Fritz Hollings

Mr. HOLLINGS

Mr. HOLLINGS. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 3322 (Purpose: To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act with respect to the requirements for the admission of nonimmigrant nurses who will practice in health professional shortage areas)

Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I concur with Subcommittee Chairman Gregg. The work of the Office of Advocacy is important to lawmakers and policymakers alike. It was our intent that the Office of Advocacy receive FY 1999 funding at the full requested amount of $1.4 million.

Mr. HOLLINGS. I am aware of the report language accompanying the Commerce, Justice, State and the Judiciary Appropriations bill, and I did not object to the inclusion of that language. The EFH provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act are intended to address growing concerns over the loss of habitat essential to the health of marine fisheries, including many commercially and recreationally valuable stocks.

Mr. HOLLINGS. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. HOLLINGS. I too suggest that EDA consider and fund an application from Shea's if the application has merit and meets all applicable procedures and guidelines.

Mr. HOLLINGS. The Senator is correct.

Mr. HOLLINGS. My colleague is correct.

Mr. HOLLINGS. I share the view of the chairman that we will do what we can on this account.

Mr. HOLLINGS. I appreciate the dedication of researchers at the N.C. State University. Howevr, this dedication is not limited to that institution, and we also must recognize the expertise and important contribution of government and academic scientists throughout the Eastern United States in dealing with this problem. For example, researchers at the National Ocean Service laboratory at Charleston are playing a critical role in developing methods for detecting Pfiesteria toxins. The reduction of toxin outbreaks must rely on bringing our combined federal, state and academic resources to bear on the problem in a cooperative and cost effective manner. jefferson parish communications system

Mr. HOLLINGS. I agree with Senator McCain, the Chairman of the Commerce Committee, and Senator Harkin that a State network organized and operated like the Iowa Communications Network is eligible to receive universal service fund support as a provider of telecommunications services under Section 254(h) of the Communications Act of 1934. I will certainly work with Senator McCain and others if this issue arises in the Commerce Committee.

Mr. HOLLINGS. I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. HOLLINGS. I thank our chairman. Has our managers' amendment been adopted?

Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, let me thank Chairman Gregg in the first instance. I have had the occasion to handle several bills myself. I have watched it for over 30 years. Several Senators on our side of the aisle have remarked along with me in the back of the cloakroom that they have never seen a bill that was better managed and that Senator Gregg has done an outstanding job, which I want to note for the Record. As the distinguished Senator stated, the staffs on both sides have just done an outstanding job. They worked around the clock. I have never seen this many amendments actually move in this short a time. It couldn't have been done, of course, without the folks here right at the front desk on both sides of the aisle. Let me thank Jim Morhard, Kevin Linskey, Paddy Link, Carl Truscott, Dan Quam, and Virginia Wilbert, of the majority staff; and Lila Helms, Emelie East, and Dereck Orr. Actually, as Senator Gregg has pointed out, Lila has come in now to replace Scott Gudes, which is next to impossible. He was as good as there ever was. But she has already brought that statement into contest. She, Emelie East, and Dereck Orr have been working around the clock and have been doing a great job. I am glad that the Senator from New Hampshire notes this for the Record. Too often we forget that we couldn't handle these bills without Scott Gudes, and Dereck Orr on our side of the aisle. I can tell you that.

Mr. HOLLINGS. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. HOLLINGS. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 3281 (Purpose: To eliminate the potential for fraud in the investor visa program)

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

Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, on behalf of the distinguished Senator from New Mexico, I send a modification to the desk.

Mr. HOLLINGS

Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, Senator Leahy of Vermont is presently conducting a hearing, and he is in opposition to this. He is unable to be here to speak at this time. I am persuaded by the Senator from Oklahoma. I yield whatever time is necessary to the Senator from New Mexico.

Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent for floor privileges for Linn Schulte-Sasse, a staffer for the Senator from Minnesota, Senator Wellstone.

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

Mr. HOLLINGS

Mr. HOLLINGS. I have to yield back to our chair.

Mr. HOLLINGS. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 3260

Mr. HOLLINGS. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, on this particular amendment, I talked previously with the distinguished Senator from Wisconsin. I thought it was in conformance with the actions of the committee with respect to the cable rates. When we passed the 1996 Telecommunications Act, we mandated that cable rates would not increase, under that particular act, until March of 1999. Thereafter, of course, rates did increase in accordance with the 1992 act. The 1992 act allowed increases with respect to additional channels and additional services and costs incurred in expanding and in competing. That, generally speaking, is as I understood it with the cable companies. Because we have had complaints I, myself, looked at it earlier this year. The FCC has been monitoring it. We discussed this with Chairman Kennard and the other Commissioners as they came on in their confirmation hearings. They have been monitoring it. As I understand, the distinguished chairman of our Commerce Committee, Senator McCain of Arizona, is headed to the floor. Because I have been engaged in other matters, I didn't even realize we had a hearing scheduled for Tuesday of next week on this same thing, to hear from the Commissioners on what has occurred. So I would not favor this particular resolution. It is not just a matter of 30 days, it sort of preempts the committee in its action with respect to listening to the Commission and finding out. I know, good and well, we are all familiar with the 1996 Telecommunications Act provision against increase in rates through March of 1999. Of course, then we relate back in all of these percentages. It sounds, in the resolution of the distinguished Senator from Wisconsin itself, that all you need to do is look at the percentages and they are in excess of the inflation rate and everything else. The inflation rate is not the question. It is the question of the services, the channels, and the programming itself, and the costs of expanding and competing. I think perhaps this would have a disruptive effect on that particular trend at this time. The committee has yet to have heard from the Commission itself and from those engaged in this particular business. So I just comment that the chairman of the committee and the chairman of the subcommittee, Senator Burns of Montana, are on their way, as I understand it, to the floor. I didn't want to just waste this time and let it go past on the premise: Wait a minute, in 30 days---- Incidentally, the Federal Communications Commission is just like a tenth-round boxer. They have more mergers, more rulings, and everything else like that, trying to implement all the petitions that they have before them. You could not find fault if they could not find out in 30 days, 60 days, or 90 days. So I do not think this is well taken, with respect to what the Congress has asked the FCC to do. They have had one backup of time, trying to make findings here, after their particular investigations. Mind you me, if there are 60,000 lawyers registered to practice in the District of Columbia, 59,000 are communications lawyers. They have more appeals and petitions and reviews and everything else of that kind. So the work at the FCC is not necessarily the most prompt, or what we would wish to have, but it has to be understood. The committee itself is working. With that, I yield the floor.