Kay Hutchison

Mrs. HUTCHISON

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Madam President, I would like to offer a modification to my amendment that will be argued and offered by Senator Coats from Indiana. It is acceptable to me as a modification of my amendment.

Mrs. HUTCHISON

Mrs. HUTCHISON. I want to thank the Senator from Kentucky, who is a cosponsor of this second-degree amendment, for helping us with it because obviously, when the committee was putting together its bill, we did not know of North Korea's provocative actions of last week. I think it is imperative that the Senate act very decisively to say that we are not going to continue to appease a country that is clearly selling technology to rogue nations that would harm our own allies and, furthermore, is breaking an agreement they made with us in return for which we would have assisted the people of North Korea in developing peaceful energy sources. I hope, with all my heart, that North Korea will back up, that it will keep its commitment to stop building a nuclear weapon. I hope that it will step back and stop selling ballistic missile technology to rogue nations. Then it would be eligible for the money that has been fenced in this bill. But until they do, it would be highly irresponsible for the U.S. Senate to go forward with a no-strings-attached gift of 35 million taxpayer dollars that are against the interests of the United States and all of our allies. Thank you, Mr. President. And I thank the Senator from Kentucky for his leadership on this issue.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 3500.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I send a second-degree amendment to amendment No. 3500 to the desk.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I will speak briefly about what Senator McCain and I are trying to do. My amendment says that no funds will be contributed to North Korea until the President has certified that North Korea is not providing ballistic missiles or ballistic missile technology to a country, the government of which the Secretary of State has determined is a terrorist government. This adds to Senator McCain's amendment which has the same prohibition of funding for North Korea if they are continuing to build a nuclear weapon. Senator McCain and I are clearly saying that the United States will not continue to fund an agreement with North Korea that we know is being violated. The McCain amendment deals with the nuclear capability North Korea appears to be building. It would restrict the use of funds for the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization pending a Presidential certification that North Korea has stopped its nuclear weapons program as it has promised to do. My amendment adds the requirement that North Korea is not transferring ballistic missile technology to other terrorist countries. Mr. President, this week, we saw what trying to coerce and reward a totalitarian dictatorship will achieve. North Korea launched a two- stage ballistic missile toward Japan, a country which has provided emergency food relief to North Korea and wound up having a ballistic missile pass through their air space as thanks. North Korea has admitted selling ballistic missiles to raise hard currency. It has made repeated threats to restart its nuclear program, claiming that the United States has not honored its obligations. Recently we learned of evidence that the North Koreans are ignoring their part of the agreement and building a new underground site for nuclear weapons development. I raised concerns 4 years ago when the Clinton administration proposed this framework agreement. It seemed to be an all-carrot-no- stick approach to North Korea. The agreement was to help develop a peaceful nuclear program giving them 500,000 tons of heavy fuel oil. I was concerned that the nuclear weapons program would continue and that the fuel oil that we promised would be diverted to military use. I am sorry to say both seem to have occurred. The fuel was diverted almost immediately for military use. Since signing the agreement, the North Koreans have also continued to conduct military operations against South Korea, sending spy submarines into South Korean waters and discharging commandos on to South Korean territory. This is hardly the behavior of a partner to an agreement, and sending them a no-strings gift of 35 million American taxpayer dollars is hardly a responsible act for the U.S. Congress to make. The North Korean launch this week of the ballistic missile over the airspace of Japan was truly a shot across the bow of the civilized world. North Korea was warned beforehand that testing this type of missile would have a direct impact on our negotiations. They ignored the warning. We must make it clear to the North Koreans that we cannot and will not disconnect North Korean conventional military activity from the nuclear issue. Their failure to meet their obligations not to build nuclear weapons, nor to sell the technology to rogue nations, cannot be disassociated from our contribution to their country. We must stop rewarding dangerous North Korean provocations. This amendment will ensure that we do just that. Mr. President, I urge adoption of the second-degree amendment to the McCain amendment. Mr. McCONNELL addressed the Chair.

Mrs. HUTCHISON

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, the issue before us today is whether the citizens of Texas, Maine, and Vermont will enjoy the same protections as 41 other States to ensure safe and environmentally sound disposal of dangerous radioactive material. The local support is there. The Governor has assured us that there will not be a site selected until all of the scientific data shows that this is where it should go, and we are doing exactly what Congress directed us to do in creating safe places for this low-level radioactive waste. I hope my colleagues will support this, as all of the six Senators who have a direct interest in this are doing. Thank you, Mr. President. I thank the Senator from Maine. I yield the floor. Mr. WELLSTONE addressed the Chair.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Thank you, Mr. President. It is very important that the people of our country know that the people of Hudspeth County want this low-level waste authority. They in fact had an election this past May in the primaries. The county elections were held. And every opponent of the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Compact who sought office in Hudspeth County lost. I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record a letter of support from the Hudspeth County judge, James Peace, and 300 community leaders in the county in support of the compact; and, furthermore, letters from the National Governors' Association, the Western Governors' Association, the National Conference of State Legislatures, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission of the United States, the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, the University of Texas System, the Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center in El Paso, and the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio. There being no obligation, the material was ordered to be printed in

Mrs. HUTCHISON. There is one other addition I would like to have, and that is that the Senator from Minnesota have an additional 1 minute as well.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Thank you, Mr. President. I thank the Senator from Maine. Mr. President, I think it should be noted that all six Senators from three affected States are supportive of this legislation. I want to begin my remarks with the most important thing I can possibly say, and that is, I would never support a hazardous waste site in my State that wasn't in full compliance with Federal and Texas environmental laws and regulations. This is the most important of all of the things that I could possibly say. This compact came about because of Federal legislation--the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act and its 1985 amendments. They allowed States to come together, and encouraged States to come together, to find waste disposal facilities that would meet the needs of our country. In fact, all of us would love not to have any waste that would be put anywhere. But if we didn't have waste, we wouldn't have medical remedies, we wouldn't have the cures for people's diseases. That is what this waste is. It is not nuclear waste. It not high-level hazardous waste. It is low-level medical waste. The law has created 41 States that have formed 9 low-level radioactive waste compacts. Minnesota is a member of one such compact ratified by Congress in 1985. Nine compacts have been formed. And the compact that Texas, Maine, and Vermont have created is no different from these, and it seeks to provide the citizens of our three States the same protections enjoyed by the State of Minnesota and the other 40 States that have formed compacts. I think it is very important that we address the issue of how this came about. A compact agreement was negotiated by former Governor Ann Richards with the Governors of Maine and Vermont. The compact was overwhelmingly approved by the Texas State Legislature and signed by Governor Richards in 1993. That compact now enjoys the support of our current Governor, George Bush, and our Lieutenant Governor, Bob Bullock. Maine's compact was passed by their legislature and signed in 1993. It also passed a State-wide referendum. In Vermont, legislation was passed by the legislature and signed by the Governor in 1994. I don't think the Federal Government has a mandate to nullify a contract among three State Governors and ratified by their legislatures. I think it is also important that we address the local issue that has been addressed by the Senator from Minnesota. We have not yet--the three States together, nor the State of Texas-- decided on a place for this radioactive waste. However, there is careful consideration being given to Hudspeth County, which is the focus of where they are looking for the site of this low-level waste compact as a place where they are going to put the waste. Hudspeth County is the third largest county in Texas, with 4,566 square miles. It has a population of 3,200 people. I want my colleagues to know that the vast majority of the county's leadership support locating this facility in Hudspeth County as long as it is done in an environmentally safe way, which the Governor has promised will happen or it will not be created.

Mrs. HUTCHISON

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I agree with my colleagues on this very important national security issue. In particular, I agree that the words in the Committee report for this bill should not be taken to mean that membership in NATO by the Baltic states is going to be considered until there is a complete debate on the matter, that the Senate's responsibility for advice and consent on treaties is in any way predetermined in the case of the Baltic countries.

Mrs. HUTCHISON

Mrs. HUTCHISON. I thank the Senator for his leadership and his assistance and cooperation in ensuring that the intent of this important bill is allowed to be carried-out according to specific state needs and laws.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. I thank the Senator. There is, however, one final item on which I request clarification. It is my understanding that the intent of Section 194(a)(4) is to allow Texas to limit providers to provide either intake or training services as defined under section 134.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I wish to engage my colleague, Senator DeWINE, in a colloquy. I thank Senator Jeffords, and the other members of the Senate Committee on Labor and Human Resources for your collective efforts in passing H.R. 1385, the Workforce Investment Act of 1998. This bill promises to improve and revitalize our country's workforce system and will enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of our federal job training programs. As you know, Texas has been in the forefront of the remaking its state and local workforce delivery system. Beginning in 1993, Texas created a system very similar to one embodied in HR 1385. As with this federal legislation, the new Texas system is based on the principles of local control, customer service, and consolidation. In this regard, I commend you for recognizing in the bill the uniqueness and foresight of the Texas workforce system by providing flexibility in the bill for our state to fully implement its new laws. Specifically, I understand that HR 1385 provides that Texas will be able to maintain use of its Human Resource Investment Council (known as the Texas Council for Workforce and Economic Competitiveness) as defined in Texas statute and regulation to fulfill the State Board requirements under Section 111. In addition, Section 117(I) provides that Texas will be able to maintain the Local Workforce Development Boards as defined in Texas statute and regulation to fulfill the Local Board requirements under Section 117. Section 189(I)(2) provides that Texas may maintain the current local workforce board areas as defined in Texas statute and regulation to fulfill the requirements under section 116, and that no other language in HR 1385 may be construed to force Texas to change the configuration of its 28 local workforce areas. Section 189(I)(3) provides that Texas may maintain its sanctioning process for local boards. Section 194(a)(1)(A) provides that Texas may maintain it current process and formulas for allocating funds under sections 127 and 132 to its local workforce boards and that Texas may maintain it current procedures for disbursing money that is allocated to local workforce boards. Section 194(a)(1)(B) provides that local workforce boards in Texas may maintain their disbursal processes and procedures for monies provided under sections 127 and 132. Section 194(a)(2) provides that Texas may maintain the procedure as defined in Texas statute and regulation through which fiscal agents are designated by local boards for monies provided under sections 127 or 132. Section 194(a)(3) provides that Texas may maintain its process by which local boards designate or select one-stop partners and one-stop operators, notwithstanding any requirements set forth in section 121. Section 194(a)(4) provides that Texas may maintain its requirements that service providers shall not be permitted to perform both intake and training services. Section 194(a)(5) provides that Texas may maintain the roles and functions of its state board (otherwise known as the Texas Council for Workforce and Economic Competitiveness) and that no requirements for elements of state plans shall be construed to force a role or function upon Texas' State Board that is inconsistent with Texas statute or regulation. Section 194(a)(6) provides that Texas may maintain the roles and functions of its Local Boards and that no requirements for elements of state or local plans shall be construed to force a role or function upon Texas' local board that is inconsistent with Texas statute or regulation.

Mrs. HUTCHISON

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, if we let the perfect be the enemy of the good, we are going to let a lot of people down who are in desperation right now. This is a good bill. I think the debate can be legitimately waged, but, please, at this late hour, as we are leaving for a month, do not fail to let us have this relief. These farmers can get credit if they can get that payment moved up. It is no new money. But they need this help. This will help my State, which is the most drastically affected at this point with this drought. I urge you, for whatever other reasons it may not have been handled right, let this unanimous consent go through. It will be to everyone's benefit who has a stake here. Let's work out the other problems when we can. We are going into a month recess.

Mrs. HUTCHISON

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Oklahoma, the Senator from Alabama, the Senator from West Virginia, who have all made very strong statements about their commitment and the commitment of Congress to support our troops. It is our responsibility to do this. I want to answer a couple of points that were made. Somalia--the argument was made that troops were not provided equipment and we lost 18 rangers. That is exactly correct. I would hold up Somalia as the very reason that we should be doing something today to protect our troops in the field--because, in fact, in Somalia Congress was never consulted. The decision not to send the equipment was made by the Pentagon. It is precisely because Congress was not consulted and was not committed to this that it failed so miserably. The mission creep in Somalia is exactly what we are trying to avoid in Bosnia today. And that is why I have this amendment on the floor. Let us talk about precedent. On July 31, 1989, there was a resolution requiring the President to reduce the number of U.S. forces in Korea. That is exactly what I would hope that we would do today. Nine years ago, almost to the day, Congress met its responsibility. This was an amendment that specifically asked the President to come forward with a plan to have gradual reductions in the number of U.S. military personnel stationed in the Republic of Korea. This is exactly what we are doing today. We are saying, in this appropriations bill for this fiscal year, that we should reduce the number of forces so that the President can go to our allies and start negotiating for a more equitable spread. That is exactly what we did in Korea. With Korea we said, ``The Republic of Korea should assume increased responsibilities for its own security.'' This was an amendment that was sponsored by Senator McCain, Senator Nunn, Senator Warner, Senator Exxon, Senator Dixon, Senator Wirth, Senator Shelby, Senator Thurmond, Senator Cohen, Senator Wallop, Senator Gorton, Senator Lott, and Senator Coats. This is exactly what I hope we will do today. It is the responsibility of Congress to provide support for our troops. We cannot stand by and watch our military disintegrate, lose our most experienced warriors, put them in harm's way, and do nothing. Have we lost our backbone in 9 years? Or have we lost our compass? Have we lost the will to do what is right for this country? Congress is responsible for providing the support for our troops. And I hope that we will meet our responsibility today. Thank you, Mr. President. And I yield the floor. Mr. McCAIN addressed the Chair.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Thank you, Mr. President. I will withhold until the Senator from Michigan uses his time that was allocated, and then I will finish.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. I had 10 minutes. I authorized up to 3 minutes for Senator Sessions and up to 3 for the Senator from Oklahoma.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I yield up to 3 minutes to the Senator from Oklahoma.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I yield 3 minutes to the Senator from Alabama.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. That will be fine. I thank the Senator.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. After Senator Byrd speaks, I would be allowed at least 5 minutes to close?

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I would like to be able to close.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Will the Senator also allow others who said they would like to speak on this amendment to speak and then move to table?

Mrs. HUTCHISON

Mrs. HUTCHISON. This is the amendment on Bosnia that we will discuss immediately following the stacked votes this afternoon. I am happy to yield the floor.