Congressional Record. I ask unanimous consent that a copy of my statement and the accompanying resolution from 1992 be printed in the Record. It describes his many accomplishments and explains why he was so beloved by so many for so long. I extend my sincerest condolences to Bob's wife, Louise, and their entire family in the wake of this tremendous loss.

Mr. HEFLIN

Mr. HEFLIN. In an effort to facilitate the continued growth of the aquaculture industry and provide the necessary resource tools, it is highly desirable that all relevant departments and agencies of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, including Agricultural Research Service, take steps necessary to support research in the field of aquaculture and particularly to exercise its authority to assist and help the industry and related fields of aquaculture including the cooperation with and/or the assumption of fish culture laboratories including the Southeastern Fish Culture Lab at Marion, AL.

Mr. HEFLIN. We now have an annual trade deficit in fisheries products ranging from $4.5 to $7 billion. This trade imbalance is the largest of all agricultural commodities and ranks second only to petroleum among natural products. Our domestic aquaculture industry has the potential of turning this trade deficit into a trade surplus with only modest support and encouragement.

Mr. HEFLIN. As my colleagues from Mississippi and Arkansas are well aware, the U.S. aquaculture industry has grown more than 15 percent annually since 1980. As a result, aquaculture has emerged as a solid alternative agricultural opportunity and has allowed farmers to diversify. The research and extension infrastructure has been a major resource for aquaculture. Without this research it is doubtful that the aquaculture industry would have gotten off the ground.

Mr. HEFLIN. Mr. President, the aquaculture industry is of vital importance to the economy of west Alabama. In some west Alabama counties, for example, over 20 percent of the total population is employed directly in the production or processing of fish. The Southeastern Fish Cultural Laboratory in Marion, AL has played a major role in this process. It's my understanding that there are similar facilities in Arkansas and Mississippi.

Mr. HEFLIN

Mr. HEFLIN. Mr. President, is the pending business the Brown amendment?

Mr. HEFLIN. I yield such time to Senator Nunn, of Georgia, as he may consume. Mr. NUNN addressed the Chair.

Mr. HEFLIN. It is my understanding Senator Domenici desires to speak. Since this was worked out I did not intend to make a speech, but there have been certain statements that I do not want to leave that are erroneous. No. 1, the peanut program does not have a target price and does not have a subsidy. It has a loan rate. Historically, the loan rate has every year been substantially lower than the price paid to the peanut farmer for his peanuts. Historically over 10 years, the peanut program has averaged only $13 million a year in cost to the U.S. Government. It varies as to what may happen at various times. In regard to the savings of the consumer, there was a GAO study that indicated that there could be savings to the first purchaser of peanuts. In testimony before the Agriculture Committee of the House the GAO representative who was there testifying made a distinction between the first purchaser and the final consumer, and he went on to say that in the study they contacted the manufacturers and asked them, ``Will the savings be passed on to the consumer?'' The answer was ``Well, we may develop new products and have a different promotional program.'' There have been many studies over the years that have shown that as the price of peanuts goes up and down they are not passed on to the consumer. Purdue University has conducted two such studies and have traced over the history what the price has been. I just wanted to make those statements. I can go into much more detail and make a further statement and speech but I see Senator Domenici is on the floor. I yield 2 minutes.

Mr. HEFLIN. Mr. President, I yield back what time I have.

Mr. HEFLIN

Mr. HEFLIN. Mr. President, 5, 6, 7, 8, somewhere in that neighborhood.

Mr. HEFLIN. Mr. President, I appreciate that. I rise in opposition. But first let me say that no opponent is more formidable than the little package of dynamite from California. Senator Boxer is a tremendous opponent. They say dynamite comes in little packages. And she certainly works on every issue that she takes a stand on. Most of the time she is right. But every now and then she gets misled and this is one of those instances. My colleague asked me how much time I wanted, 5 minutes, maybe? I said 6, 7, 8, somewhere around that so I got 8--but, you know, as I think about that, why did I not say a specific time? Well, it is because there may be some variances of thoughts that I had, and variances are very important. What is lacking from this, in regards to fresh, is variance. Thermometers differ. I have been in a hospital a good deal, and they take my temperature one way and it is one figure and they take it another way and it is a different figure. Then they, all of a sudden, will get thermometers that they take it in the ear for a minute, and in the old days you take the thermometer and you kept it for 3 minutes in your mouth, and you are supposed to put it in a certain spot and everything else relative to that. The point I am making is you have a hard and fast rule and you are crossing the desert in a truck, you set it at 26 degrees, but by the time it gets through west Texas, where you are going through some area where the temperature is about 105, and 106, and it varies. Then I think what this also is, it is that we are going to see the inspectors are going to be the thermometer brigade. The thermometer brigade will be coming around, checking. What we need here is some flexibility, some variance, that will allow--if you have something at 26 degrees, why not have it, say, a 4- degree variance because of weather or whatever else, relative to this? Trucks will have to stop and check the temperature about every 5 or 6 minutes to see that it gets to be 26 degrees. As you travel across the desert and everything else they will stop. Sometimes, when these truckdrivers stop, they might also have something else to quench the heat. So I do not know what might be occurring relative to this. But, I think there is certainly a need for variance. I have the front page and the introduction of the California Poultry Workgroup, University of California, Cooperative Extension, called ``Turkey Care Practices.'' In the introduction it has this: The number of turkeys produced in California peaked at 32 million in 1990 and dropped to an estimated 24.5 million by 1993. The major causes for this reduction was the necessity to import feed grain and the unfavorable business climate in California. Production costs in California are higher than in other areas making it difficult for the California industry to competitively produce turkey meat products for the consumer. That is said there. I assume feed is the same for chickens. The same climate is there for chickens as it is for turkeys. When you get out there, this is a cost issue. It is basically a protectionist issue. It seems to me we are missing the point on all of this. The way I heard Senator Bumpers talking about freezing various meats, and you freeze bacon to slice it and you freeze beef to do various and sundry things, but turkeys--I know very few people who, on Thanksgiving, do not have frozen turkeys. Most of the turkeys that you buy in the market are frozen. That is one of the delicacies of the American cuisine, is turkey on Thanksgiving. But how many live turkeys do you see? There is nothing wrong with frozen food. Frozen food has a lot of things. We talk about diseases. It kills a lot of germs in a lot of things that might be flying around and get on to the meats. So this is a safety protection, a food safety provision that Senator Cochran has come up with as well, in regards to this. So, there are a lot of things we feel that people are not reviewing, they are not thinking about in all of these. This 26 degrees that has been said is not any scientific number. A lot of the companies put it on the market at 26 degrees. It is pliable, it is soft, it is certainly, with the ideas we have on poultry and other things, this concept of fresh--if it is 25 degrees it is no longer fresh. When you cannot tell the difference in the feel, you cannot tell the difference in anything else, even if it is 24 degrees instead of 26 degrees. The point I am making here is the Department of Agriculture has some 26,000 comments and 23,000 of them, as I recall, were against this proposal. But they have some zealots over there in the Department of Agriculture on certain issues who throw to the winds reason, who throw to the winds the logic that is necessary and the real facts that underlie all of this. So I think this is a mistake on what the Department has done. We ought to adopt the Cochran amendment that is in the bill, send it back to them, and tell them, ``All right. Let us take another look at it.'' At that time, Senator Boxer, with her dynamite approach toward her issues, can argue with the Department of Agriculture, and the California turkey group that I quoted from here can make their arguments. I just think that we are reaching out and making a very unrealistic approach toward an issue that is not the problem that it is being made here today. Mr. President, I oppose the motion to strike the provision in this appropriations bill. The purpose of the language is to ensure that new poultry labeling rules are meaningful to all consumers. The rule promulgated by the Food Safety and Inspection Service on August 25, 1995, prohibits poultry products that have ever been chilled below 26 degrees from being labeled ``fresh,'' products chilled above 0 degrees but below 26 degrees would have to be labeled as ``hard chilled'' or ``previously hard chilled.'' There is nothing special or scientific about the 26-degree threshold temperature selected for determining freshness other than the fact that it is low enough to permit certain regional poultry companies to process their products in accordance with accepted industry practices. At the same time, the temperature suggested by those who have benefited by this regulation is just high enough to interfere with competing poultry products transported from other States from reaching these regional markets without jeopardizing product quality. This is especially true since USDA did not provide any temperature tolerance in the final rule. You will not find anyone who can tell you with a straight face that poultry products at 26 degrees are fresh while those chilled to 25 degrees are no longer fresh. There is absolutely no scientific evidence that poultry freezes at those temperatures. That is something that came from a Hollywood script and a bureaucrat's desire to develop a punitive and unreasonable regulation. This kind of irresponsible regulation cannot be tolerated. USDA has succeeded in developing a labeling system that designates high-quality poultry products and will confuse consumers. Poultry consumers will be misled by a labeling requirement that a product is hard chilled when it is, in fact, soft and pliable to the touch at the retail counter. Many consumers may be led to believe that such product is of lesser quality, when, in fact, it is the same high-quality product they have been buying for years. Not only will consumers be misled by this designated labeling, but the threat of such labeling may force companies to ship poultry products at higher temperatures to avoid being required to use the labeling USDA has mandated, even in the absence of any affirmative quality claim. Basic science provides that cooler temperatures enhance the quality of food products. Poultry, as well as beef, pork, or lamb products, shipped at 24 or 25 degrees will have a longer shelf life and maintain their quality longer than products shipped at higher temperatures--to the benefit of consumers. Because of USDA's denigrating labeling requirement, however, poultry companies will be forced to ship products at higher temperatures, to the detriment of product quality and consumers. The fresh poultry regulation was designed by the California poultry industry to make it difficult for competing poultry products from other sections of the country to be marketed in California without jeopardizing product quality. When consumers in California have fewer choices in the marketplace, they will pay higher prices for poultry. That is the hidden agenda of the California Poultry Industry Federation. It's simple economics--less competition, fewer choices, and higher prices. The consumer pays and the California poultry products take it to the bank. We should reject USDA's misguided and ill-conceived regulation and instead require the agency, as we have been forced to do before, to develop a rule that will not result in consumers paying more for the high-quality poultry products they buy today.

Mr. HEFLIN

Mr. HEFLIN. Mr. President, there is no doubt that our current system of welfare needs reforming. Each Member of the Senate knows that severe short-comings exist in our welfare program and each is sincere in their efforts to solve these problems. The bill before us highlights block grants as the principal instrument for reform. By folding several programs into a block grant directly to States, the Federal Government will be giving broad authority to the States to run their welfare programs, as well as lump- sum Federal payments to help cover costs. If this is done, the Federal guarantee of cash assistance to all eligible low-income mothers and children will end. I originally supported the Daschle-Breaux-Mikulski Democratic alternative as the best, most compassionate means of reforming welfare. The Work First reform plan would have changed the current system by: abolishing the AFDC Program and replacing it with a Temporary Employment Assistance Program; establishing the Work First employment block grant for States to get welfare recipients into jobs and to keep them in the work force; and permitting the States to use block grant funds to provide such services as job-placement vouchers, wage subsidy and work supplementation, on-the-job training or other training or education for work preparation to assist recipients in obtaining jobs, and allowing the States to establish all eligibility rules. Furthermore, it would have increased the Federal matching rate for work-related activities, consolidated child care programs and increased the Federal matching rate to make child care available to all those required to work or prepare for work, and extended Medicaid coverage for an additional 12 months beyond the current 1-year transition period. It would have also required community service for those not working within 6 months. In short, the Democratic plan would have met the basic objective of the Republican plan in terms of allowing for State flexibility. Its strength was that it provided for much more flexibility on the part of the State governments while also correctly recognizing that arbitrary time- limits and monetary caps do not meet the test of sound policymaking. The plan which I strongly supported provided for major reforms in the system, but at the same time allowed for the fact that every situation and case is unique, and that arbitrary standards and block-grants are not panaceas for addressing every situation. It is these unique cases and situations that, unfortunately, are not addressed in the Republican plan. These are also the cases and situations which will end up costing the system more in the long-term than under the current system. I still believe this was the best reform plan we could have adopted. The Dole-Daschle compromise welfare reform legislation, while not as sound as the original Democratic plan, is still a vast improvement over the Republican bill. I still have some objections to certain provisions contained in the measure, but I believe, overall, that the good outweighs the bad. As is the case with virtually any comprehensive omnibus legislation we consider, this test has to be our bottom line: Are there enough positives to offset the negatives? I think the compromise we have struck is a step in the right direction, and an overall positive effort at ending welfare as we know it. One of the major problems I had with the original Dole bill was its funding formula, which, in my judgment, was somewhat punitive to the Southern States. In essence, it places the very States where most of the welfare population lives at a disadvantage as compared to other regions. The formula in the Graham-Bumpers children's fair share amendment, which was rejected, would have substantially increased poor States' funding for legitimate recipients of welfare. Senator Graham tried again last Friday to alleviate some of the problems with the funding formula by allowing the Secretary of Health and Human Services more discretion in certain funding decisions, but that amendment was also defeated. As with most funding formulas, the figures can be misleading. In any event, I think that any problems that remain can be properly addressed when they appear in the future. There will also be an opportunity for the conference committee to address remaining deficiencies in the funding formula. The Senate also agreed to a Daschle amendment creating a contingency fund for States during times of economic hardship. The original GOP block grant froze funding for States over the next 5 years, with no consideration for economic or natural disasters. This important provision provides eligible States with the resources necessary to manage unforeseen emergencies that are impossible to predict. The second major objection I had to the original Republican plan was that it did not provide enough funding for child care for those mothers who will be required to work after 2 years. As Senator Moynihan succinctly put it during the debate on child care, we will either have to pay for child care, or for orphanages. Senate leaders wisely opted to cover more expenses for child care. Democrats were able to secure an additional $3 billion over 5 years for a total of $8 billion in funding to guarantee the availability of child care for mothers required to work. This is the key to shifting mothers of young children from the welfare rolls to the pay rolls. This major change will assist many mothers and their families to permanently move off of welfare and into the work force. Welfare reform legislation is among the most important issues we will tackle during this or any other Congress. Our debate over the last couple of weeks has been civil, constructive, and, ultimately and most importantly, productive. We now have a bill before us which is a testament to the Senate and its leadership. In essence, it is a product of the Senate's legislative process working as it was designed to work, and I will vote in favor of this landmark welfare reform measure. We have seen some hard-fought battles and witnessed significant changes in the original bill after some intense debate and good-faith negotiations between the two sides of the aisle. Each side has made concessions, while holding firm to certain core principles. We have arrived at agreements on several major issues. As a result, we now have a bill that contains stronger work provisions and that is not as harsh on children. While there are undoubtedly problems still remaining in the legislation that will have to be addressed down the road, the Dole- Daschle compromise is an overall positive step for reforming welfare, reducing dependency, and offering a brighter future for millions of American families. contingency fund eligibility trigger

Mr. HEFLIN

Mr. HEFLIN. Mr. President, I want to take a moment to commend and congratulate Faye Brown, who will be retiring from the bankruptcy administrator's office in Birmingham at the end of this month. She has been a fixture at the bankruptcy court and administrator's office for many years. Faye graduated from Dale County High School in Ozark, AL; in 1950 and attended Howard College, now Samford University, graduating in 1954. From 1966 to 1971, she served as the personal secretary to Judge Robert S. Vance. In 1972, she was appointed deputy clerk for the bankruptcy court. From 1979 to 1985, Faye was the secretary to Judge Stephen B. Coleman, Chief Judge of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Alabama. In 1985, after Judge Coleman's retirement, she became the asset closing clerk for the bankruptcy clerk's office, serving there for the next 7 years. In 1992, she obtained her current position and the one from which she is retiring this month, that of bankruptcy analyst. Faye Brown has done an outstanding job over the many years of her career. In many ways, she is the institutional memory of her office, and knows the in's and out's of the bankruptcy court as well as anyone, and her expertise and dedication will be sorely missed. I congratulate her for a job well done and wish her all the best for a long, healthy, and happy retirement. It is surely well-earned.