Jesse Helms

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, at the close of business Tuesday, May 21, 1996, the Federal debt stood at $5,115,827,182,802.62. On a per capita basis, every man, woman and child in America owes $19,312.52 as his or her share of that debt.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, last week the distinguished majority leader, Mr. Dole, reacted with justifiable indignation to a May 12 Los Angles Times report indicating that the Clinton-appointed U.S. attorney in San Diego is failing to prosecute some of the drug smugglers detected and reported to him. In fact, more than 1,000 suspected traffickers have been sent back to Mexico since 1994 with scarcely more than a slap on the wrist--if that. The U.S. attorney's office in San Diego reportedly has virtually discontinued filing charges or prosecuting drug smugglers. Instead they are merely deported. The Los Angeles paper estimates that 25 percent of all detected drug smugglers in the southern district of California are sent back to Mexico where they are free to renew attempts to smuggle drugs into the United States. Senator Dole's concerns are well-founded, Mr. President: Consider these cases: Two U.S. citizens were arrested when found to have 150 pounds of marijuana, in their possession. Another had 386 pounds. All three were released without jail or prosecution. Two Mexican women, transporting 24 pounds of marijuana and 32 pounds of narcotics across the border to California, were handed tickets back across the border, where they no doubt reloaded for another trip to California. Customs inspectors are working hard on the borders, but hundreds of traffickers are avoiding prosecution. One Customs inspector told the Los Angeles Times: ``Lack of enforcement is not because inspectors are not trying. It's because of the policy coming from upstairs.'' Mr. President, the pending sense of the Senate amendment calls on the U.S. Attorney General to investigate this situation immediately and report promptly to the respective chairmen of the Judiciary Committees of the House and Senate. International drug trafficking is fundamentally a matter of national security, Mr. President. The drug trade is one of the gravest threats to the security of U.S. today. Smugglers are crossing our southern borders with impunity, selling illicit drugs in our communities and poisoning our children. Senator Dole refers to these drug smuggling thugs as ``merchants of death.'' The distinguished Senator has that right--and the problem is getting worse by the day. There's been a resurgence in illegal drug usage among our youth. Since 1992, the number of high school seniors using drugs on a monthly basis has jumped 52 percent. And during the current administration, the price of illegal drugs have fallen significantly, suggesting that the flow and the availability of illegal drugs are increasing. The Clinton administration's record on illicit drug use has been described by a Senate Judiciary Committee report as ``benign neglect.'' It is worse than that--it is an abdication of duty. The Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts states that there was a 12 percent decline in drug prosecutions between 1992 and 1994. Furthermore, the Clinton administration's budget request for fiscal year 1995 would have resulted in a cut of 621 drug enforcement positions from the Drug Enforcement Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and other Federal agencies. Fortunately, Congress restored many of these proposed cuts in law enforcement manpower. At a time when drug use is skyrocketing, there should be an urgent increase in aggressive prosecution of the criminals who transport illicit drugs across our borders. This is a national problem, Mr. President, yet the administration has reduced drug prosecutions at the very time that drug use is soaring. It's time for the administration to rejoin the war on drugs and the vigorous enforcement of our Federal drug laws.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, a less formal but somewhat more revealing title for this bill would be ``The Prevention of Prisoner Double- Dipping Act.'' A rose by any other name is still a rose and this bill is a winner by any name. It will save millions of dollars of the taxpayers' money and it will put a stop to the injustice of paying scarce Social Security disability benefits to prisoners charged with a felony who have been in jail for 30 or more days awaiting trial. Current law prohibits payment of disability benefits to anyone in jail after conviction for a felony. A loophole permits prisoners to continue receiving benefits despite the fact that they are in jail if they have not yet been convicted of the crime charged. This bill will close that loophole. Mr. President, I learned that prisoners are continuing to receive these benefits when Sheriff Mike Joyce of Stokes County, NC, wrote me earlier this year about it. Sheriff Joyce wrote to me about Earl Blevins, a career criminal and convicted murderer, who has been in Stokes County jail since December 16, 1995, awaiting trial on charges of larceny and breaking and entering. Incredibly, Blevins has been receiving disability payments since 1988, even though as Sheriff Joyce stated, Blevins obviously is healthy enough ``to run from a bloodhound and hide up under leaves under a tree.'' Until last month, when Blevins was convicted of unrelated felony charges in Surry County, he was receiving $450 per month in disability payments while Stokes County taxpayers were picking up the tab for his room and board and other care. Mr. President, Sheriff Mike Joyce is a fine law enforcement officer. His outrage about the Federal Government's paying prisoner Blevins $450 per month in Social Security disability benefits while he is in jail awaiting trial on yet another felony charge, will be matched by the outrage of the public at large once they learn about it. The point is this: Earl Blevins and other career criminals prey on law-abiding citizens. When they are apprehended, their food, clothing, shelter, and often their legal fees are paid for by the very citizens whom the criminals have victimized. It is unwarranted salt rubbed in the taxpayer's wounds that these predators are allowed by law to collect disability benefits while awaiting trial. This bill will change that law. The purpose of Social Security disability payments is to provide a minimum income to beneficiaries in order to insure that they have access to food and shelter. A prisoner awaiting trial is already being provided these needs and the taxpayers are paying the bill. Prisoners should not be allowed to ``double-dip'' into the pocket of taxpayers. Mr. President, for the record, I reiterate that current law stops Social Security disability payments to anyone who has been convicted of a felony. It also stops payments to the criminally insane who are confined to a mental hospital. Other disability benefits, for example, SSI, are cut off to a recipient who is locked up for 30 or more days, even if they have not yet been brought to trial. My bill will simply apply the same policy to Social Security [OASDI] disability benefits that we now have for SSI disability benefits. Mr. President, the existing situation brings to mind the case of Michael Hayes who cold-bloodedly killed four people and shot five others during a 1988 murder spree in Winston-Salem. After being confined to a State mental hospital, he began receiving over $500 a month in Social Security disability payments which he used to buy luxuries like leather coats, electronics, and even a motorcycle. Payments to Hayes finally stopped last year after the 103d Congress passed and the President signed my bill which I had offered in response to this outrage. It's now time for this Congress to act to stop further waste of Social Security funds. Mr. President, let me make clear for the Record what the pending bill, the Prevention of Prisoner Double-Dipping act will do: It will eliminate pretrial benefits to anyone charged with a felony who has been in jail for 30 or more days; It will authorize $50,000,000 for the Social Security Office of Inspector General to increase the number of investigators and auditors pursuing charges of fraud against the SSA; It will require SSA to make recommendations to insure the timely and accurate reporting of pre-trial felony detainees in order to stop benefits to those who will no longer qualify under this bill; It will give the Commissioner of SSA the authority to make payments to State and local correctional facilities that report the receipt of benefits by those who are in custody; It will give the SSA power to impose civil monetary penalties of up to $5,000 each time someone fraudulently uses a Social Security number or card, in addition to being subject to an assessment of up to five times the amount of disability benefits paid; and It will require SSA to make recommendations to streamline the review and appeals process. Mr. President, a few concluding thoughts: I expect some of my colleagues will raise concerns about the constitutionality of the Prevention of Prisoner Double-Dipping Act. I am confident that this legislation will easily pass constitutional muster because prisoners have no constitutional right to be paid while they are sitting in jail. Second, although this bill is targeted towards prisoners, it is not punitive. These payments should be stopped because they are duplicative, not because Congress is imposing a punishment on the recipient. The payments would be stopped regardless of the ultimate finding of guilt. Finally, stopping payments to a prisoner will have no effect on the payment of benefits to children and other dependents who are otherwise entitled to these or other benefits. I do hope the Senate will expedite consideration of these common sense reforms of the Social Security Act and thereby, save millions of dollars that the taxpayer would otherwise have to provide. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of S. 1789 be printed in the Record.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, a less formal but somewhat more revealing title for this bill would be ``The Prevention of Prisoner Double- Dipping Act.'' A rose by any other name is still a rose and this bill is a winner by any name. It will save millions of dollars of the taxpayers' money and it will put a stop to the injustice of paying scarce Social Security disability benefits to prisoners charged with a felony who have been in jail for 30 or more days awaiting trial. Current law prohibits payment of disability benefits to anyone in jail after conviction for a felony. A loophole permits prisoners to continue receiving benefits despite the fact that they are in jail if they have not yet been convicted of the crime charged. This bill will close that loophole. Mr. President, I learned that prisoners are continuing to receive these benefits when Sheriff Mike Joyce of Stokes County, NC, wrote me earlier this year about it. Sheriff Joyce wrote to me about Earl Blevins, a career criminal and convicted murderer, who has been in Stokes County jail since December 16, 1995, awaiting trial on charges of larceny and breaking and entering. Incredibly, Blevins has been receiving disability payments since 1988, even though as Sheriff Joyce stated, Blevins obviously is healthy enough ``to run from a bloodhound and hide up under leaves under a tree.'' Until last month, when Blevins was convicted of unrelated felony charges in Surry County, he was receiving $450 per month in disability payments while Stokes County taxpayers were picking up the tab for his room and board and other care. Mr. President, Sheriff Mike Joyce is a fine law enforcement officer. His outrage about the Federal Government's paying prisoner Blevins $450 per month in Social Security disability benefits while he is in jail awaiting trial on yet another felony charge, will be matched by the outrage of the public at large once they learn about it. The point is this: Earl Blevins and other career criminals prey on law-abiding citizens. When they are apprehended, their food, clothing, shelter, and often their legal fees are paid for by the very citizens whom the criminals have victimized. It is unwarranted salt rubbed in the taxpayer's wounds that these predators are allowed by law to collect disability benefits while awaiting trial. This bill will change that law. The purpose of Social Security disability payments is to provide a minimum income to beneficiaries in order to insure that they have access to food and shelter. A prisoner awaiting trial is already being provided these needs and the taxpayers are paying the bill. Prisoners should not be allowed to ``double-dip'' into the pocket of taxpayers. Mr. President, for the record, I reiterate that current law stops Social Security disability payments to anyone who has been convicted of a felony. It also stops payments to the criminally insane who are confined to a mental hospital. Other disability benefits, for example, SSI, are cut off to a recipient who is locked up for 30 or more days, even if they have not yet been brought to trial. My bill will simply apply the same policy to Social Security [OASDI] disability benefits that we now have for SSI disability benefits. Mr. President, the existing situation brings to mind the case of Michael Hayes who cold-bloodedly killed four people and shot five others during a 1988 murder spree in Winston-Salem. After being confined to a State mental hospital, he began receiving over $500 a month in Social Security disability payments which he used to buy luxuries like leather coats, electronics, and even a motorcycle. Payments to Hayes finally stopped last year after the 103d Congress passed and the President signed my bill which I had offered in response to this outrage. It's now time for this Congress to act to stop further waste of Social Security funds. Mr. President, let me make clear for the Record what the pending bill, the Prevention of Prisoner Double-Dipping act will do: It will eliminate pretrial benefits to anyone charged with a felony who has been in jail for 30 or more days; It will authorize $50,000,000 for the Social Security Office of Inspector General to increase the number of investigators and auditors pursuing charges of fraud against the SSA; It will require SSA to make recommendations to insure the timely and accurate reporting of pre-trial felony detainees in order to stop benefits to those who will no longer qualify under this bill; It will give the Commissioner of SSA the authority to make payments to State and local correctional facilities that report the receipt of benefits by those who are in custody; It will give the SSA power to impose civil monetary penalties of up to $5,000 each time someone fraudulently uses a Social Security number or card, in addition to being subject to an assessment of up to five times the amount of disability benefits paid; and It will require SSA to make recommendations to streamline the review and appeals process. Mr. President, a few concluding thoughts: I expect some of my colleagues will raise concerns about the constitutionality of the Prevention of Prisoner Double-Dipping Act. I am confident that this legislation will easily pass constitutional muster because prisoners have no constitutional right to be paid while they are sitting in jail. Second, although this bill is targeted towards prisoners, it is not punitive. These payments should be stopped because they are duplicative, not because Congress is imposing a punishment on the recipient. The payments would be stopped regardless of the ultimate finding of guilt. Finally, stopping payments to a prisoner will have no effect on the payment of benefits to children and other dependents who are otherwise entitled to these or other benefits. I do hope the Senate will expedite consideration of these common sense reforms of the Social Security Act and thereby, save millions of dollars that the taxpayer would otherwise have to provide. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of S. 1789 be printed in the Record.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, the impression will not go away: The $5 trillion Federal debt stands today as an increasingly grotesque parallel to the energizer bunny in the T.V. commercial that keeps moving and moving and moving--precisely in the same manner and to the same extent that the President is sitting on his hands while the Federal debt keeps going up and up and up into the stratosphere. Same old story. Some politicians talk a good game (``talk'' is the operative word here) about cutting Federal spending and thereby bringing the Federal debt under control. (But watch what they do when efforts are made to balance the Federal budget.) Mr. President, as of the close of business yesterday, Monday, May 20, the Federal debt stood at exactly $5,114,232,705,195.00 (which amounts to $19,306.97 per man, woman, child on a per capita basis).

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, this sense-of-the-Senate resolution calls for the extension of a critical education tax provision that enables American workers to further their education and better provide for their families. I have vigorously supported this education tax credit since its initial authorization in 1978. This provision has allowed millions of American men and women to acquire new skills and pursue their educational goals. Our Government, being a republic, relies on the promotion of a moral and principled citizenry, education is central to the continued vitality of America. President Thomas Jefferson put it this way: ``If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.'' The Federal Government has promoted education and individual choice through the educational assistance exclusion, codified at section 127 of the Internal Revenue Code, a provision that allows employees to receive up to $5,250 a year, tax-free, in educational benefits from their respective employers. When this provision expired on December 31, 1994, it left many workers and companies uncertain about the Federal Government's commitment to the promotion of worker education and retraining. That uncertainty increased last year, when President Clinton vetoed the Balanced Budget Act that would have extended the credit through December 31, 1996. Mr. President, over the years, this provision has enjoyed wide bipartisan support, resulting in its reauthorization seven times. I hope Senators will once again support extension of this education tax credit which has done so much to help our Nation's workers and employers alike. Accordingly, I offer today a sense-of-the-Senate resolution that provides that Congress should include, in any appropriate tax legislation, an extension of this critically needed tax credit. Neither the need for education nor the need for acquiring new skills stops when a young person receives a high school diploma. Increasingly, education and worker training have become lifelong pursuits. My home State of North Carolina has been hit hard by plant closings during the last few years. The textile industry in my State has been particularly hard hit as thousands of workers have lost their jobs. I could cite eye-popping statistics as to the number of lost jobs but what is important to realize is that each one of these lost jobs represents an individual man or woman, often the lone breadwinner in a family. Many workers are understandably concerned about job security. They worry about the possibility of losing their job and wonder how they would provide for their loved ones if they did suddenly become unemployed. If this education provision is not reauthorized then many more workers and their families, across the country, will suffer needless anxiety and uncertainty. Mr. President, while the Federal Government cannot set up programs to guarantee that every American has a job, we can act to ensure our Tax Code encourages workers and companies to act in their own interest by promoting education and training. Without this exclusion, many employers may choose to end these benefits for their employees. Those employers who do offer these benefits will subject their employees to additional Federal and State taxes. A fortunate few may be able to meet a complex IRS test to demonstrate that the benefits are sufficiently job-related so as to be deductible. These additional taxes can easily exceed 40 percent of the amount paid by the employer. This enormous tax burden can be decisive in preventing an employee from pursuing an education to improve his or her career prospects and earning ability. I support reauthorization of this provision because it empowers individual employees and businesses by encouraging and promoting education not through a monolithic Government bureaucracy but through the removal of a harmful and destructive hurdle to the pursuit of an education. Over the years, this provision has helped more than 7 million working Americans to further their education and to acquire additional skills. While the importance of this achievement to those individuals, their families and their companies cannot be overstated, it is also true that this accomplishment has served our Nation well. Last week, the House Ways and Means Committee included an extension of the tax credit for employer provided education assistance in its markup of the Small Business Job Protection Act. Mr. President, I do hope Senators will demonstrate their support for the continuation of this important provision and vote for this sense-of- the-Senate resolution to reaffirm the Congress' commitment to improving the education of American workers.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, at the close of business Friday, May 17, 1996, the Federal debt stood at $5,114,511,847,123.90. On a per capita basis, every man, woman, and child in America owes $19,308.54 as his or her share of that debt.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, at the close of business Thursday, May 16, 1996, the Federal debt stood at $5,113,662,573,709.50. On a per capita basis, every man, woman, and child in America owes $19,306.88 as his or her share of that debt.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, 4 years ago when I commenced these daily reports to the Senate it was my purpose to make a matter of daily record the exact Federal debt as of the close of business the previous day. In that first report (February 27, 1992) the Federal debt as of the close of business the previous day stood at $3,825,891,293,066.80, as of the close of business. The point is, the Federal debt has since shot further into the stratosphere. As of yesterday at the close of business, a total of $1,289,803,057,697.20 has been added to the Federal debt since February 26, 1992, meaning that as of the close of business yesterday, Wednesday, May 15, 1996, the exact Federal debt stood at $5,115,694,350,764.00. (On a per capita basis, every man, woman and child in America owes $19,315.06 as his or her share of the Federal debt.)

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, the Federal Government is running on borrowed money--more than $5 trillion of it. As of the close of business yesterday, May 14, 1996, the Federal debt stood at $5,096,217,391,261.73. On a per capita basis, every man, woman, and child in America owes $19,242.02 as his or her share of the Federal debt.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Madam President, the American Petroleum Institute reports that for the week ending May 10, the United States imported 8,623,000 barrels of foreign oil each day, 1,411,000 barrels more than the 7,212,000 barrels imported during the same week a year ago. This means that Americans now rely on foreign oil for 57 percent of their needs, and there are no signs that this upward spiral will abate. Before the Persian gulf war, the United States obtained about 45 percent of its oil supply from foreign countries. During the Arab oil embargo in the 1970's, foreign oil accounted for only 35 percent of America's oil supply. Anybody interested in restoring domestic production of oil? Politicians had better ponder the economic calamity certain to occur in America if and when foreign producers shut off our oil supply--or double the already enormous cost of imported oil flowing into the United States--now 8,623,000 barrels a day.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, I think so often of that November evening long ago, in 1972, when the television networks reported that I had won the Senate race in North Carolina. It was 9:17 in the evening and I recall how stunned I was. I had never really anticipated that I would be the first Republican in history to be elected to the U.S. Senate by the people of North Carolina. When I got over that, I made a commitment to myself that I would never fail to see a young person, or a group of young people, who wanted to see me. I have kept that commitment and it has proved enormously meaningful to me because I have been inspired by the estimated 60,000 young people with whom I have visited during the 23 years I have been in the Senate. A large percentage of them are greatly concerned about the total Federal debt which back in February exceeded $5 trillion for the first time in history. Congress created this monstrous debt which coming generations will have to pay. Mr. President, the young people who visit with me almost always are inclined to discuss the fact that under the U.S. Constitution, no President can spend a dime of Federal money that has not first been authorized and appropriated by both the House and Senate of the United States. That is why I began making these daily reports to the Senate on February 25, 1992. I decided that it was important that a daily record be made of the precise size of the Federal debt which, at the close of business yesterday, Monday, May 13, 1996, stood at $5,094,150,618,714.59. On a per capita basis, the existing Federal debt amounts to $19,234.76 for every man, woman, and child in America on a per capita basis. The increase in the national debt in the 24 hours since my report yesterday--which identified the total Federal debt as of close of business on Friday, May 10, 1996--shows an increase of more than $1 billion--$1,335,403,008.84, to be exact. That 1-day increase alone is enough to match the total amount needed to pay the college tuition for each of the 198,015 students for 4 years.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, it was on Friday, February 23, 1996, that the Federal debt broke the $5 trillion sound barrier for the first time in history. The records show that on that day, at the close of business, the debt stood at $5,017,056,630,040.53. Twenty years earlier, in 1976, the Federal debt stood at $629 billion, after the first 200 years of America's history, including two world wars. The total 1976 Federal debt, I repeat, stood at $629 billion. Then the big spenders really went to work and the interest on the Federal debt really began to take off--and, presto, during the past two decades the Federal debt has soared into the stratosphere, increasing by more than $4 trillion in two decades--from 1976 to 1996. So, Mr. President, as of the close of business Friday, May 10, 1996, the Federal debt stood--down-to-the-penny--at $5,092,815,215,705.75. On a per capita basis, every man, woman, and child in America owes $19,230.19 as his or her share of that debt. This enormous debt is a festering, escalating burden on all citizens and especially it is jeopardizing the liberty of our children and grandchildren. As Jefferson once warned, ``to preserve [our] independence, we must not let our leaders load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude.'' Isn't it about time that Congress heeded the wise words of the author of the Declaration of Independence?

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, a lot of folks don't have the slightest idea about the enormity of the Federal debt. Ever so often, I ask groups of friends, how many millions of dollars are there in a trillion? They think about it, voice some estimates, most of them wrong. One thing they do know is that it was the U.S. Congress that ran up the enormous Federal debt that is now over $5 trillion. To be exact, as of the close of business yesterday, May 8, 1996, the total Federal debt--down to the penny--stood at $5,094,597,203,341.08. Another sad statistic is that on a per capita basis, every man, woman, and child in America owes $19,238.98. So, Mr. President, how many million are there in a trillion? There are a million million in a trillion, which means that the Federal Government owes more than $5 million million. Sort of boggles the mind, doesn't it?

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, on Friday, February 23, 1996, the U.S. Federal debt broke the $5 trillion sound barrier for the first time in history. The records show that on that day, at the close of business, the debt stood at $5,017,056,630,040.53. Twenty years earlier, in 1976, the Federal debt stood at $629 billion, after the first 200 years of America's history, including two world wars. The total Federal debt in 1976, I repeat, stood at $629 billion. Then the big spenders went to work and the compounded interest on the Federal debt really began to take off--and, presto, during the past two decades the Federal debt has soared into the stratosphere, increasing by more than $4 trillion in two decades, from 1976 to 1996. So, Mr. President, as of the close of business yesterday, Tuesday, May 7, the Federal debt stood--down-to-the-penny--at $5,093,910,014,740.64. On a per capita basis, every man, woman, and child in America owes $19,236.90 as his or her share of that debt. This enormous debt is a festering, escalating burden on all citizens and especially it is jeopardizing the liberty of our children and grandchildren. As Jefferson once warned, ``to preserve [our] independence, we must not let our leaders load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude.'' Isn't it about time that Congress heeded the wise words of my hero, Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence?

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, it's difficult to imagine an act more cowardly or reprehensible than a violent criminal act against a child, or an elderly person, or someone who is mentally or physically handicapped. But this dastardly criminality is becoming more and more common is society as a part of the general moral decay which is so painfully apparent in our cities and towns. Therefore, I am introducing a bill to strengthen the penalty for criminals who commit violent Federal crimes against children, the elderly, and those vulnerable due to mental or physical conditions. Crimes against the vulnerable are soaring. For instance, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, personal crimes against the elderly increased by 90 percent between 1985 and 1991--from 627,318 in 1985 to 1,146,929 in 1991. Likewise, the homicide rate for children skyrocketed 47 percent between 1985 and 1993. These are real victims, Mr. President, not just statistics. Just last month in Durham, NC, two mentally handicapped women were robbed at knife point. Earlier this year in Durham, a disabled Vietnam veteran-- partially blind and with limited use of his legs--was robbed after exiting a Greyhound bus. And in my hometown of Raleigh, I recall the reports of a blind, 77-year-old lady who in 1993 was raped in her backyard. These types of crimes are sick, outrageous, and revolting. Something must be done to make clear that this kind of depravity will be severely punished in the Federal system. The Federal law must reflect our extreme repulsion against those who would victimize people who cannot defend themselves. This bill stiffens the punishment, by an average of 50 percent, for criminals who prey on the vulnerable in our society by committing violent crimes--including carjacking, assault, rape, and robbery. More specifically, this bill directs the U.S. Sentencing Commission to increase sentences by five levels above the offense level otherwise provided if a Federal violent crime is committed against a child, an elderly person or other vulnerable victim. By vulnerable I mean one whose physical or mental condition makes him susceptible to victimization by the thugs who commit these sorts of crimes. This bill increases most of these sentences by about 50 percent. For example, a conviction of robbery against a senior or a child currently carries with it a base-offense level of 20, which translates into 2\1/ 2\ to 3\1/2\ years in prison. This bill raises the base-offense level to 25, jacking up the prison sentence for robbery to 4\1/2\ to 6 years. Incidentally, Mr. President, a substantially similar bill, introduced by Representative Dick Chrysler of Michigan, was passed 414 to 4 last night in the House of Representatives. The American people are demanding that these loathsome cries against the vulnerable in our society receive the punishment they deserve. This bill moves us in the right direction, and I urge my colleagues in the Senate to move with dispatch to enact this bill.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, it's difficult to imagine an act more cowardly or reprehensible than a violent criminal act against a child, or an elderly person, or someone who is mentally or physically handicapped. But this dastardly criminality is becoming more and more common is society as a part of the general moral decay which is so painfully apparent in our cities and towns. Therefore, I am introducing a bill to strengthen the penalty for criminals who commit violent Federal crimes against children, the elderly, and those vulnerable due to mental or physical conditions. Crimes against the vulnerable are soaring. For instance, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, personal crimes against the elderly increased by 90 percent between 1985 and 1991--from 627,318 in 1985 to 1,146,929 in 1991. Likewise, the homicide rate for children skyrocketed 47 percent between 1985 and 1993. These are real victims, Mr. President, not just statistics. Just last month in Durham, NC, two mentally handicapped women were robbed at knife point. Earlier this year in Durham, a disabled Vietnam veteran-- partially blind and with limited use of his legs--was robbed after exiting a Greyhound bus. And in my hometown of Raleigh, I recall the reports of a blind, 77-year-old lady who in 1993 was raped in her backyard. These types of crimes are sick, outrageous, and revolting. Something must be done to make clear that this kind of depravity will be severely punished in the Federal system. The Federal law must reflect our extreme repulsion against those who would victimize people who cannot defend themselves. This bill stiffens the punishment, by an average of 50 percent, for criminals who prey on the vulnerable in our society by committing violent crimes--including carjacking, assault, rape, and robbery. More specifically, this bill directs the U.S. Sentencing Commission to increase sentences by five levels above the offense level otherwise provided if a Federal violent crime is committed against a child, an elderly person or other vulnerable victim. By vulnerable I mean one whose physical or mental condition makes him susceptible to victimization by the thugs who commit these sorts of crimes. This bill increases most of these sentences by about 50 percent. For example, a conviction of robbery against a senior or a child currently carries with it a base-offense level of 20, which translates into 2\1/ 2\ to 3\1/2\ years in prison. This bill raises the base-offense level to 25, jacking up the prison sentence for robbery to 4\1/2\ to 6 years. Incidentally, Mr. President, a substantially similar bill, introduced by Representative Dick Chrysler of Michigan, was passed 414 to 4 last night in the House of Representatives. The American people are demanding that these loathsome cries against the vulnerable in our society receive the punishment they deserve. This bill moves us in the right direction, and I urge my colleagues in the Senate to move with dispatch to enact this bill.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, the American Petroleum Institute reports that for the week ending May 3, the United States imported 7,301,000 barrels of oil each day, 1,184,000 barrels more than the 6,117,000 barrels imported during the same week a year ago. Americans now rely on foreign oil for 53 percent of their needs, and there are no signs that this upward spriral will abate. Before the Persian Gulf war, the United States obtained about 45 percent of its oil supply from foreign countries. During the Arab oil embargo in the 1970's, foreign oil accounted for only 35 percent of America's oil supply. Anybody else interested in restoring domestic production of oil--by U.S. producers using American workers? Politicians had better ponder the economic calamity sure to occur in America if and when foreign producers shut off our supply--or double the already enormous cost of imported oil flowing into the United States--now 7,301,000 barrels a day. Mr. President, I hope Senators will examine this information in the context of rapidly rising gasoline prices. U.S. reliance on foreign oil has caused us to forsake the use of alternative domestic fuels and allowed for serious declines in domestic crude oil production. In 1970, the United States produced 9,600,000 million barrels per day. Currently, we are producing only 6,500,000 million barrels per day. Thus, more than half of the gasoline consumed in this country comes from foreign sources, and the problem is getting worse. Where's the leadership from the White House on this critical issue? The President ordered a draw down of the strategic oil reserves. The American people recognize this for what it is--a cynical joke. Of course Congress should cut the Clinton gas tax. We should also cut taxes on domestic alternative fuel sources, and on a host of other taxes Democrats have heaped on the shoulders of hardworking American taxpayers.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Madam President, many Americans don't have the slightest idea about the enormity of the Federal debt. Ever so often, I ask groups of friends, how many millions of dollars are there in a trillion? They think about it, voice some estimates, most of them wrong. One thing they do know is that it is the U.S. Congress that has run up the enormous Federal debt that is now over $5 trillion. To be exact, as of the close of business yesterday, May 6, 1996, the total Federal debt--down to the penny--stood at $5,090,257,303,263.75. Another sad statistic is that on a per capita basis, every man, woman, and child in America owes $19,223.62. So Madam President, how many million are there in a trillion? There are a million million in a trillion, which means that the Federal Government owes more than five million million dollars. Sort of boggles the mind, doesn't it?

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, the awesome $5 trillion Federal debt stands today as an increasingly grotesque parallel to the energizer bunny on television that keeps moving and moving and moving--precisely in the same manner and to the same extent that the President is allowing the Federal debt to keep going up and up and up into the stratosphere. A lot of politicians like to talk a good game--``talk'' is the operative word here--about cutting Federal spending and thereby bringing the Federal debt under control. But watch how they vote on spending bills. Mr. President, as of the close of business Friday, May 3, the exact Federal debt stood at $5,089,270,954,342.92 or $19,220.40 per man, woman, child on a per capita basis.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, at the close of business yesterday, Thursday, May 2, 1996, the Federal debt stood at $5,100,092,620,432.01. On a per capita basis, every man, woman, and child in America owes $19,262.84 as his or her share of that debt.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, the American Petroleum Institute reports, for the week ending April 26, that the United States imported 8,052,000 barrels of oil each day, 10,000 barrels less than the 8,062,000 barrels imported during the same period a year ago. This is one of those rare weeks when less oil was imported in 1996 than for the same week in 1995. In any case, Americans now rely on foreign oil for more than 50 percent of their needs, and there are no signs that the upward trend will abate. Before the Persian Gulf war, the United States obtained about 45 percent of its oil supply from foreign countries. During the Arab oil embargo in the 1970's, foreign oil accounted for only 35 percent of America's oil supply. Anybody else interested in restoring domestic production of oil--by U.S. producers using American workers? Politicians had better ponder the economic calamity sure to occur in America if and when foreign producers shut off our supply, or double the already enormous cost of imported oil flowing into the United States--now 8,052,000 barrels a day.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, the U.S. Government has a duty to control immigration, and it is failing miserably. Passage of this bill will help halt the large migration of illegals into our country. But, due in part to the service rendered by the able Senator from Wyoming [Mr. Simpson] on this bill, S. 1664, ``The Immigration Control and Financial Responsibility Act of 1996'' the Federal Government will have meaningful tools to discourage illegal immigration and better handle illegal aliens in our country. We are grateful for the enormous amount of time and expertise Al Simpson has devoted throughout his tenure in the Senate to the formulation of a workable, credible immigration policy. All of us have benefited from Senator Simpson's tireless efforts. Mr. President, immigration is an especially important issue to the American people, and it is important that we not forget that ours is a nation of immigrants. America has always had a very generous immigration policy. But while it is politically correct in some circles to call for an open immigration policy--allowing in all who seek admission--it would be a serious mistake of judgment to fail to assess the consequences of an out-of-control influx of immigrants, legal or illegal. During the 1985 consideration of immigration reform, some Senators cautioned against granting amnesty to the illegal aliens pouring across our borders. I was among those who stated such an apprehension. It was envisioned that such amnesty would establish a dangerous precedent certain to encourage even more illegal immigration. Another concern in the 1985 debate was the potential for an enormous increase in Federal welfare spending. Both concerns were valid and both have come to pass. The National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc., has compiled statistics showing that from 1984 to 1990, the percentage of welfare benefits distributed to immigrant households has risen from 9.8 to 13.8 percent. There is no indication that the percentage will decrease in the years ahead. The abuse in the Supplemental Security Income Program alone is startling. According to the Congressional Budget Office, 25 percent of the growth in SSI between 1993 and 1996 is due to immigrants--an astounding number because of the percentage of immigrants among SSI recipients--2.9 percent of the general population are immigrants and 29 percent of the SSI-aged beneficiaries are immigrants. Thousands of North Carolinians, and others across the Nation, have contacted me to describe their problems with the current U.S. immigration system. Most often, citizens express disgust at the numbers of noncitizens receiving welfare benefits almost from the day they slip over the borders into the United States. Mr. President, it is impossible to suggest to my fellow North Carolinians that there is any wisdom or common sense to an immigration policy that allows noncitizens to receive welfare checks or any other Federal benefits and services. Sponsors of this bill agreed. The bill correctly changes the current system which aliens can sign up for a long list of welfare benefits including Aid to Families With Dependant Children, Supplemental Security Income, and food stamps. With mention seldom, if ever made, of the U.S. law these aliens are violating--a law which clearly states that nobody may immigrate to the United States without demonstrating that he or she is not ``likely at any time to become a public charge.'' Hard-working taxpayers should not be required to shell out funds to aliens who have broken the promise they made when entering the country. North Carolinians will be relieved to learn that many attempts-- through the amending process--to lessen the impact of the bill's rigid enforcement of this law were soundly defeated. In addition, the bill further forbids receipt of any Federal, State, or local government benefit by noncitizens. Mr. President, it is virtually impossible to estimate the total number of illegal immigrants in our country--in 1983, the Immigration and Nationalization Service estimated that there were 3.4 million in our country. Some have crossed our borders illegally while others have overstayed their visas and permits. The National Immigration Forum has given what is perceived as a conservative estimate that the number of illegals in the United States is about 3.2 million, pushed downward by the amnesty of 1987-88 which has resulted in a 200,000 to 300,000 addition to America's population each year. At a time when the Federal Government is wrestling with its $5 trillion debt, it is the responsibility of Congress to find out where the taxpayers' funds are being used. It is our duty to take a position on the doling out of the taxpayers' funds to people not legally in our country and aliens who should not be in line for welfare benefits. As of Tuesday, April 30, the debt stood at $5,102,048,827,234.22, meaning that every man, woman, and child in our Nation owes $19,271.23 on a per capita basis. Mr. President, the bill before the Senate tightens the enforcement and improves the effectiveness of our immigration law by: First, adding additional Border Patrol and investigative personnel; second, creating additional detention facilities; third, increasing penalties for alien smuggling and document fraud; fourth, reforming asylum, exclusion and deportation law and procedures; and fifth, by ending distribution of welfare to noncitizens. I support this measure because it will make it more difficult for immigrants to enter this country illegally. This is a bold step to protect the rights and best interests of citizens of the United States.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, a great many Americans don't have the faintest idea that the Federal debt is so incredibly enormous. Quite often, I ask friends if they know how many millions of dollars are there in a trillion? Few know, but one thing they do know is that it was the U.S. Congress that ran up the enormous Federal debt that is now over $5 trillion. To be exact, as of the close of business yesterday, May 1, 1996, the total Federal debt--down to the penny--stood at $5,096,321,323,731.34. On a per capita basis, every man, woman, and child in America owes $19,249.10. So, Mr. President, there are a million million in a trillion, which means that the Federal debt is now in excess of 5 million million dollars.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, 4 years ago when I commenced these daily reports to the Senate it was my purpose to make a matter of daily record the exact Federal debt as of the close of business the previous day. In that first report, February 27, 1992, the Federal debt the previous day stood at $3,825,891,293,066.80, as of the close of business. The point is, the Federal debt has since shot further into the stratosphere. As of yesterday at the close of business, a total of $1,276,157,534,167.42 has been added to the Federal debt since February 26, 1992, meaning that as of the close of business yesterday, Tuesday, April 30, 1996, the Federal debt stood at $5,102,048,827,234.22. On a per capita basis, every man, woman, and child in America owes $19,271.23 as his or her share of the Federal debt.