Frank Lautenberg

Mr. LAUTENBERG

Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. Mr. President, yesterday the Majority Leader made a long statement on behalf of Senate action on S. 2180, the ``Superfund Recycling Equity Act,'' which he introduced earlier this year. This legislation would clarify that persons who merely recycle certain specified materials, but did not dispose of those materials, are not subject to Superfund liability. Today, Mr. President, I join as a co-sponsor of this legislation. And, I note for the record, that I was the author of the recycling provision in 1993. I included it in comprehensive Superfund reform legislation, S.1834, which I introduced when I was Chairman of the Senate Superfund Subcommittee. As Senator Lott noted yesterday, this provision has reappeared in every major, comprehensive Superfund bill since then, whether authored by Democrat or Republican. And it has been introduced in every Congress, by Democrats and Republicans, as stand- alone legislation. There is broad-based, bipartisan support for this legislation which would remove impediments to recycling efforts. It now appears that some type of liability relief for recyclers will be considered by the Environment and Public Works Committee next week, although it is not clear exactly which of several proposals will be considered. For this reason, Mr. President, I would like to bring to the Senate's attention two other very similar provisions which I believe should be considered in conjunction with S. 1280. They are designed to expedite the revitalization of communities all across this country, and to provide relief to untold numbers of small business owners, small non- profits, and individuals who sent only ordinary household trash to landfills that are now Superfund sites. Mr. President, once it became clear that the Congress would not act on comprehensive Superfund legislation this year, and the Majority Leader expressed his interest in enacting a liability exemption for certain recyclers, I suggested that we also take the very modest step of enacting a similar exemption for brownfields development and for those who innocently disposed of municipal solid waste at landfills that later became Superfund sites. I wrote to the Chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, asking that the Committee consider exemptions for brownfields and municipal solid waste (MSW) disposal, should it take up any liability exemptions--because brownfields and MSW exemptions also enjoy broad, bi-partisan support and have been regarded as non-controversial. The Chairman responded that he opposed so-called piecemeal reform of Superfund, and that the Committee would not be considering such legislation this year. In deference to this judgement, I deferred introducing separate legislation. Now that the Committee apparently will be considering liability exemptions for recyclers, I hope we will also have an opportunity to consider exemptions for brownfields and MSW. Mr. President, as is the case for recyclers, provisions to clarify the law on liability for brownfields development and MSW have been included, with bipartisan support, in every comprehensive Superfund bill since 1993. In virtually every regard, they meet the same criteria that have been offered to justify enacting exemptions for recyclers. They are simple clarifications of existing law to correct unintended consequences of the Superfund liability scheme. They have gained the support of all stakeholders, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Justice, and the national environmental community. The brownfields and MSW ``fixes'' are minor, but are critical for successful brownfields development, or to those subjected to unfair and unintended litigation. They do not involve cleanup standards or natural resource damages. They do not deal with orphan shares or municipal liability. And they offer significant economic and environmental benefits. Why, then, should the Senate reject consideration of these ``fixes?'' Only one reason is offered: that they should be held hostage to comprehensive Superfund reform! Mr. President, it is argued they are so popular, and enjoy such broad ranging support, and provide such significant benefits to the nation, that we should hold them hostage to see if they provide a stimulus for action on comprehensive legislation in the next Congress. It is argued that they should be held as ``sweeteners'' to try to sweeten the sour pot of proposed changes to the Superfund program that have been rejected by three successive Congresses. Mr. President, with all due respect to those making this argument, I think it is wrong to prevent enactment of legislation that enjoys broad support, and would reap acknowledged benefits, as a tactical matter to achieve unrelated goals. I think this disserves the public and adds to public cynicism. For a variety of reasons, efforts to radically change Superfund, the nation's toxic waste cleanup program, have failed for six years running. Toward the end of each of the past two congresses, many Senators, including this Senator, have argued that we should move ahead with achievable reforms that are non-controversial and permit our people, our communities, and our economy to benefit from their enactment. Today, as we head into the final weeks of this Congress, I make the same plea. Just as holding recyclers hostage to comprehensive Superfund reform has not worked, so holding brownfields development and persons who disposed of household trash hostage to other legislative goals is a failed strategy. It will not mitigate the controversy intrinsic to the broader issues raised by comprehensive legislation. Yet, it robs communities across the country of the jobs and tax ratables that flow from revitalized brownfields and imposes severe penalties on the individuals and small businesses caught up in a litigation nightmare through no fault of their own. Mr. President, in the last Congress, the Majority party insisted on an all or nothing Superfund strategy. But, when that failed, lender liability legislation was passed in response to a strong lobbying effort by lenders who, understandably, wanted relief from liabilities that were unfair and made no sense. I supported lender liability relief because I thought it had public benefits and corrected an injustice. In these last weeks of the 105th Congress, a similar game plan is unfolding. Thousands of recyclers around the country are asking for liability relief--relief they deserve, in legislation I support. They have skilled representatives making their case, and I do not fault them for that. In fact, I support their efforts. But, as a Senator from a state with literally thousands of brownfields sites, as well as altogether too many instances of homeowners and small businesses mired in litigation at landfill sites, it is my responsibility to lobby for those communities and individuals who don't have lobbyists representing them here in the Congress. We, as their elected representatives, are their lobbyists. We are their voice. There is no reason in the world why this Senate, and this Congress, should not move forward to make the minor, non-controversial, and eminently sensible changes to Superfund law that impede brownfields development and rob small businesses of their hard earned profits. Mr. President, I hope my colleagues will consider the plight of persons who disposed of household waste, or office trash, such as cafeteria waste or paper waste, at the local town dump. I am talking about homeowners, pizza parlor owners, and Girl Scouts who, as unbelievable as it may sound, have been dragged into Superfund litigation. They have not been sued by EPA. They have been sued, primarily, by large corporations who disposed of toxic waste, some by dark of night, at a dump alongside solid waste from homes and small businesses and restaurants. Through two Congresses now, the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee has heard testimony from Barbara Williams, the owner of Sunny Ray Restaurant, who was named as a fourth-party defendant in litigation concerning the Keystone Sanitation Company, Inc. Superfund Site, in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. Indeed, the whole country heard her saga, when she was interviewed on ``60 Minutes.'' How did Barbara Williams get ensnared in Superfund litigation? EPA sued 11 companies that dumped hazardous waste from industrial processes at the Keystone Landfill for a period of years, but did not want to clean it up. These 11 companies sued 180 third-party defendants, who in turn sued 590 fourth-party defendants, including Barbara Williams. But Mrs. Williams sent only mashed potatoes and other restaurant waste to the Keystone Site. Those suing her told her she could get out of the lawsuit if she would pay them $75,000. Mr. President, a $75,000 assessment is a lot of money for most small businesses, and Barbara Williams is no exception. Further, Barbara Williams is not a polluter. No one at the Department of Justice, the EPA or in the Congress believes she should be liable under Superfund for sending mashed potatoes to the local garbage dump. Nor does anyone believe she should have to pay staggering lawyers' fees to get herself out of this litigation nightmare. Congress could, and should, act now to free Mrs. Williams and get all those like her out of the litigation web. Mrs. Williams, her business, and her family should not be held hostage to some notion that if we wait to grant her justice another two years, or four years, we will enact highly controversial changes to the Superfund program. Comprehensive Superfund legislation will have to rise or fall on its own merits. Barbara Williams should not become a pawn in this legislative battle. Likewise, Mr. President, this body should ask the same questions about removing obstacles to brownfields development. Brownfields are often in cities, but also are located in many, many suburban and even rural areas. They are abandoned, or idle, former industrial properties. Some of these are contaminated, some are not. But it is the fear that these properties are contaminated that some say deters investors from buying them and redeveloping them. Mr. President, there are more than 500,000 brownfields staining this country's landscape. The nation's Mayors estimate they lose between $200 and $500 million a year in tax revenues from these properties sitting idle. Returning these sites to productive use could create some 236,000 new jobs. Our nation's Mayors, as well as developers and bankers, say immediate action is imperative, since new tax laws provide incentives for brownfields redevelopment, but expire in 2001. Congress should act before we adjourn to remove the unintended burden of Superfund liability that deters investors from buying and developing brownfields properties. Brownfields development results in significant economic benefits. It creates jobs and tax ratables for communities, which lowers local tax burdens on residents. The cleanup of brownfields also removes contaminants from our environment. These cleanup initiatives are win/win opportunities that make good environmental sense and good business sense. Mr. President, if this body takes steps to encourage recycling, which I support, I urge my colleagues to also take steps to encourage brownfields development and to free our nation's small business owners from the unfair and punitive penalties being assessed on them. It is in the interest of good government, and clearly in the interest of millions of Americans, that we do so. Let's act now to revitalize our communities. And let's act now, and let Mrs. Williams discharge her lawyer. Mr. President, the legislative language which would provide relief from brownfields and MSW liability is well known to all who have followed this debate. But, for the convenience of my colleagues, I ask that a summary be printed in the Record. The summary follows: Summary of Senator Frank R. Lautenberg's ``CERCLA Liability Exemptions Act of 1998'', containing a total of four exemptions, three in the brownfields arena and one in the municipal solid waste (MSW) arena. The proposed legislation would relieve the following persons from Superfund liability: (1) Brownfields-- (a) Bona fide prospective purchasers--persons who seek to buy contaminated properties, and can show that they did not cause the contamination; (b) Innocent landowners--persons who already own property that they did not know was contaminated; and (c) Contiguous landowners--persons who own property that becomes contaminated as a result of contaminants migrating from neighboring properties or areas; and (2) Municipal Solid Waste-- individuals; small businesses (less than 100 employees); and small non-profit organizations (less than 100 employees) who disposed only municipal solid waste (ordinary household trash, or house-hold-like trash, such as cafeteria or office paper waste) at a landfill. The exemptions were replicated, almost verbatim, in S.8, except that S.8 would have shifted the exempt MSW party's share to the Trust Fund. Our Democratic substitute did not assign a share to the exempt MSW party, nor did S. 1834, the consensus bill reported out of EPW on an 11:4 vote in the 103rd Congress.

Mr. LAUTENBERG

Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I rise in strong support of this resolution. I am pleased that we are passing this resolution on the second day of Hispanic Heritage Month because Puerto Ricans, like all Hispanic Americans, have made a great contribution to the culture and economic growth of America. There are nearly 4,000,000 American Citizens who live in the Islands of Puerto Rico. They are an integral part of our nation, they pay taxes and serve and die in our nation's military. Furthermore, there are millions of American Citizens with Puerto Rican heritage who live on the continent, hundreds of thousands of whom live in New Jersey. In many ways, New Jersey is a second home for Puerto Ricans. I strongly believe that the American citizens who live in Puerto Rico should have the right to a democratic vote to determine the future status of these islands. I am pleased that such a referendum will take place in December. After this vote, Congress should take the appropriate legislative action that reflects the will of the American citizens living in Puerto Rico. And I will work with my colleagues to make sure that this happens. I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.

Mr. LAUTENBERG

Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I rise to pay tribute to the Latino community. As we celebrate Hispanic Heritage Month, I want to recognize the contributions made by millions of Latinos in our nation. New Jersey is a truly multi-cultural state and I am honored to help represent this vigorous community in the United States Senate. Mr. President, this month we celebrate a community with leadership which is notable in every facet of our society; which continually commits to family, education and business; and which is a vital force in our economy. Latinos have persevered, often under difficult situations, yet remain hopeful even as they strive for change. Hispanic elected officials and community leaders work to increase involvement in the electoral process, break the cycle of poverty and improve people's lives. Many Latino soldiers have made the ultimate sacrifice in giving their lives for the common good of our country. Today, I want to honor these brave Americans and their families. And I also want to honor Latina/o heroes and heroines like the late Julia de Burgos, Arturo Alphonso Schomburg, Cesar Chavez, Roberto Clemente, Puerto Bibliophile and Don Pedro Albizu Campos among others. These teachers, advocates, athletes, and activists have brought pride to their community, enriched our country, and provided role models for all of us to emulate. I commend the Latino community for its courage and persistence and want to warmly acknowledge the talent and vitality its expanding population brings to our nation. I thank the community for leading by example, and for promoting a national policy agenda which highlights very basic human necessities that should be the right of every American. Mr. President, a democratic and prosperous society, such as ours, should not step back from a national commitment to provide assistance to those who strive to achieve the American dream, despite the odds. In particular, I want to emphasize the importance of a quality education for the success of Latino children. Our Latino young people are a great source of strength and hope for the future and they should be able to participate fully in the American experience. We should not cut off benefits to children, the elderly, and disabled immigrants who entered our country legally and may have no other means of survival. Quality child care, early childhood development and work training initiatives are also critical investments that can make all the difference to Latino children. Mr. President, I am proud to honor New Jersey's Hispanic community today and to have the opportunity to ensure that Latino contributions, insights and sacrifices do not go unnoticed.

Mr. LAUTENBERG

Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, today I wanted to announce that I am cosponsoring legislation authorizing the National Park Service to acquire and add lands to the Morristown National Historical Park. The Morristown National Historical Park is an important Revolutionary War site and this bill would authorize the Park Service to acquire lands from a willing seller to prevent the encroachment of modern residential and commercial development in an effort to preserve the visitor's experience of the park's historic landscape and enable the park to retain its rural character. The Morristown National Historical Park was established in 1933 and hosts approximately 550,000 visitors a year. The park preserves the sites that were occupied by General George Washington and the Continental Army during this critical period where he held together, during desperate times, the small, ragged army that represented the country's main hope for independence. General Washington chose the area for its logistical, geographical, and topographical military advantages, in addition to its proximity to New York City, which was occupied by the British in 1779. The site proposed for acquisition would be a 15 acre parcel near the Jockey Hollow Encampment Area of the park and prevent further degradation of the parks vistas. I invite my colleagues to join me in support of this legislation which will ensure that an important historical site for New Jersey and the nation is protected.

Mr. LAUTENBERG

Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, today I wanted to announce that I am cosponsoring legislation authorizing the National Park Service to acquire and add lands to the Morristown National Historical Park. The Morristown National Historical Park is an important Revolutionary War site and this bill would authorize the Park Service to acquire lands from a willing seller to prevent the encroachment of modern residential and commercial development in an effort to preserve the visitor's experience of the park's historic landscape and enable the park to retain its rural character. The Morristown National Historical Park was established in 1933 and hosts approximately 550,000 visitors a year. The park preserves the sites that were occupied by General George Washington and the Continental Army during this critical period where he held together, during desperate times, the small, ragged army that represented the country's main hope for independence. General Washington chose the area for its logistical, geographical, and topographical military advantages, in addition to its proximity to New York City, which was occupied by the British in 1779. The site proposed for acquisition would be a 15 acre parcel near the Jockey Hollow Encampment Area of the park and prevent further degradation of the parks vistas. I invite my colleagues to join me in support of this legislation which will ensure that an important historical site for New Jersey and the nation is protected.

Mr. LAUTENBERG

Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, late last week the Majority Leader indicated that the Senate would be unable to complete efforts this year to reform the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act as it pertains to remediation waste. For many months, Senators Lott, Chafee, Smith, Baucus, Breaux and I have worked on ``rifle-shot'' legislation in this area. I regret that we were unable to bring these negotiations to a successful conclusion. However, I believe that we made a lot of progress in narrowing differences and developing a bill that could have improved the RCRA hazardous waste cleanup program through a series of responsible reforms. Our work provides a solid foundation upon which to build in the next Congress. Mr. President, last fall, in October, the GAO issued a report recommending targeted reforms which, in conjunction with adequate resources for state and federal agencies, could have resulted in substantial savings in cleanup costs; encouraged treatment remedies; and sparked brownfields cleanup and redevelopment efforts. As Chairman of the Subcommittee in the Senate with jurisdiction over these issues for many years, and more recently as Ranking Democratic Member, one of my priorities has been to encourage such efforts, and to return these contaminated parcels to valuable uses. I believe such reforms can yield substantial national economic and environmental benefits while protecting human health and the environment. Such reforms would especially benefit my state of New Jersey, which is one of the five states with the largest volume of remediation waste. For these reasons, I was pleased that Senators Lott, Chafee and Smith invited Senator Baucus and me to join in developing a targeted consensus reform package. We spent many hours at this effort and we reached agreement in a number of areas. I regret that we did not come to final closure on this legislation. I want to thank my colleagues and the Administration for the considerable efforts they all made in thoughtfully resolving many of the complicated issues in this debate. I want to also thank Senator Breaux, who has been instrumental in championing reform in this area. Finally, I want to thank the many and varied stakeholders--representatives from industry, environmental organizations, as well as state and local agencies and community groups--that provided us with inestimable assistance in understanding this highly complex statute. Mr. President, I regret that we did not have the chance to resolve all of the issues this year. We made significant progress in resolving a host of thorny questions. The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act has significantly reduced the generation of hazardous waste, and prevented new generations of Superfund toxic waste sites. I am optimistic that we can resume this process next year and achieve responsible reforms at that time. I pledge myself to these efforts.

Mr. LAUTENBERG

Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I rise to introduce that resolution along with my colleague, Senator Torricelli, expressing our pride and our admiration for that very special group of youngsters from New Jersey. New Jersey has a national philosopher who dwells in its boundaries. His name is Yogi Berra. He is often quoted and I quote him now. I recall he said, ``It's like deja vu all over again.'' For another time, a New Jersey Little League team has won the prestigious Little League World Series championship, a group of exciting youngsters under the age of 12, vigorous sports figures now. I have seen them on television. I understand the 11-year-old pitcher got a request for marriage from an admirer. I don't think that is what he was striving for, but it happened. The honors accorded this group have been spectacular. This past Saturday, the Toms River East American Little League team clinched the honor, defeating Kashima, Japan, by a score of 12 to 9 to win the 52nd annual Little League World Series Championship. They are affectionately known as ``The Beasts of the East,'' these little guys. They are pretty good. They received a hero's welcome Sunday upon return home from the five-game series in Williamsport, PA, where they defeated teams from Jenison, MI, Cyress, CA, Tampa, FL, and Greenville, NC, before their final game with Japan. They are the fourth New Jersey team in history to win the Little League World Series and the first U.S. team in 5 years to win this title. Toms River East American has brought pride to its community and the entire State of New Jersey. They join the ranks of the New Jersey teams from Hammonton, the 1949 Little League champions; Wayne, NJ, the 1970 champions; and Lakewood, champs in 1975. All of the young men on the team deserve hearty congratulations for an incredible season. I give you their names: Mike Belostock, Eric Campesi, Chris Cardone, Chris Crawford, Scott Fisher, Brad Frank, Joe Franceschini, Todd Frazier, Tom Gannon, Casey Gaynor, Gabe Gardner and R.J. Johansen. These 12 young men are not only fine athletes, but they are also outstanding young people. They showed poise and dignity, and if one saw them in that game on national TV, unparalleled enthusiasm under pressure. Their manager, Mike Gaynor, and coaches, Ken Kondek and Joe Franceschini, Sr., all volunteers, shepherded these youngsters through a 28-game season. I commend them for their hard work and their dedication on behalf of Toms River's children. But I also must congratulate the parents, the families and the fans of the team's players who supported these young sluggers through thick and thin. They traveled long distances to root for their children, and they are truly the heroes behind the champions. Mr. President, I am pleased that the entire U.S. Senate will have a chance to join with me and Senator Torricelli in recognizing the accomplishments of not only the Toms River East American team, but also the greater Toms River community. New Jersey and the Nation owe a debt of gratitude to the ``Beasts from the East,'' their parents, families, friends and fans for allowing us to celebrate this important achievement. As Yogi Berra said, ``I'd like to thank all of those who made this night necessary.'' With that, I yield the floor. Mr. TORRICELLI addressed the Chair.

Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the resolution was agreed to.

Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I thank the manager and ranking member on the Foreign Operations Subcommittee for giving us these few minutes of time. This is kind of a happy moment in New Jersey. One of our communities, Toms River, has produced a special group of young people who have won the Little League World Series. I send a resolution to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. LAUTENBERG

Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, today, Senator Kennedy and I join together, as we have in the past, in a ceaseless effort to provide some degree of justice for the families of the victims of the terrorist attack on Pan Am 103. This flight was brought down over Lockerbie, Scotland on December 21, 1988. 259 people on the plane and 11 others on the ground were killed. Most of the victims were Americans, making it the most fatal terrorist atrocity in American history. Two Libyan security agents have been charged with this heinous crime. They must be held accountable before a United States or United Kingdom court. The United Nations Security Council has imposed sanctions in an effort to make this happen, but for years this has brought no results. Recently, Secretary of State Albright proposed that the two suspects in the bombing of Pan Am 103 be tried in a Scottish court, under Scottish law, with a panel of Scottish judges, but physically located in the Netherlands. Libyan authorities have publicly accepted this proposal while calling for negotiations. I remain skeptical of Libya's willingness to cooperate with the international community in bringing terrorists to justice. But I also remain hopeful that the families of the victims will soon be able to end their painful wait for justice. I therefore believe we should give this potential solution an opportunity to work, while remaining determined to see the indicted terrorists brought to trial. The amendment we are introducing today therefore sets a reasonable time limit for action. It also calls for the imposition of additional multilateral sanctions measures, even including an embargo on oil exports, if Libya fails to turn over the bombing suspects for trial. The families of the victims of the Pan Am 103 bombing understand that nothing will bring back their loved ones. Nothing we do here can change that. But by adopting this resolution today we send the clear message that we are determined to see justice served and we will continue to increase international pressure on Libya until that happens.

Mr. LAUTENBERG

Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to an individual who dedicated his life to public service, and who died leaving that legacy as a model for all of us. Alan Gibbs began his career in Baltimore, Maryland. After serving several years on the National Labor Relations Board he joined the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission right here in Washington, D.C. His work at the EEOC was recognized by his peers when he received the Commission's meritorious service award. Wherever Alan served there was always public acknowledgment of his contributions. New York City, Seattle and my home state of New Jersey were fortunate beneficiaries of Alan's energy, tenacity and commitment to bettering the lives of others. In 1977, Alan was appointed Assistant Secretary of the Army by President Carter. He was awarded the Distinguished Civilian Service Award--an honor not many are given but few deserve as much. In New Jersey, Alan served as the Commissioner of the Department of Human Services. During his tenure, Alan made sure that individuals were not lost in the shuffle or became faceless statistics. He was always compassionate and caring. The principle that guided his tenure, and is his most enduring legacy, was to give each individual the resources to live a life with dignity and hope. The job was not easy, but Alan got it done. Alan also gave of his time to teaching. He recognized the importance of education and helped equip students for their careers. Mr. President, I extend my deep condolences to Alan's wife Barbara, and their children Jordan, Philip and Cynthia. The outpouring of tributes to Alan are in reality a celebration of his life. I hope they bring comfort and a measure of joy in remembrance to his family.

Mr. LAUTENBERG

Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I rise in support of the nomination of Ray Bramucci for the position of Assistant Secretary of Employment and Training in the Department of Labor. Mr. President, I have known Ray for many years. He is a man of enormous integrity, deep commitment to public service, and is ready and anxious to take up his responsibilities at the Department of Labor. Ray has a passion for making things better, and believes strongly in lifelong education and job training for our youth, especially our disadvantaged youth. He will give this job his full measure. I urge the Senate to move rapidly to confirm him. A leading figure in New Jersey politics and public affairs, Ray's expertise in labor-management relations, job training initiatives, employment services, and policy development provides a solid foundation for overseeing the administration of agency programs as Assistant Secretary. From 1990 to 1994, Mr. Bramucci served as Commissioner of the New Jersey Department of Labor. In this position, he was a key cabinet member and principal advisor to the Governor on matters of both statewide and national impact, particularly in regard to economic development, education and training, and labor relations. Mr. Bramucci also served as Chief Executive Officer of the New Jersey Department of Labor, an agency charged with workforce training and preparation, protecting workers from exploitation, and providing income security through benefit programs for injured, ill, and unemployed workers. While in office, he successfully created and implemented a number of ground breaking initiatives, including the Workforce Development Partnership, a program which has helped to train and upgrade worker skills since July 1992 and is training over 15,000 workers today. He helped to establish the nation's first state-funded program to provide extended unemployment benefits to workers who had exhausted their regular claims, as well as the New Jersey State Employment and Training Commission and the Employment Security Council, two national leaders in reforming and revitalizing the worker security system. To the position of Assistant Secretary, he would also bring the skills he acquired in his 22 years of service as part of the International Ladies' Garment Workers' Union. During this time, he rose from shop floor worker to eventually become the senior executive and key negotiator for the Union, in which he played a central role in negotiating hundreds of individual and industry-wide contracts. From 1979 to 1990, he was Director of New Jersey Operations for our former colleague, Bill Bradley. Ray was the eyes and ears for Senator Bradley in New Jersey, and a key adviser to him on political and policy matters. It was during this period that I got to know Ray well, and then when he served as Labor Commissioner. In recognition of his many accomplishments, he has been named to the Executive Board of CDS International, Inc., the Commission Board of the New Jersey Black Achievers Program of Business and Education, and President of the New Jersey Caucus Education Corporation. Mr. President, the Assistant Secretary for Employment and Training is charged with directing Department programs and ensuring that programs funded through the agency are free from unlawful discrimination, fraud, and abuse. Ray Bramucci has the experience and commitment to assume these responsibilities with sensitivity and skill. He will make an exceptional Assistant Secretary. I thank my colleagues for confirming Ray Bramucci so he can get on with the job. nomination of patrick T. henry to be assistant secretary of the army for manpower and reserve affairs

Mr. LAUTENBERG

Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I yield 3 minutes of the time I have to the Senator from New Mexico.

Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, first, I want to hear the response of the Senator from New Mexico, because in a private conversation we just had here there was an assurance that I would like to hear publicly made and then I will be able to respond.

Mr. LAUTENBERG. Very quickly, I am pleased to hear the assurances. First, I commend the Senator from Iowa for bringing this to our attention because we were both of the same mind. Even as I read the letter sent to Senator Stevens and Senator Thurmond, to me, it looked like we were going to be put in a position where defense was going to be particularly well treated, and nondefense was going to be left out. But we have had an interesting colloquy here, a dialog, and I trust the chairman of the Budget Committee. I work with him all the time and have great respect for him. When he gives us an assurance that there will be no distinction, or no difference between the treatment given to defense and nondefense, I don't have to go a lot further. We have heard it. We have heard it directly from the chairman. We have heard it in this public forum. Mr. President, I yield the time I have in the interest of moving this along.

Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I say to the distinguished chairman that I am going to be very brief, in view of what has just been said. I trust the chairman of the Budget Committee. There is some time available, is there not, Mr. President?

Mr. LAUTENBERG

Mr. LAUTENBERG. Madam President, I would like to express my support for the amendment offered by Senators Snowe and Reid. I applaud the efforts of these two Senators in bringing to our attention the inequities that exist for men and women in federal health care plans. Most federal employee health care plans (FEHBP) cover a wide range of prescription drugs without covering prescription contraceptive drugs. In fact, almost all federal insurance plans fail to cover all five of the most widely used forms of contraception. Ten percent have no coverage of contraception at all. A health care plan's refusal to cover contraception is effective discrimination against women. Access to contraception should be a basic health benefit for female federal employees. And women should be able to choose the best method of contraception for them, depending on their medical history and personal health care needs. If adopted, this amendment will certainly help lower the rate of unintended pregnancies and reduce the need for abortion. That result is something positive on which we can all agree. The Federal Government should be conscientious and fair about how it treats its employees. It should be a model for private insurance plans, guiding them to provide the best health care possible for those who enroll in government-sponsored plans. Not allowing access to a full range of contraceptive services to the women who work in our own Senate offices, to the civilian employees in the Pentagon, to FBI and DEA agents, and to the female officers on the Capitol Police Force, to name a few examples, is unfair and essentially creates a two-tiered health care system for public and private sector employees. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

Mr. LAUTENBERG

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

Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I rise in opposition to this amendment, which eliminates the Tax Code without an alternative. Mr. President, I heard it said that we ought to ``pull it out by its roots,'' get rid of it now. Well, I would hate to go to a dentist with a toothache and have the dentist say, ``You know what, we are going to look at this tooth. First, we will pull it out by its roots, and then we will look at it.'' That is what is being proposed here, Mr. President. This amendment would get rid of the Tax Code, but without any indication of what would replace it. Instead, we could be left without any revenues to operate the government. We could be left with no revenue to support our military and protect our country. With no revenue to buy the weapons systems we need for the future to advance our country technologically. Mr. President, this amendment will create tremendous uncertainty in the business community. They're not going to know when they can make investments and when they cannot. For example, they will not know whether the R&D tax credit will be available. That is an important part of the code. But businesses will not know whether it will remain available if this amendment is enacted. Mr. President, I ran a big company that now employs 31,000 people. I started this company with two other guys, poor people from New Jersey. We built the company by planning ahead and making investments, often because we knew that there were tax benefits that we could count on. But if this amendment is approved, other entrepreneurs will not be able to make similar plans. What the distinguished Senator from Kansas is saying is, ``Wait, before you do any investing, let's get rid of the Tax Code. Wander where you want through the jungle for a couple of years, and that will make the Congress respond.'' I don't understand it, I must tell you. Sometimes I think I work in a different place from some of my colleagues, because the references are to ``them.'' ``They will never get it done unless we pull it out by its roots.'' ``They will never get it done unless we make the pain excruciating.'' ``Fear of shutting down Government, fear of being unable to operate, that will make them move.'' Who is the ``them'' and who is the ``they''? Who is the ``we'' and who is the ``us''? We are all in this together for the American people. Look at the economy. I hear about this oppressive Tax Code and the number of pages, and ``Compare it to the Holy Bible.'' ``Holy cow,'' that is what I say, ``holy cow.'' What are we going to do? Are we going to weigh these things? Do we want to buy a scale here and say if it weighs less than a certain number of grams, pounds, ounces, it is OK? But if it weighs over that, overboard? Go to the business community and ask them what they think about throwing it all away. They will tell you that we would only be punishing ourselves. Mr. President, I agree that the Tax Code is too complicated and too cumbersome. But the way to solve that is to offer something positive. It is to offer a real alternative. I also would point out, Mr. President, that eliminating the whole tax code could undermine much of the progress we have made in recent years. We have gone from a deficit of $290 billion six years ago, to a surplus that is now projected to be $60 billion. And for the next decade, we will have $1.5 trillion to pay down our debt. But this amendment would reverse this progress. It says that we want to play political games. That is what this is about. This is almost becoming a national sport here. It is not football, baseball or basketball, it is politics. We are going to take away the revenue code. Do you know what? You are not going to feel it, Mr. Citizen. Everything is going to be hunky- dory. And do not worry if the FDA can no longer approve new drugs. And do not worry if the National Cancer Institute can no longer do the research needed to help defeat breast cancer or prostate cancer or to help the newborn grow up healthy--no. No. We are going to fix the revenue code. But you are not going to have to pay any price. You know, Mr. and Mrs. America, you know there are free lunches all over this place. You don't have to pay for anything. Listen, no one here likes taxing people who work hard for their money. The President certainly doesn't. He says: Provide tax relief for families who send their children to child care so that they can go out and work. Provide relief to support education, so that we can have the best educated society on this Earth. That is where we want to give tax relief--to ensure that our children can get a good education. That is especially important in our age of technology in the new millennium. Mr. President, I come out of the technology business. I am, immodestly, called, ``a member of the Hall of Fame of Information Processing.'' My company was one of the earliest in the computer business, and we learned that technology is the way to the future. We helped start an industry called the computing industry. It is different than the computer industry. The computer industry is the hardware. The computing industry is all else. It is programs. It is engineering. It is all those things. It is an industry that is dramatically improving efficiency in so many ways. Mr. President, from my experience in the business community, I know the problems that would be created if we simply rushed out and eliminated the entire tax code without a replacement. It would be a serious mistake. Yes, the Tax Code ought to be simpler. Yes, people ought to pay less. But you don't get something for nothing in life. You don't get it in a country club, you don't get it in a schoolroom, and you don't get it in the United States of America. We have seen what happens with those countries where they have codes that say you don't have to pay--communism. You don't have to pay. They produced a society in Russia that is almost flat broke, dispirited, broken down, can't produce a product. We say let the free market operate, and let the Tax Code reflect what the objectives are; to build a society, to invest in this society, to give people a chance to get an education, to know that when they are 65 years old that Social Security is going to be there and its purchasing power is protected. What a remarkable thing we are witnessing today, and how in a few words here we like to disparage it. ``It don't work. It ain't good. Get rid of it.'' Here we produced surpluses when deficits were the rule. And we want, now, led by the President of the United States, to shore up Social Security so somewhere in the 2070s--it is pretty obvious I won't be running by then; I might, though--we want to make sure Social Security is there for our children, for our grandchildren. That is what we are doing now, and it is all part of a fiscal plan. You can't throw out the revenues without throwing out the expenses. I am sure the Senator from Kansas would say, ``Of course.'' Well, what expenses? The expenses for the military, the expenses for research, the expenses for development, the expenses for education, the expenses for clean air, the expenses for operating our national parks, the expenses for leaving a legacy for our children, that tell them there are still fish in the oceans, fish in the streams, so that they have something to look forward to. No; the mission is destroy first and then decide what you are going to do next. I spent 3 years in the Army, and I never had that. We always knew what the mission was before we started out on it. Mr. President, I am a member of the Budget Committee. I am the senior Democrat on the Budget Committee, and I expect that a point of order will be raised against this amendment because it violates the budget rules. I hope that our colleagues respond appropriately. I respect those who differ with me, but I will tell you this: If a company I was investing in decided that they couldn't figure out what the revenues were going to be and they wanted to operate and just go ahead and see what happens, make all kinds of investments, I would get out of there in a hurry. There is not a company in America who will make big investments if they do not know what the tax treatment is going to be. I am going to yield the floor, but I hope my colleagues are going to join me in standing up for what is right for America and do things in an orderly fashion. I have heard the plea made so many times: Why can't we operate like a business? Why can't we operate like families do? We want to do just that. We want to operate just like a business that plans its actions, lays it out on a piece of paper and says, ``This is going to be our revenues, this is going to be our expenses, and this is where we want to be 5 and 10 years from now.'' Instead, we now have a proposal that says, ``What we can do, ladies and gentlemen, and the board of directors and the president of the company, is we are going to ask you to hold your breath, we are going to make the investment anyway and take the chance it is going to come out right.'' Fire that guy. I yield the floor and hope that my colleagues will assess the threat that this reckless proposal poses to our Government, our Nation, and our economy. Mr. HUTCHINSON addressed the Chair.

Mr. LAUTENBERG

Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I rise to recognize one of the few schools operating in America today dating from the pre- Revolutionary war days. The Newark Academy in Livingston, New Jersey, is celebrating its 225th anniversary this year, and deserves great recognition for its dedication to excellence in education since its formation in 1773. For students who prove to have strong academic ability, the school offers a traditional college preparatory program and over 50 interscholastic athletic teams. With a commitment to diversity, the Newark Academy represents 15 countries, 85 communities, and since 1964 has been fully co-educational. The Academy's motto, translated as ``toward enlightenment,'' is apparent throughout the workings of the school. With 548 students between the 6th and 12th grades, this day school launches many youngsters on a path towards enlightenment, adulthood and higher education. The Newark Academy's ability to grow and adapt to our changing educational needs, complexity of our society and the ever advancing world of technology has contributed to the strength of the Academy and established it as an example for other educational institutions to follow. I congratulate the administration, faculty and students of Newark Academy for the school's superior performance and wish them the best in the years to come.

Mr. LAUTENBERG

Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, the Senate's Transportation Appropriations bill for fiscal year 1999 which the Senate will approve today is of vital importance to the state of New Jersey. As the most densely populated state in the nation, efficient and effective transportation is critical to the economic well being of my state, as well as to the quality of life of its residents. The Senate's transportation appropriations bill provides over $900 million in transportation investments to my state. In addition, New Jersey will receive tremendous benefits from investments in Amtrak services, in the William J. Hughes FAA Technical Center in Pomona, in the U.S. Coast Guard training center in Cape May, the Coast Guard air station in Pomona, and in the airports in our state, particularly Newark International Airport. This investment provides good paying jobs in the short-term, and in the long-term, it will create and maintain the infrastructure that New Jersey needs to attract and keep a strong workforce. Ultimately, these investments will serve to reduce congestion, improve air quality, and enhance New Jerseyans' quality of life. Mr. President, I would like to highlight some of the important provisions in the Senate's bill which I was able to secure for the Garden State. Transit is an intricate part of Northern New Jersey's transportation plan. The single largest component of New Jersey's mass transit initiatives is the Urban Core. I was pleased to secure $70 million that will go toward additional design and construction of the Hudson-Bergen Light Rail link. This rail line will reduce congestion and increase mobility, and will spur economic development in the communities along the Hudson County waterfront and into Bergen County. It will improve air quality, and provide needed construction, operation and maintenance jobs. In addition, the $12 million that is provided for the Newark- Elizabeth Rail Link is the first significant infusion of federal dollars that will seriously initiate this project. This mass transit project will first link Broad Street Station to Penn Station in Newark, extending past Newark International Airport, through the City of Elizabeth and into Union County. Also part of Urban Core, the Newark- Elizabeth Rail Link is an integral part of the ``Circle of Mobility'' that will serve to reduce congestion, improve air quality, and enhance New Jerseyans' quality of life. To date I have secured over $600 million for Urban Core projects. In addition to the Urban Core and transit formula assistance, the bill makes a number of bus and bus facility projects eligible for federal assistance. Among those are the Market Street bus maintenance facility in Paterson, New Jersey Transit jitney shuttle buses, Newark, Morris and Essex Station access and buses, the South Amboy regional intermodal transportation initiative and New Jersey Transit clean fuel buses. The bill also allocates $4 million to the National Transit Institute at Rutgers University, of which $1 million will go toward mass transit workplace safety training. Mr. President, I strongly believe that Amtrak is a critical component of our nation's transportation system, particularly in New Jersey and throughout the Northeast corridor. It provides safe and effective transportation to millions of customers every year, reducing congestion on our roads and in our skies. If Amtrak were not operating, there would be 18,000 cars a day on New Jersey's already dense highways. This is untenable for my state. Despite many difficulties, I am pleased that the Senate bill provides $555 million for Amtrak's national rail operations. This funding is in addition to the $2.2 billion in capital funding provided by the Amtrak Reform and Accountability Act of 1997. This investment will allow Amtrak to continue its operations for another year and further enable it to reach its goal of self- sufficiency by 2002. Mr. President, the bill also includes a general provision concerning a High Occupancy Vehicle lane along I-287 in New Jersey. The provision would allow the state to remove the HOV restrictions without being required to reimburse the federal government for construction costs. A few years ago, I secured $140 million for the HOV lane in an appropriations bill at the request of the state. Now operational, the HOV lane is clearly not working, as only 72 cars an hour are using the lane, significantly less than the 600 cars expected. Currently, a state can appeal to the federal government to decommission an HOV lane without having to pay back the funds if it successfully makes the case that it is not ``in the public interest.'' Since the I-287 lane was directed by statute, the federal government does not have the authority to approve a state's appeal. The general provision allows New Jersey to appeal to the Federal Highway Administration that the lane is not in the public interest, and if the Secretary concurs, the state will not have to pay back the $140 million. No one is more committed to cleaner air, energy conservation, and innovations to cut traffic congestion than I. HOV lanes have worked in certain settings and I support them where they are successful. But, in New Jersey, it may be that our traffic patterns, work schedules and other issues make it difficult for the I-287 HOV lane to work. This provision removes a significant financial hurdle if the HOV lane is proven to be a failed lane. Mr. President, to make roads in New Jersey as productive as possible, the Senate bill includes $6 million for intelligent transportation system initiatives in New Jersey. These funds will go to advance projects already underway and managed by TRANSCOM, a consortium of 14 state and local agencies in the NY/NJ/CN metropolitan area. TRANSCOM is responsible for developing and coordinating the region's traffic management and incident detection system through the deployment of significant investments in intelligent transportation systems. Over half of the congestion on the region's roadways is due to traffic incidents and it is TRANSCOM's mission to improve inter-agency response to such incidents. Mr. President, transportation is the lifeblood of New Jersey and aviation is in the center of it. I am pleased to cite a number of provisions in this bill that improve upon the state's aviation system. First, the bill includes $11 million for the redesign of national air space, of which $3 million will be used to focus the FAA's efforts of redesigning the airspace in the New Jersey/New York metropolitan area. This funding will kick-off the redesign process, which will hopefully alleviate congestion and improve aircraft operations in the region's already dense and complex airspace, leading to fewer delays and reduced air noise levels. I was also pleased to secure $100,000 for a ``technical assistance grant'' for a community group to retain the services of an expert to ensure that citizens are represented and included during the FAA's redesign effort. I was also pleased to secure funding that will greatly improve operations at Newark International Airport. The bill provides $2 million to begin work on installing state-of-the-art radar upgrades and runway-monitoring improvements that will reduce delays and enhance safety at the airport. Moreover, the bill includes report language that recognizes the cooperative effort among the FAA, the Port Authority of New York/New Jersey, and airport users to make Newark Airport among the best in the country. The language directs the FAA to report quarterly on the progress of the cooperative working group and outlines the various equipment and initiatives that are priorities for the airport. The bill also includes report language expressing concern about staffing and equipment needs at New Jersey/New York area towers, the New York TRACON and the New York Air Traffic Control Center. This language will serve to direct the FAA to do all it can to improve the safety and efficiency of these facilities. And, the bill includes a provision directing the FAA to ensure that the air traffic controllers serving all the major FAA facilities in the region--air traffic control towers, the New York TRACON and the New York Center--are compensated equally. The FAA's proposed reclassification scheme would create a pay gap that does not recognize the equity of the work performed at the facilities and will force the experienced controllers serving the towers to go to the Center and the TRACON. The language prevents this from happening. Moreover, the bill fully funds the Hughes Technical Center in Pomona. The Technical Center is the world's premier aviation testing and development center, with state-of-the-art facilities and an impressive workforce. The bill provides funding to continue the good work at the Tech Center. Mr. President, I strongly supported funding for the Office of Pipeline Safety, and I am pleased that the bill provides $32.7 million for pipeline safety programs, with $1 million set aside for One-Call programs. These programs require anyone who is going to dig-- contractors, utilities, for example--to find out the exact location of pipelines before they break ground. We in New Jersey know all too well the damage that a pipeline accident can have on victims of pipeline eruptions, and particularly to the community. Four years ago, around midnight, on March 24, 1994, a major natural gas pipeline ruptured in Edison, New Jersey, a densely populated, urban environment. This rupture caused a deafening boom, awakening residents of the Durham Woods apartment complex and changing their lives forever. The explosion was caused by third party damage, something a strong one-call program would address. Thus, the bill includes language emphasizing the importance of One-Call programs in preventing accidents. Two-thirds of all pipeline accidents are caused by people who dig without knowing of the locations of pipelines. Mr. President, the bill also provides $2 million for the Biomechanics Consortium, of which the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey (UMDNJ) is a member. These institutions study the effects of motor vehicle crash injuries on adults and children, resulting in the deployment of more effective life-saving safety devices. These life- saving funds are extremely important and I am pleased that the bill funds this program. Mr. President, the Coast Guard has an important presence in our state and I am pleased that it is well funded. In addition to the assistance provided to the air station in Pomona and the training center in Cape May, the bill fully funds the Coast Guard's Container Inspection Program (CIP) at $3.6 million. The CIP addresses environmental and safety problems posed by improper transport of containerized hazardous materials into U.S. ports. I established this program in 1994 to address the environmental and safety problems posed by improper transport of containerized hazardous materials into U.S. ports. This was highlighted by the 1992 Santa Clara casualty, in which several containers of highly toxic arsenic trioxide were lost overboard off the New Jersey coast, posing a substantial threat to the marine environment and its resources. Following this, the Coast Guard conducted intensive, targeted inspections and discovered wanton and widespread violations of container handling and packaging regulations. This program serves to prevent such casualties and protect the marine environment. Mr. President, having better, more efficient transit systems, roads, airports and all other transportation systems will improve the quality of life for thousands of residents and visitors to New Jersey on a daily basis. I am glad that as Ranking Minority Member of this Transportation Appropriations Subcommittee I was able to secure this funding, as well as the bill and report language for New Jersey. I appreciate the generosity shown by the Chairman of the Subcommittee, Senator Richard Shelby, who has been most cooperative and helpful throughout the process. His work will serve all New Jerseyans and the nation well.

Mr. LAUTENBERG

Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. LAUTENBERG

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

Mr. LAUTENBERG. No. We support the amendments and urge their adoption.

Mr. LAUTENBERG. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. delaware river, pennsylvania its deployment project