Daniel Inouye

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, this amendment has been cleared and approved by both managers.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. I move to table the motion. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 4582, as Modified (Purpose: To provide funds for preparing the application for renewal of the use of the McGregor Range at Fort Bliss, Texas)

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I am pleased to advise the Senate that the managers have approved this measure.

Mr. INOUYE. I move to reconsider the vote.

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

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

Mr. INOUYE. Considering both the cost savings and the excellent performance of UND's graduates, this program appears to be an excellent buy.

Mr. INOUYE. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 4451 (Purpose: To set aside $20,000,000 for payment to certain Vietnamese commandos captured and interned by North Vietnam)

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, on behalf of Senators Kerry and McCain, I ask for the immediate consideration of amendment No. 4451.

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

Mr. INOUYE. We have no objection.

Mr. INOUYE. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 4888 (Purpose: To set aside $10,000,000 for independent scientific research on possible causal relationships between gulf war service and gulf war syndrome)

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, on behalf of Senator Byrd, I send to the desk an amendment and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. INOUYE. I understand the concern of my friends from North Dakota. From what I have heard today, rejecting these fine young men and women for the positions for which their country has trained them does not appear to make much sense.

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

Mr. INOUYE. Yes, I am aware of this program. Has this training been cost-effective for the Army?

Mr. INOUYE. The Senator from North Dakota raises a valid point, and I know that the chairman and I will try to accommodate him should it become clear that some reallocation of B-52 funds between appropriations accounts, or further language clarification, is advisable.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, the Indian Child Welfare Act was enacted by the Congress in 1978 to secure long overdue protection for Indian children. In enacting the Indian Child Welfare Act, the Congress was concerned not only with the removal of Indian children from their families, but also their removal from their Indian heritage, culture, and identity. For the past 18 years, the Indian Child Welfare Act has served as a ray of hope and promise to Indian people striving to protect their children and the security and integrity of their families and tribal communities. While there is much debate about whether or not amendments are needed to the Indian Child Welfare Act, I have great respect for the leaders of the tribal governments who have come together to address the concerns of others notwithstanding the fact that these amendments will affect their most precious resource--the children of the native people of America. I wish to take this opportunity to make it clear to my colleagues that the amendments contained in this bill are intended to and will apply to all child custody proceedings affecting Indian children and their families.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, the Indian Child Welfare Act was enacted by the Congress in 1978 to secure long overdue protection for Indian children. In enacting the Indian Child Welfare Act, the Congress was concerned not only with the removal of Indian children from their families, but also their removal from their Indian heritage, culture, and identity. For the past 18 years, the Indian Child Welfare Act has served as a ray of hope and promise to Indian people striving to protect their children and the security and integrity of their families and tribal communities. While there is much debate about whether or not amendments are needed to the Indian Child Welfare Act, I have great respect for the leaders of the tribal governments who have come together to address the concerns of others notwithstanding the fact that these amendments will affect their most precious resource--the children of the native people of America. I wish to take this opportunity to make it clear to my colleagues that the amendments contained in this bill are intended to and will apply to all child custody proceedings affecting Indian children and their families.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. I thank the Chair. I begin by commending our subcommittee chairman, the senior Senator from the State of Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for putting together what I consider to be a very good bill, a bill that all of us should and could support. As the chairman indicated, last month the Senate adopted the conference report on the budget resolution, and that measure directed the Appropriations Committee to increase defense budget authority by $11.2 billion. The subcommittee's share of that increase is $10.1 billion. Chairman Stevens, acting in conjunction with the subcommittee, was tasked to determine how this increase should be allocated. I believe, as my colleagues review the bill, they will see that the subcommittee, under the leadership of Senator Stevens, used this increase very judiciously. The bill provides many improvements to the administration's budget requests. For example, the bill increases funding for operation and maintenance by $500 million to protect readiness. We speak of readiness, Mr. President. This is necessary if we are to implement readiness. It includes such items as $280 million for barracks renovation and repair; $150 million for ship depot maintenance and to fund 95 percent of the Navy's identified requirements; $148 million for identified contingency costs, as the chairman clearly pointed out, in the case of Bosnia; and $119 million for the President's counterdrug initiative; $50 million to clean up the environment, protect endangered species. We also add $590 million, Mr. President, to fully fund health care costs identified by the Surgeon General and DOD Health Affairs Secretary. This will allow our men and women in uniform access to health care that they deserve. Third, as the chairman pointed out, we recommend $150 million for breast cancer research, $100 million for prostate cancer research, and $15 million for AIDS research. I think all of us can be very proud of what the Army Institute of Research has done in the area of AIDS. The bill also provides $300 million for the defense missions of the Coast Guard. Fifth, the chairman has added $40 million to examine alternative technologies to dispose of chemical weapons. Mr. President, this bill has fully provided for the pay and allowances of our military personnel, including a 3-percent pay raise and a 4-percent increase in quarters allowances. One can gain an appreciation from these few examples that the committee has responded to the needs of our men and women in uniform. The bill also provides $44.1 billion for procurement of equipment, which is an increase of $6 billion above the request of the President. This increase will provide for many of the high-priority needs identified by our commanders in the field. But the total is still $1.7 billion below the level recommended by the Senate Armed Services Committee. As the committee reported the bill, this bill adds $525 million to initiate a 4-year multiyear contract for the Navy's Aegis destroyer program. According to the Navy, this recommendation will save our taxpayers $1 billion. This bill also adds $163 million to improve the Navy's EA-6B electronic jamming aircraft, and this will allow the Air Force to retire the EF-111, saving hundreds of millions of dollars. Funding of $759 million is included for equipment for our National Guard and Reserve forces to the level authorized by the Armed Services Committee. Our Guard and Reserve commanders will decide what specific equipment to purchase. The funding added by the committee for modernization responds to the concerns expressed by many of our military leaders that action is needed to ensure our forces are equipped with the world's best equipment. This bill also provides the level approved by the Senate for ballistic missile defense, $3.4 billion. While some of my colleagues may oppose this, I note that the Senate voted for this level last month. The administration identified several issues in the House bill that it opposes. The committee has responded to nearly all of its concerns, rejecting restrictive legislative provisions and funding administrative priorities. Chairman Stevens has done a masterful job in keeping this bill clean. It safeguards our national defense and the priorities of the Senate, and rejects controversial riders. As I indicated in my opening, this is a very good bill and I am strongly in favor of his recommendations. I sincerely believe it should have the bipartisan support of the Senate. In closing, may I note the following. I am certain there are many in this Chamber who will criticize the fact that we have appropriated funds over and above the amount requested by the administration. For that matter, I should note if it were not for this subcommittee, the C- 17 program would be dead. Today it is hailed by all as being the big working ship, the ship that is necessary, the plane that will carry the cargo for us. If it were not for Chairman Stevens and this subcommittee, the V-22 Osprey would be a dead bird. It is now considered the highest priority by the Marines. The great hero of Desert Storm was the F-117, the Stealth fighter, the fighter that was able to knock out all the radar stations that made it possible for our bombers to come in. If it were not for this subcommittee, the F-117 would not have been operating in Desert Storm. I would say we can take full credit for insisting upon modernizing the National Guard airlift with the C-130-H after the Air Force canceled that. Here is another historic footnote. If it were not for the action of this subcommittee, in all likelihood the central command would have been wiped out in 1990, just before Desert Storm. And we would have retired General Schwarzkopf just before Desert Storm. I think we can take credit for saving the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences. This subcommittee was instrumental in upgrading the Patriot missile program, a program that we were ready to wipe out. It was not perfect, but the Patriot saved many American lives during Desert Storm. So I just wanted to note a few of these items to indicate that, yes, we have taken the initiative to recommend items over and above that requested by the administration because, in our judgment, we felt these steps had to be taken. With that, once again I congratulate my chairman for having done a tremendous job.

Mr. INOUYE. May I add Tina Holmlund to that, too.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Madam President, I rise today in recognition of events which are taking place in the Capitol today concerning the cause of a native American, Mr. Leonard Peltier. For over 20 years, Mr. Peltier has been imprisoned for a crime that the Government now appears to be admitting Mr. Peltier may not have committed. I first became interested in this case when I viewed a documentary on one of the network television news programs in which, much to my surprise, the prosecuting attorney evinced some pride in the fact that at trial, the defense did not request and the prosecution did not produce certain exculpatory ballistics evidence which may have well effected a different outcome in the jury's verdict. Although it has been many years since I served as a prosecutor, at that time, a defendant was entitled to the production of all of the evidence that might be used against him by the prosecution, and to my knowledge the law has not changed in that regard. Thereafter, I learned that Mr. Peltier had been extradited from Canada on the basis of affadavits of eyewitnesses who later admitted that their testimony was not truthful. Although the Government apparently knew of the false nature of these affadavits, they were nonetheless presented to the Government of Canada as the basis for extradition. Over the ensuing years, it has been my belief that if these facts of apparent misconduct on the part of the government could be disproved, it would serve the interest of justice to have a full review of all of the actions and proceedings leading up to and resulting in Mr. Peltier's incarceration. Accordingly, I called upon President Bush to initiate such a review, and it is my understanding that a hearing examiner of the U.S. Parole Commission undertook such a review. Thereafter, in December 1995, I am told that a hearing was held in which the prosecuting attorney in the Peltier case acknowledged that the Government could not be certain who was responsible for the murder of two FBI agents on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation on June 26, 1975, and that rather than having evidence which would support the theory that Mr. Peltier fired at the agents at close range, the most the Government could say was that Mr. Peltier may have been firing shots at long range in the direction from which other gunfire was emanating and that in so doing, he may have aided and abetted those who were in fact responsible for the murders. Thus I was surprised to learn the Parole Commission ultimately concluded that ``the government has not changed its position that circumstantial evidence presented at your trial established your complicity in the execution of the agents.'' Even more surprising, given that Mr. Peltier has consistently maintained his innocence of the crime with which he was charged, is the Parole Commission's finding that ``[Mr. Peltier] has not given a factually specific account of your actions at the time of the offenses that is consistent with the jury's verdict of guilt, considering either theory of your participation in the crimes outlined by the government at trial.'' Madam President, in the 8 years that I served as chairman of the Committee on Indian Affairs, the committee received literally thousands of letters each week from citizens of almost every country on this globe, calling upon the United States to examine the facts and circumstances surrounding Mr. Peltier's conviction and subsequent incarceration, and urging clemency. International attention continues to be focused on what is seen by many as a matter of human rights. Madam President, it is my hope that one day soon, a nation which prides itself on being an open society will find it appropriate to reexamine Mr. Peltier's case in all of its aspects. If there is nothing to hide, as honorable men and women, we can do no less. If we find that we have been holding the wrong man accountable for these heinous crimes, let us renew our efforts to find the real culprits, and let an innocent man live out the remaining years of his life as a free man.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to the U.S. Army Veterinary Corps on the occasion of its 80th anniversary. Established on June 3, 1916, the Veterinary Corps has distinguished itself through exemplary service in two world wars, the Korean and Vietnam conflicts, Operation Desert Storm, and, most recently, in the peacekeeping operation in Bosnia. The responsibilities of the Veterinary Corps have evolved from that of equine medicine for the cavalry of 1916 to diverse roles encompassing not only the traditional role of animal medicine but also food hygiene and quality assurance, prevention of diseases transmissible between animals and man, and medical research and development. The professional excellence of the 396 officers serving in the Veterinary Corps is exemplified by the fact that 186--47 percent--of these officers are board certified in at least one specialty recognized by the American Veterinary Medical Association. As the Department of Defense Executive Agent for Veterinary Services, the U.S. Army Veterinary Corps is responsible for providing its expertise to all of the military services on a worldwide basis. Through the assurance of a safe and wholesome food supply, animal disease prevention and control, animal-facilitated therapy for hospitalized service members and families, and medical and subsistence research and material development, the contributions of veterinarians as health care providers are essential to the well-being of the soldier, sailor, airman, and marine. It is indeed a pleasure for me to salute the U.S. Army Veterinary Corps in recognition of its innumerable contributions to our national defense, and to extend my congratulations to the members of the Veterinary Corps, past and present, upon this 80th anniversary.

Mr. INOUYE

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce an amendment that would put into law a designated position and grade for the chief nurses of the U.S. Army and the U.S. Air Force. To the credit of the past and present leadership of our Armed Services, they have appointed a chief nurse in the rank of brigadier general since the 1970's. However, for the Army and the Air Force, this practice has never been codified in law, although I am pleased to note that the Navy has designated their chief nurse as a rear admiral. Our military chief nurses have an awesome responsibility--a degree of responsibility that is absolutely deserving of flag officer rank. You might be surprised at how big their scope of duties actually is. For example, the chiefs are responsible for both peacetime and wartime health care doctrine, standards, and policy for all nursing personnel. In fact, the chief nurses are responsible for more than 80,000 Army and 26,000 Air Force nursing personnel. This includes officer and enlisted nursing specialties in the active, reserve and guard components of the military. If an executive officer in a large American corporation had this much responsibility, he or she would undoubtedly have a position title and salary at least comparable to that of a brigadier general, and would certainly have a seat at the corporate table of policy and decisionmaking. You might wonder why it would be necessary to put these provisions in law since this practice is already occurring. Sadly, I am most concerned that without this official designation, these positions are vulnerable to being downgraded or even eliminated. In recent years, downsizing mandates and new ways of providing health care have led to many reorganization efforts. Unfortunately, reorganization has become a euphemism for eliminating positions--and health care reorganization has too often become an excuse to eliminate nursing positions, particularly senior and executive leadership positions. There has been much discussion about the so-called glass ceilings that unfairly impact the ability of women to achieve the same status as their male counterparts. While I do not want to make this a gender- discrimination issue, the reality is that military nurses hit two glass ceilings: one as a nurse in a physician-dominated health care system and one as a woman in a male-dominated military system. The simple fact is that organizations are best served when the leadership is composed of a mix of specialty and gender groups--of equal rank--who bring their unique talents to the corporate table. For military nurses, the general officer chief nurse position is the only way for nurses to get to the corporate executive table. Mr. President, I strongly believe that it is very important, and past time, that we recognize the extensive scope and level of responsibility the military chief nurses have and make sure that future military health care organizations will continue to benefit from their expertise and unique contributions. Mr. President, as noted, the distinguished managers of the measure have both agreed to its adoption. I urge its adoption.

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