Kay Hutchison

Mrs. HUTCHISON

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I think the Senator from Illinois has a very good sense of the Senate. I think having benchmarks and accountability we can look at next year is very appropriate. I commend him for caring about these crime issues and the issues that we all want to solve. I certainly support his amendment and suggest we approve it unanimously.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, according to the unanimous consent agreement, it is now appropriate for Senator Durbin's sense of the Senate on D.C. quality of life. He has 15 minutes under his control; I have 5 minutes under my control. I yield the floor to Senator Durbin.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, the next item on the unanimous consent agreement is Senator Durbin's tuition assistance program amendment. Twenty minutes will be given to Senator Durbin, and I will control 10 minutes, at the end of which time Senator Durbin will withdraw.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, the explanation of the amendment sounded very good. I had not seen the amendment until earlier this evening. I am happy to go forward with a vote on the amendment.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, under the unanimous consent agreement, at this time we will go to Senator Coverdell's amendment, and the time will be divided, 20 minutes under the control of Senator Coverdell and 10 minutes under the control of Senator Durbin.

Mrs. HUTCHISON

Mrs. HUTCHISON. I thank the Chair. I appreciate Senator Brownback giving me a little time to talk about this, because I think it is a very important issue. There are a number of American investments being made in Azerbaijan right now. There are a number of American jobs that will be dependent on our keeping a good relationship with Azerbaijan. I have been able to visit Azerbaijan. I was there at the same time as the distinguished chairman of the subcommittee. He knows this issue very well. I look at this a different way. I talked to the President of Azerbaijan while I was in his country and then when he visited our country to sign agreements with several American companies to do business in his country. It is of utmost concern to him that we are beginning to make investments in his country. He welcomes us. He wants to do business with us. Yet we have sanctions on his country because of internal conflicts. This is not a policy that is evenhandedly put forward by our country. We do business with other countries where we don't agree with the way they are treating certain people within their own country. There are border disputes with other countries, but we don't put sanctions on them in order to impose our will. I hope Senator Brownback's amendment will pass, at least this part of the amendment, because I think it is important that we send a message to the President of Azerbaijan and to the people of Azerbaijan that we want to be partners with them, that it is an important relationship to this country, and that we should continue to be able to help them work out this internal problem. But I don't think imposing our will on them is the right thing to do. Senator Brownback is trying to give the President the ability to maneuver in the interest of the United States. I think it is a reasonable request. It is a good amendment. I hope that the Senate will support it.

Mrs. HUTCHISON

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I want to vote for this bill but I can't. I want to because I think part of the steel industry has a legitimate case. But I can't because voting for this bill would make it worse than the relief they seek. We have GATT. We have WTO. We have NAFTA. We have access to accountability. However, the administration is not allowing that to go forward. We have to stay within the system. We have to play by the rules. The reason we are debating this is because we haven't had the administration firmly coming forward and saying the steel industry has a legitimate gripe. They do. I support the Finance Committee approach to it which says we are going to stick by the rules, and we need to enforce them vigorously.

Mrs. HUTCHISON

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from New Mexico for allowing me 2 minutes. I was introducing a judicial candidate and was not able to come earlier. I thank the Senator from New Mexico, the chairman of the committee, for the great help he has given to many of us who particularly have strong water needs in our States. I particularly want to mention the Port of Houston. The Port of Houston is the second largest port in the Nation, and it is the largest in foreign tonnage. It is the largest container port. We have the largest petrochemical complex in the entire world. It is very important that our port be competitive. This bill will fully fund the dredging of that port, which is the last port in America that has not gone under 40 feet. This will take us to 45. It is a very important bill. I think both Senator Domenici and Senator Leahy have done a great job on this bill, but particularly I appreciate the support for this great Port of Houston and the efforts that were made to continue this dredging project that will help us in trade and help us remain competitive in the world market. I yield the floor.

Mr. HUTCHISON

Mr. HUTCHISON. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Chairman, all firearms would be under the purview of the amendment that I am offering if the transfer is with the knowledge that it is going to be used for the commission of a serious violent felony or to be used in a school zone.

Mrs. HUTCHISON

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mrs. HUTCHISON

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, this resolution, submitted by Senator Feinstein and I, commemorates the Tenth Anniversary of the National Race for the Cure. We are pleased to be joined by over 40 other Senators, including Majority Leader Lott and Minority Leader Daschle. Mr. President, on June 5, 1999, the National Race for the Cure will take place in Washington, D.C. This will be the Tenth Anniversary of this Race--that has drawn national attention and thousands of volunteers and runners. All are united by one goal--to eradicate breast cancer from our lives. The Resolution we are introducing today will designate June 5th as National Race for the Cure Day. This Race has very special meaning for me. The Race for the Cure was started by the Susan G. Komen Foundation which is located in my hometown, Dallas, Texas. The Susan G. Komen Foundation was founded in 1982 by Nancy Brinker. The Foundation honors her sister, Susan Komen, who tragically died of breast cancer at the young age of 36. Nancy promised herself that she would fulfill Suzy's plea to help others confronted with this disease. The mission of the Foundation is to eradicate breast cancer as a life-threatening disease by advancing research, education, screening and treatment. Nancy Brinker's pledge to her sister has grown to be a major factor in fighting breast cancer. The Foundation has 35,000 volunteers and 106 offices across the United States. The Komen Foundation's Grant Program is regarded as one of the most innovative in funding breast cancer research today. The Komen Foundation has financed 325 grants at 72 institutions in 25 states. The Foundation's most public event, however, has become the Race for the Cure. The Race for the Cure has become the largest series of Five Kilometer Runs in the world. The Race series stated as one event in Texas with 800 participants. But, this year, there will be 98 races across the United States with over 700,000 people participating. The Komen Foundation and the Race for the Cure have raised over $136 million for breast cancer research. On June 5th, the National Race for the Cure will celebrate its tenth anniversary. It is the largest of the Races across the U.S. In fact, there are more than 50,000 entrants already signed up for this race. This resolution commemorates the Tenth Anniversary and it designates June 5th as National Race for the Cure Day. Mr. President, I think it is fitting that the Senate recognize this unique day. Breast cancer is the leading cause of death of women between the ages of 35 and 54. A woman in the United States will be diagnosed with breast cancer every three minutes, and every 12 minutes a woman will die of breast cancer. The Race for the Cure is one day, when Americans of all walks of life, can come together united in a great cause to wipe out this terrible disease. Mr. President. I would urge the Senate to adopt this resolution. Is also want to thank the numerous other Senators that were part of this effort. Thank you, Mr. President.

Mrs. HUTCHISON

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I am offering this amendment on behalf of myself and Senator Lautenberg. The purpose of this amendment is to encourage the Secretaries of each military department to give due consideration to providing a higher priority to the officers from Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic for attendance at our military schools and training programs. Our professional military schools and training programs including the service academies, the senior service colleges and the command and general staff colleges provide an outstanding opportunity for these officers to become fully immersed in our military doctrine and develop a deeper understanding for the American military culture. As new member nations of NATO, it is important that the officers of these countries become fully integrated as quickly as possible. The professional friendships and the mutual understanding which results from attendance at these courses is invaluable for both American officers and for foreign military officers. I recently led a Congressional delegation to the Balkans. In Budapest we met with Hungarian Chief of Defense Staff, General Ferenc Vegh, who was proud to inform the delegation that he was a graduate of the United States Army War College in Carlisle, Pennsylvania. As a direct result of the professional association gained as a student at the War College, General Vegh has been key in directing Hungary's rapid integration into NATO. His story is simply one example among many of how the United States and the NATO Alliance has reaped an enormous benefit by providing the opportunity for foreign officer attendance at our military schools. Attendance at our service academies on a priority basis will also provide an outstanding opportunity for future officers from our new NATO allies to foster long-term relationships with future U.S. military leaders. Historically, the relationships fostered through attendance at the Military Academy, the Naval Academy and the Air Force Academy among American and foreign cadets over the four-year curriculum at the service academies have formed the basis for closer long-term military- to-military relations. Numerous foreign cadets who have graduated from our service academies have gone on to serve at the very highest levels as military and civilian leaders, including many heads of state. It is my expectation that this legislation will encourage the Secretaries of our military departments to give the officers and cadets from Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic, our new NATO allies, a priority for attendance at our professional military schools and academies.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Thank you, Mr. President. This amendment requires that the President and the Department of Defense come forward and report on the missions we have throughout the world. One thing that has become very clear to me as I have visited with our troops--whether it is in Saudi Arabia or Kuwait, whether it is in Bosnia or in Albania just 2 weeks ago--is that our troops are overdeployed. Secretary Bill Cohen said in testimony just last week to the Defense Appropriations Committee that we have either too few people or too many missions. The fact is that this is beginning to show the wear and tear on our military. Between 1986 and 1998, the number of American military deployments per year nearly tripled at the same time that the Department of Defense budget was reduced by 38 percent. There is no question that our military is stretched. No one disagrees with that. The Department of Defense is asking for help. Congress realizes that this is a problem and has continually tried to increase the military spending, including pay raises for our military to give them more chances to live a quality of life. But the fact is that we have to do something about either overdeployment or too few numbers. In fact, our present military strategy is to deter and defeat large-scale cross- border aggression in two distant theaters in an overlapping timeframe. We have the deterrence of Iraq and Iran in southwest Asia and the deterrence of North Korea in northeast Asia. That represents two such potentially large-scale cross-border theater requirements. In addition to that, we have 120,000 troops permanently assigned to those theaters and 70,000 in addition to that assigned to non-NATO, nonspecific-threat foreign countries. The United States has more than 6,000 in Bosnia- Herzegovina and many others around the world. What we need to do is to start to prioritize where our missions are and where American troops should be deployed. On May 27 of this year, the Secretary of the Air Force announced a stop-loss program that places a temporary hold on transfers, separation, and retirement from the Air Force. This is a decision that is normally reserved for wartime or severe conflicts. And, yet, we now have in place that no one can separate from the Air Force. My amendment says it is the sense of Congress that the readiness of our U.S. military forces to execute the national security strategy is being eroded from a combination of declining defense budgets and expanded mission. It says to the President that we must have a report that prioritizes ongoing global missions, that the President shall include a report on the feasibility and analysis of how the United States can shift resources from low-priority missions in support of high-priority missions, and consolidate the use of U.S. troop commitments worldwide, and end low-priority missions. This is a report that the President would make through the Department of Defense to prioritize these missions. I believe the Department of Defense has been looking for this type of opportunity to prioritize and to say we are going to look at the wear and tear on our military and we are going to have to make some final decisions. I think when we get this report we will be able to see if, in fact, we need more military and we need to ``ramp up'' the military force strength in our country or whether we can prioritize the overseas missions and stop the overdeployment and the mission fatigue that so many of our military people have. I am very pleased to offer this amendment. I think it is a step in the right direction. It is a positive step toward relieving our very stretched military. Certainly, as we are watching events unfold in Kosovo and we are seeing more and more of our military being called up, I think it is time for Members to assess everywhere we are in the world and ask the President to prioritize those. Then Congress can work with the President to determine if we need to ramp up our military force structure or ramp down the number of deployments that we have around the world. I ask that the amendment be agreed to.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Thank you, Mr. President. I call up amendment No. 477.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. This is the amendment to ask for the report from the President on the foreign deployments with a report on where these deployments could be categorized as low priority and where there can be consolidation for reductions in troop commitments.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, parliamentary inquiry.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. No. I say to the distinguished cosponsor of my amendment, I discussed that particular issue and was told that it would be put in an addendum that would be classified if there were any such missions that needed to be disclosed.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. I would be happy with 5 minutes, and I would be happy for the Senator from Alabama to go first.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. As long as I am assured I will be able to offer it.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. I am in no need of speaking to my amendment until I am able to offer it.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. I would want to be assured from both the distinguished chairman and ranking member that if we go past the 2:30 unanimous consent deadline I would be allowed to offer my amendment if there is not an agreement.

Mrs. HUTCHISON

Mrs. HUTCHISON. I thank the Chair. I thank the Senator from Kansas for pursuing this, because I do think it is a very important amendment. I think it is very important that we ask the President to come forward and tell us if this new Strategic Concept we have all been reading imposes a new commitment or obligation on the United States. The original NATO treaty, the whole treaty, is very clear. It is a defensive alliance. That has never been questioned until what is happening today in Kosovo, which is clearly not defensive. It is offensive. NATO has started airstrikes on a sovereign nation that is not a member of NATO. So I think it is, before our eyes, evolving into a new Strategic Concept for NATO, and I think we most certainly must have the right to approve it. It is an addition to a treaty obligation that was made 40-plus years ago. Now, I am not necessarily against NATO having an offensive part of a treaty obligation, but I am absolutely certain that the Senate must approve this kind of added obligation and that we not walk away from the very important concept that a treaty sets out certain obligations and it is required to be ratified by Congress. And most certainly, we must ratify the changing of a treaty obligation from a defensive alliance to an offensive alliance. There is no question that the founders of our country chose to make it difficult to declare war. They chose to make it difficult to declare war by giving the right to Congress. They could have given it to the President, but they were going away from the English system, where the King declared war and implemented the same war. They wanted a division of responsibility, and they wanted it to be difficult to put our troops in harm's way. Indeed, every President we have had has said that it should be difficult to put our troops in harm's way; perhaps until this President, that is. So it is important that we pass this amendment and that the President certify that we either do have a new obligation or we do not. I think we do, and I think we need to debate it. As I said, I am not against NATO having some offensive responsibilities. I do question that they have in our NATO treaty the right to do what they are doing right now. I think we need to debate it, and I think we need to clarify exactly what would be in a new offensive strategy that would be a part of a NATO treaty obligation of the United States of America. I can see a role for NATO that would declare that we have security interests that are common and that we would be able to determine what those common security interests are and that we would fight them together, stronger than any of us could fight independently. I do not know that Kosovo meets that test, but I think others certainly do believe that. I do believe that a Desert Storm does meet the test or Kim Jong-Il, with nuclear capabilities, does meet that test. Mr. President, I support the amendment, and I ask unanimous consent to be added as a cosponsor of the amendment. I think it is incumbent on the Senate to stand up for our constitutional responsibility and that is what this amendment does. I thank the Chair.

Mrs. HUTCHISON

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, today, I am pleased to introduce, along with Senator Durbin, the IRA Rollover to Charity Act of 1999. This legislation has the support of numerous charitable organizations across the United States. The effect of this bill would be to unlock billions of dollars in savings Americans hold and make them available to charity. Mr. President, the legislation will allow individuals to roll assets from an Individual Retirement Account (IRA) into a charity or a deferred charitable gift plan without incurring any income tax consequences. Thus, the donation would be made to charity without ever withdrawing it as income and paying tax on it. Americans hold well over $1 trillion in assets in IRAs. Nearly half of America's families have IRAs. Recent studies show that assets of qualified retirement plans comprise a substantial part of the net worth of many persons. Many individuals would like to give a portion of these assets to charity. Under current law, if an IRA is transferred into a charitable remainder trust, donors are required to recognize all such income. Therefore, absent the changes called for in the legislation, the donor will have taxable income in the year the gift is funded. The IRA Rollover to Charity Act lifts the disincentives contained in our complicated and burdensome tax code and will unleash a critical source of funding for our nation's charities. This is a common sense way to remove obstacles to private charitable giving. Under the legislation, upon reaching age 59\1/2\, an individual could move assets penalty-free from an IRA directly to charity or into a qualifying deferred charitable gift plan--e.g. charitable reminder trusts, pooled income funds and gift annuities. In the latter case the donor would be able to receive an income stream from the retirement plan assets, which would be taxed according to normal rules. Upon the death of the individual, the remainder would be transferred to charity. Mr. President, I hope the Senate will join in this effort to provide a valuable new source of philanthropy for our nation's charities. This legislation has the support of numerous universities and charitable groups, including the Charitable Accord, an umbrella organization representing more than 1,000 organizations and associations. Mr. President, I have just returned from the Balkans. I have seen first hand the wonderful work that is being done by charitable groups in dealing with the massive refugee crisis that has occurred there. As terrible as this crisis has been, it would be worse if not for the great work that is being done by charitable groups. Our bill will help direct additional resources to those charities and thousands of others. I urge my colleagues to co-sponsor this legislation.

Mrs. HUTCHISON

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I rise to speak in favor of the emergency appropriations bill because it is an emergency, it is necessary. I have been reading all of the press reports about the bill and criticisms of the bill because it is too large or perhaps too much money has been spent on one area or another. But the fact is, we have emergencies in our country that are not covered by the budget. We have had more emergencies in our agriculture area than we ever could have foreseen. You can't pick up the paper that you don't read about a terrible tragic tornado, and we are coming into hurricane season. So we are putting more money into FEMA. We have had floods in my home State. We must deal with these as they occur, and clearly on an emergency basis. A good part of this bill is for agriculture. We are also helping our neighbors in Central America who were ravaged with a terrible hurricane and tornadoes. We are trying to do the things we have promised we would do. But since we started this emergency appropriation, we have also had a new emergency, and that is the situation in Kosovo. We are seeing, every day, what is happening there. Mr. President, it is no secret that I have spoken out strongly against the way we got into this Kosovo operation. I have spoken out against going into an operation when we didn't have a good contingency plan. I have spoken out against so much of our policy in the Balkans. I just came back from the Balkans, just over the weekend, and I met with our soldiers on the airfield in Albania, the ones who are going to be supporting our humanitarian effort and, hopefully, be part of our defenses there, whatever we may do. I went to Aviano, Italy, and met with the troops who are doing so many of these air operations that we are seeing day after day after day. And, of course, there is no question that our troops are doing a great job. They don't make the policy; they just do the mission they are given. Nobody can question their sincerity, their great attitude, and their commitment to our country. You will never meet a young man or woman in the military who isn't there because they love our country. So when I think about this supplemental appropriation--and I know I have spoken against the mission itself, the way it has come about--and I remember looking into the eyes of the young men and women who are on the front line, I think, now, can I vote not to give the money to them to have the equipment they need to do the training they need, to have the incentives that they need to be doing a very tough job in a very tough neighborhood? Well, the answer is no, I can't vote against paying for their security, because they are the security for me and my family and for every one of us who is lucky enough to live in the greatest country on Earth. So they have volunteered to give their lives so that we may live in freedom. Do you think for one minute I would vote not to give them the equipment they need to do that job? It would be unthinkable. So while we debate how we pay for it or who is responsible, in the end, I am going to vote for this bill, because I am going to support the troops who are in the field. I am going to continue to argue with the administration that we need to learn the lessons about how this operation has been handled, and I think we will. I think there is a glimmer of hope that perhaps Mr. Milosevic has seen that we are going to win and prolonging it will only hurt his own people. So there is a glimmer of hope, and a glimmer of hope is better than total darkness. I think we need to seize on that glimmer of hope and try to come to the first agreement that we must have from Mr. Milosevic--that he will stop the atrocities against the people of Kosovo. I just visited with the people of Kosovo. I visited with them in Macedonia. I visited with them in Albania. Those people have been through more than any one of us will ever know or understand. What I want now is the atrocities to stop for the ones who are still there. The ones we met with are in refugee camps. They are not comfortable, but they are safe. I want to try to help the people who are still in Kosovo, and the atrocities on them to stop so that we can then allow the people who have fled their country in terror to be able to go back in and rebuild their homes, rebuild their economy, so that they will be able to have a livelihood, so that they will be able to raise their children in their homeland without fear of a despot who would commit the atrocities that there is no question in my mind have been committed in the last 6 months and, indeed, for many years in this part of the world. So, Mr. President, while we are debating policy, while we are debating from where the money is going to come all of which is legitimate debate, while we are talking to each other about our principles, which is our right to do, but at the end of the day, it is most important that we have the emergency appropriations which would give our kids who are on the front line and their commanders everything they need so as to know that we are not going to pull the rug out from under them, that they will have the equipment, they will have the airplanes, they will have the helicopters for their own security while they are protecting yours and mine. So let's talk policy. Let's talk about never going into an operation like this again without a contingency plan. Let's talk about the treasure we have spent in this country to try to solve this problem. And let's not stop with Kosovo, because the money and the troops that we have put in harm's way cannot be lost for us to put a Band-Aid on Kosovo. Let's finish this job now. But when we have stopped the atrocities and when the Serb troops have started leaving Kosovo, and when an international peacekeeping force moves in, let's take the opportunity, let's seize the moment to do something bigger than putting a Band-Aid on Kosovo. Let's look at the Balkans and do what we can to try to help them form areas of government that have to change so that those people will be able to have jobs, start farming their land, to live in security. That is what I want for the Balkans. But continuing to say we can amalgamate the Balkans as if they were America is not going to have a long-term chance for success, because we don't understand what they have just been through in the last 5 years. We don't understand what it would be like to force people to live next door to each other when their mothers have been raped, when their fathers have been brutally murdered, when their families have had to flee in terror. Let's start today by supporting our troops. Let's start today by keeping open the glimmer of hope for peace. And then let's take one step at a time to try to help these people become a contributing part of Europe so that they can do what every one of us wants to do; that is, live in peace and freedom, to have jobs, to support our families, and to give our kids a better chance than we have. That is what the Kosovar Albanians want. It is what the Serbs want. They are the good people of Serbia--not President Milosevic. That is what the Moslems in Bosnia want. That is what the Croats want. It is what the Albanians want. And they should be able to have it. That should be our goal. I am going to support this bill. I am not going to say there are not legitimate differences about certain parts of it. Sure there are. That is why 100 of us are elected independently to represent the views we have--the views of our States. But we are required to come together. I hope the Senate will do the right thing and come together to do what is right for the farmers who are hurting, for the people in Central America who are hurting, for the people in the Balkans who are hurting, to help promote peace in the Middle East, and to continue to appreciate that we live in the greatest nation on Earth. We need to make sure we keep the security and the freedom of our country on our watch. It is our responsibility to pass this bill and talk about the policy and talk about our differences, and our Constitution that provided that we do this. Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor.