Carl Levin

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, let me thank the Senator from Nevada for not only all of his help in getting bills passed but also in realistically assessing situations, which is part of his job. I must say, given the amendments we already know of, while I am hopeful, too, of completing action on this bill at some point this week, I do not see how the hopes, as expressed here, can come to reality, given the substance of some of these amendments. Again, the Kosovo amendment alone, I think, would precipitate a significant, lengthy debate on this floor, given all of the circumstances and the length of time which that subject has already required for debate, and the fact that we are in the middle of a conflict right now, and the ramifications for that conflict and the signals which would be sent to the prime creator of that conflict, Mr. Milosevic. It would be a lengthy debate, I think. I would like to finish this bill by Wednesday, too, but I just can't see, given that amendment and other amendments which are significant, that that is a realistic assessment.

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

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, with the passage of the Juvenile Justice bill today the Senate took a positive step forward in addressing the youth violence that we have sadly seen far too much of in recent weeks. One month ago today, we watched in horror as children turned violent against other children, and we asked ourselves why? Today, again, we've seen the horror of a high school student firing a weapon at his schoolmates. There is no one cause of this youth violence, the causes are many but the common denominator in all of these school shootings cannot be ignored or denied: the easy access our young people have to guns. If there is one silver lining in what happened at Littleton it's that this event has become a catalyst for the Senate to finally begin to overcome the disproportionate influence of the gun lobby and to close a few of the gaping loopholes in our federal gun laws which give our youth such easy access to guns. Over the last few weeks, with the Juvenile Justice bill on the floor of the Senate, we have taken important steps to strengthen our current laws. We have passed legislation to prohibit juveniles from owning semiautomatic weapons and large capacity ammunition devices. We have banned the importation of big ammunition clips, which have been flooding into the United States by the millions. The Senate passed an amendment requiring that handguns be sold with trigger locking devices to protect children. And just this morning, the Senate, by one vote, the deciding vote cast by Vice President Gore, passed legislation to regulate the sale of firearms at guns shows, ensuring juveniles and others cannot use these shows as a convenient way to circumvent the safeguards applied to normal sales through licensed gun dealers. Mr. President, I believe it's clear that the American people support the actions we have taken. In fact, I am hopeful that we will build on these first steps, for example, to ban semiautomatic assault weapons and handguns for persons under 21 years of age. This may be one of our most important tasks yet. According the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms' Youth Crime Gun Interdiction Initiative, the two most frequent ages at which crimes are committed with gun possession are 18 and 19. In 1997, 22% of those arrested for murder were 18, 19 or 20 years old. This legislation clearly falls short of closing all of the loopholes which allow our youth easy access to deadly weapons. However, in the wake of the tragedy at Littleton, the Senate has taken critical steps forward. This is a victory for the good sense of the American people over the entrenched interests of NRA lobbyists in Washington. Mr. President, in addition to preventing our youth from having access to deadly weapons, we must also ensure that schools have access to proven violence prevention programs designed to meet the particular needs of the students. The bill provides $250 million in grants for projects that allow schools to partner with the U.S. Department of Justice and police officers in crime prevention; $113 million for creative on-site school violence prevention programs and alcohol nd drug counseling; and amends the Elementary and Secondary Education Act to make funds available for training in school safety and violence prevention, crisis preparedness, mentoring and anti-violence programs.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to the Jewish Community Council of Metropolitan Detroit, which is celebrating its 60th anniversary on May 23, 1999. The Jewish Community Council brings together more than 200 Jewish community organizations under one umbrella, enabling the community to act in a unified way on issues of shared interest and concern. The Council's activities include building partnerships between people of different faiths and ethnic backgrounds, working to strengthen Metropolitan Detroit's Jewish community, and providing information to state and federal legislators about important issues. The people of Metropolitan Detroit have always been able to count on the Jewish Community Council for assistance. The Council administers an annual food drive conducted by a broad-based coalition of community organizations, provides volunteers to an interfaith effort to revitalize economically distressed areas of the City of Detroit, and has fought to restore food stamps for legal immigrants. One of the Council's most impressive achievements is its continuing effort to build bridges between people of different backgrounds. Some of the programs sponsored by the Council include the Detroit/Israel Student Exchange and Seeds of Peace program. The Detroit/Israel Student Exchange sends Detroit Public School students to Israel, and the students subsequently host Israeli teens at their homes in Detroit. Seeds of Peace is an innovative program which works to achieve lasting peace in the Middle East by bringing together Arab and Israeli teenagers at a summer camp in Maine with daily conflict-resolution sessions led by professional American, Arab and Israeli facilitators. The Council also works with other ethnic communities to welcome new immigrants to Michigan and to provide swearing-in ceremonies for new American citizens. As I travel across America and too often see people disconnected from each other, I am more and more certain that the strong sense of community in the Jewish community is a pillar of our strength and an essential path to our well-being. The Jewish community comes together to educate our young, house our seniors, take care of immigrants, and provide culture and recreation. I watched this sense of community with wonder when I was a boy and I see it with great pride as a man. This deeply felt sense of community--of being part of something larger than our individual selves-- is a vital part of who we are. The Jewish Community Council serves as the ``public face'' of this extraordinary community and I know my colleagues will join me in offering congratulations on its 60th anniversary, and in wishing the Council continued success in the future.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, the Santorum amendment aims at trying to reduce the number of tragedies that result when persons convicted of serious offenses obtain early release and then repeat the offense. But the mechanism it selects to advance that goal is so unworkable that it will undermine its laudable purpose. The same crime is defined differently by different States. Average terms of imprisonment imposed by States are different from average actual lengths of imprisonment. Indeed, that is part of the problem. Those are just two of the unworkable parts of Sec. (c)(1)(C)(ii). One big problem in Sec. (c)(1)(B) is that the cost of incarceration of an individual can't be known unless one can predict his or her life expectancy. An unworkable procedure will not help this cause. It will set it back, I am afraid, and I cannot vote for it.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I have great sympathy for the motives and objectives of the Senator from Colorado in offering this amendment. We all want to support the appropriate service and memorial for victims of such tragic events. However, I did not support the Allard amendment because, in my judgement, it too broadly states a view regarding constitutionality under the First Amendment and arbitrarily singles out memorials for victims who are slain on the campus of a public school, excluding memorial services involving victims of slayings during a robbery or other event not on the school's campus or victims of a tragic accident, for example. Also, I do not believe that the Senate should take the step of authorizing the Attorney General to become involved in litigation on one side or the other.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, violence in television shows, video games, and movies horrifies us as parents and grandparents. However, I support the tabling of the Hollings amendment because, in my judgment, it would have gone too far in giving the Government the responsibility for keeping violent television programming away from our children. The principal responsibility belongs in the hands of parents and grandparents. Putting this responsibility in an agency like the FCC to determine what is too violent and what is not is not only of questionable constitutionality, it would foster the idea that the Government should be doing this job. That confuses and defuses the clear message to parents that the principal responsibility is theirs. We should give parents the tools to do this as we have tried to do through the ``V-chip'' filtering technology. The first V-chip equipped televisions are expected to become available this summer. We should also focus the principal responsibility on parents, so that the V-chip is effectively used.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. I thank my good friend from California, and I commend her and the Senator from Rhode Island and others who are actively pursuing this very important amendment. Mr. President, I believe that the tragedy in Littleton, Colorado struck a chord with every American. Three weeks ago, we watched in disbelief as children turned violent against other children, and we asked ourselves why. There is no single answer to that question. The violence in movies, on television, and in video games alarms us all. Our culture is surely far too violent. But, in these school shootings, we see one crucial common denominator: guns. Guns kill some 35,000 people in the United States each year. We've grown so accustomed to the carnage that guns cause that only the most horrific acts of violence are capable of shaking us from our slumber. We paused in the Senate to observe a moment of silence to pay tribute to those who died at Columbine High School and to express our sympathy for their loved ones. But now with this latest tribute for the victims in Littleton behind us, we need to be anything but silent. There is no one cause of youth violence, the causes are many. But among them there is one that cannot be ignored or denied: the easy access our young people have to deadly weapons. Violence in television shows, video games and movies horrifies us as parents and grandparents. But these same programs and those same games are the predominant entertainment in many other countries, as well, which have a small fraction of our gun murder rate. Look at our border with Canada. In 1997, the U.S. death rate involving firearms was about 14 per 100,000 people. The rate for Canada was less than one-third of that, about 4. Canadian towns on our border watch exactly the same T.V. and movies we do. Their kids play the same video games as ours. In 1997, there were 354 firearm homicides in Detroit; across the river in Windsor, Ontario, one fifth its population, there were only 4. The crucial difference is the easy availability of firearms in the U.S. If we equate the populations, that would mean that on an apples and apples basis, Windsor would have had 20 firearm homicides. They watch the same television, they watch the same movies, and they play the same video games. We had 354 firearm homicides in Detroit; Windsor has 20 on a comparable basis. The crucial difference isn't, then, the atmosphere of violence which pervades too much of our environment; the critical, crucial difference is the easy availability of firearms in the United States. No matter how severe this plague of gun violence is for society as a whole, for the young it is far worse. For young males, the firearm death rate is nearly twice that of all diseases combined. One hundred and thirty-five thousand guns are brought into U.S. schools every day, according to an estimate by the National School Board Association-- 135,000 guns every day brought into our schools. Guns are not the cause of violent emotion, but guns are the predominant cause of violent killings and murders when such violent emotions are acted out. There are numerous loopholes in the Federal gun laws which I think would surprise most Americans. The Feinstein amendment before the Senate addresses loopholes which allow youth access to, for instance, the assault weapons which have been discussed. Most of these are commonsense proposals. Ten years ago, maybe now a little longer than that, former Senator Barry Goldwater first heard that a madman walked into a schoolyard in Stockton, CA, with a rapid-firing AK-47 and shot off 100 rounds in 2 minutes, killing 5 children and wounding 30. Senator Goldwater said, ``I'm completely opposed to selling automatic rifles, and I have been a member of the NRA. I collect, make, and shoot guns. I've never used an automatic or semiautomatic for hunting. There is no need to. They have no place in anybody's arsenal.'' Senator Goldwater was right when he said that assault weapons have no sporting purpose. How many more tragedies will it take before, at a bare minimum, we take assault weapons and large ammunition clips out of the hands of children? This amendment does that. I hope this Senate will give its support. I commend the Senators from California and Rhode Island.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I am proud to be an original cosponsor of the bill introduced today by Senator Moynihan which will help to reduce some of the financial strain that teaching hospitals are currently experiencing due to Graduate Medical Education (GME) cuts put in place under the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (BBA). The teaching hospitals in this nation are the very best in the world. There are over 1,200 teaching hospitals in the United States, 57 of which are in my own state of Michigan. Although these hospitals are providing excellent care while training residents, they are currently facing dire financial circumstances brought about by the growth of managed care combined with GME payment reductions. Additional Medicare payment reductions are currently scheduled to be phased in as per the BBA. A major teaching hospital in my own state, the Detroit Medical Center (DMC), trains over 1,100 residents each year. The DMC stands to lose a total of $53.8 million from IME reductions for Fiscal Years 1998-2002. It is important that we continue to support the DMC and other teaching hospitals, not turn our back on them. I believe that the survival of our valuable teaching hospitals is at stake if we do not act now which is why I have cosponsored this legislation. This bill will freeze the Indirect Medical Education (IME) adjustment factor (the IME is the part of the GME payment that reflects the higher costs, such as more intensive treatments, of caring for patients at teaching hospitals) at the FY 1999 level of 6.5 percent, thereby rolling back about half of the IME funding cuts in the BBA. In total, this provision restores about $3 billion over 5 years and $8 billion over 10 years in IME funding for teaching hospitals. Our medical schools and affiliated teaching hospitals conduct a great deal of the research and medical education which benefits everyone in America. The University of Michigan is one of the most prominent teaching institutions in the country. The UM is currently doing important prostate cancer research while providing health care to citizens from every county in the state. It is imperative that we allow this research to continue while we are on the verge of new discoveries in medical science. Mr. President, I hope the Senate will pass this important legislation.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I am proud to be an original cosponsor of the bill introduced today by Senator Moynihan which will help to reduce some of the financial strain that teaching hospitals are currently experiencing due to Graduate Medical Education (GME) cuts put in place under the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (BBA). The teaching hospitals in this nation are the very best in the world. There are over 1,200 teaching hospitals in the United States, 57 of which are in my own state of Michigan. Although these hospitals are providing excellent care while training residents, they are currently facing dire financial circumstances brought about by the growth of managed care combined with GME payment reductions. Additional Medicare payment reductions are currently scheduled to be phased in as per the BBA. A major teaching hospital in my own state, the Detroit Medical Center (DMC), trains over 1,100 residents each year. The DMC stands to lose a total of $53.8 million from IME reductions for Fiscal Years 1998-2002. It is important that we continue to support the DMC and other teaching hospitals, not turn our back on them. I believe that the survival of our valuable teaching hospitals is at stake if we do not act now which is why I have cosponsored this legislation. This bill will freeze the Indirect Medical Education (IME) adjustment factor (the IME is the part of the GME payment that reflects the higher costs, such as more intensive treatments, of caring for patients at teaching hospitals) at the FY 1999 level of 6.5 percent, thereby rolling back about half of the IME funding cuts in the BBA. In total, this provision restores about $3 billion over 5 years and $8 billion over 10 years in IME funding for teaching hospitals. Our medical schools and affiliated teaching hospitals conduct a great deal of the research and medical education which benefits everyone in America. The University of Michigan is one of the most prominent teaching institutions in the country. The UM is currently doing important prostate cancer research while providing health care to citizens from every county in the state. It is imperative that we allow this research to continue while we are on the verge of new discoveries in medical science. Mr. President, I hope the Senate will pass this important legislation.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, this is National Hospital Week, and one of Michigan's hospitals, Spectrum Health in Grand Rapids, Michigan, is being honored by the American Hospital Association (AHA). National Hospital Week gives health care workers, volunteers, and other health professionals the recognition that they deserve for all the care they provide. Spectrum Health has been singled out by the AHA for its Universal Infant Hearing Screening program, located at Spectrum's Downtown Campus in Grand Rapids. This program is the recipient of the AHA's prestigious Hospital Award for Volunteer Excellence, an award which highlights special contributions of hospital volunteers. Spectrum's Universal Infant Hearing Screening program identifies potential hearing loss in all babies born at or transferred to the Spectrum Health Downtown Campus. It is well known that such early identification and intervention can prevent a hearing problem from becoming a handicap. Universal Infant Hearing Screening volunteers must undergo extensive training to prepare for this program. After the volunteers administer the screening, audiologists review the test results to identify infants with potential problems. Those infants with abnormal results are referred for re-screening or diagnostic testing. Without the work of the volunteers, it would be impossible to provide this vital service to the thousands of babies born at Spectrum Health every year. Mr. President, I would like to congratulate Spectrum Health for its award winning program.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize Macomb County, Michigan for its tribute to a brave World War II soldier, Private First Class Walter C. Wetzel. With the dedication of a bust of Private Wetzel at the new county administration building, Macomb County will recognize the selfless actions of an American war hero. Walter C. Wetzel entered the United States Army in Roseville, Michigan and served in European theater. Private Wetzel was an acting squad leader with the Antitank Company of the 13th Infantry in Birken, Germany, during the early morning hours of April 3, 1945, when he detected strong enemy forces moving in to attack. Private Wetzel alerted his comrades and immediately began defending their post against heavy automatic weapons fire. Under cover of darkness, the Germans eventually forced their way close to the American position, hurling two grenades into the room where Private Wetzel and others had taken up firing positions. Shouting a warning to his fellow soldiers, Private Wetzel threw himself on the grenades and absorbed their entire blast, suffering wounds from which he died. The supreme gallantry of Private Wetzel saved his comrades from death or serious injury and made it possible for them to continue the defense of their post. His unhesitating sacrifice of his life was in keeping with the highest traditions of bravery and heroism. Because of his actions, Private Wetzel was posthumously awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor. Private Wetzel and his courageous deeds have considerable meaning to his family, and to the residents of Macomb County and the State of Michigan. Private Wetzel is the only person from Macomb County to receive the Congressional Medal of Honor. His life has been honored by the Michigan State Legislature and an important street in Macomb County was named Pfc. Walter Wetzel Drive. Mr. President, Private Wetzel is an example of the selfless and courageous commitment our soldiers display every day. I know my colleagues will join me in saluting Macomb County for its recognition of Private First Class Walter C. Wetzel and the sacrifice of the men and women of our Armed Services.

Mr. LEVIN

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

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I have an amendment which I am likely to offer, but I need to engage in some floor discussion with the managers prior to making that decision. I think it may take about a half an hour to an hour to go through a discussion with the managers on this subject. It is a very important subject. It has to do with whether or not the SEC is going to be able to regulate the purchase and sale of stock when they are done by banks. The SEC sent me a letter yesterday strongly objecting to language in this bill, and what they are pointing out is that the language in the committee report is different from the language in the bill. I want to talk to the managers about an amendment which would incorporate in the bill what the committee report says is the intent of the bill. It is possible that this will be accepted because this is committee report language which I am trying to get into the bill, but I do not know until after we go through the discussion process on the floor. I just want to alert colleagues that could take perhaps a half an hour to an hour.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, Senator Schumer is a cosponsor of an amendment which I am now offering which reads as follows. It is fairly short. I simply want to read this amendment. Then I will send it to the desk. The amendment has now been accepted by the manager of the bill. I think it will help somewhat to allay some concerns in this area. But the critical issue is what will come out of conference. That, of course, we don't know. But this is the language of the amendment, which I will be sending to the desk on my behalf and on behalf of Senator Schumer. It is the intention of this act, subject to carefully defined exceptions which do not undermine the dominant principle of functional regulation, to ensure that securities transactions affected by a bank are regulated by securities regulators notwithstanding any other provision of this act. The intention is to keep the principle that securities transactions will be regulated by securities regulators, and acknowledges that there could be some carefully drafted exceptions which do not undermine the dominant principle. That, it seems to me, would be an improvement in this area. I want to again thank my friend from Texas for looking at this language, indicating that it would be acceptable to him, and then, of course, the proof of the pudding as to whether we are really protecting purchasers of stock through the regulators who are there to protect purchasers and sellers of stock will be determined in conference. But the general principle enunciated in this amendment would go to conference as the principle that is governing this bill. I also want to thank my good friend from New York, because he has worked so closely with me on this issue. I can't yield the floor to him. But I will yield the floor. But, before doing so, and I know he does wish to speak for a few minutes, I will send the amendment to the desk. Amendment No. 317 (Purpose: To ensure bank securities activities are regulated by securities regulators)

Mr. LEVIN. I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. LEVIN. I yield the floor but hope the Senator from New York will be recognized briefly for a comment.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, in a moment I am going to send an amendment to the desk. But I want to explain exactly the reason for this amendment. A couple of days ago, I wrote to the Securities and Exchange Commission and asked them what their reaction was to the bill as drafted in terms of protecting investors. The answer that I got back from Arthur Levitt dated May 5 is that the provisions of the bill raise serious concerns about investors' protection, and, if adopted, could hamper the Commission's effective oversight of U.S. security markets. The letter also indicated that: A loophole exempting bank trust activities from Federal securities laws would, therefore, seriously weaken the commission's ability to protect investors. And: Adoption of the bank trust exemption in S. 900, in addition to other securities provisions in the bill, would undermine the important investor protections that make our markets the most transparent, most liquid in the world. It is for these reasons that the commission strongly opposes the bill. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the letter from Mr. Levitt be printed in the Record.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I also received a letter from the North American Securities Administrators Association. This is the association that was organized in 1919, and consists of the 50 States' securities agencies that are responsible to protect investors. The letter from the North American Securities Administrators Association indicates very strong problems with this bill, because, in its words, sections 501 and 502 would allow the bank to act as an investment adviser if the bank receives a fee, and ``as currently drafted, despite the claim that S. 900 would facilitate functional regulation of the securities activity in banks, banks will remain largely exempt from regulation as either a broker or dealer under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934.'' This is very, very troubling. This is a very big issue, because it is stated in the report which accompanies the bill that the bill generally adheres to the principle of functional regulation, which holds that similar activities should be regulated by the same regulator, and that the bill is intended to ensure that banking activities are regulated by bank regulators, securities activities are regulated by securities regulators, and insurance activities are regulated by insurance regulators. The report that accompanies the bill indicates that the intent is to adhere to the principle of functional regulation, which would mean that securities regulators would indeed regulate securities transactions, but the securities regulators write us that that is not what the bill does because of the way in which the exemption is drafted in the bill; that in effect all purchases and sales of stock by banks could be run through a trust department and be exempt from the Securities and Exchange Commission protection and from local regulations. That is a major problem with the bill. When you are a securities regulator, and when the people who are there intending to protect the public who are buying stocks indicate strong opposition to the bill based on that, it seems to me that some alarm bells ought to be going off in this Chamber. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the letter from the North American Securities Administrators Association be printed in the Record.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the testimony of the Secretary of Treasury Rubin before a House commerce subcommittee be printed in the Record.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I thank my friend from Texas, as well as the Senator from Maryland, for their work, but particularly the Senator from New York. Amendment No. 310, as Modified

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, earlier this week I addressed the Economic Club of Detroit, one of the most influential groups of community leaders in my State. I expressed the depth of my continuing concern about the level of violence in our society, particularly youth violence. I committed myself to continue to speak out against the easy access to guns, especially by young people. I intend to comment on this subject every week in the Senate, when the Senate is in session, to highlight the need of our Nation to face this critical issue, to discuss the growing crisis fueled by weapons among our young people, and to urge action to meet our responsibility in the Senate to work towards solutions. There is no one cause of youth violence. The causes are many. But among them there is one that cannot be ignored or denied, the easy access to deadly weapons for our young people. If we are honest with ourselves, we will admit it is too easy for children to get their hands on guns because we made it too easy to get guns, period; too easy to get guns that have nothing to do with the needs of hunters and sportsmen, guns that are too often used to kill people. Yes, we have all heard the glib rhetoric of the NRA, that ``guns don't kill people, people kill people.'' This bumper-sticker logic obscures the real truth. People with guns kill people, and they do it some 35,000 times a year in this country. That is more deaths than we suffered in the 3-year-long Korean war. The number of times that handguns were used to commit murder is itself staggering, some 9,300 times in the United States in 1996. In that same year in Japan, a nation almost half our size, there were 15 murders with handguns--just 15 handgun murders for a country with half our population. There were 9,300 murders here in the United States. We have every right as parents and as consumers to expect some responsibility from the entertainment industry. But I am told Japanese popular culture is even more violent than our own. However severe this plague of gun violence is for society as a whole, for the young it is far worse. For young males, the firearm death rate is nearly twice that of all other diseases combined. A National Centers for Disease Control study found 2 of every 25 high school students reported having carried a gun in the previous 30 days. If those numbers were evenly distributed among communities and schools, that would mean that in the average classroom, two students have carried guns at some time in the previous month. These figures are shocking, but they are hardly secret. We have grown so accustomed to the carnage that guns cause in America that only the most horrific acts of violence are capable of shaking us from our slumber. As I told the Economic Club of Detroit, the question we have to ask ourselves in the wake of the Columbine High School tragedy is: Are we willing to say that enough is enough? And will we say it not just today but next week and next month and next year? The NRA is betting we will not. They believe their brand of single- minded, single-issue politics can once again paralyze us from acting, once these images of death and pain in Colorado fade from view. They are going to go on telling their members that even the most measured gun control proposal is a thinly veiled attempt to take away their legitimate hunting weapons. It will not stop there. They will use that membership as a potent political tool to intimidate candidates for office. It is a sad fact that, thus far, too many Americans and too many American children and their parents live in fear of gun violence because too many of us in Washington live in fear of the political power of the lobbyists of the NRA. I believe there is also a power when people unite to demand action-- businesspeople, labor union people, parents, teachers, police officers, young people, the clergy. When I look at the kind of coalition that could be represented by groups like that, I see a potential power that could dwarf any narrow special interest. The question is not whether we are in the majority. The polls show that a large majority of Americans will support strong action to reduce access of minors to guns. The question is not whether we have the power. We do. The question is whether we are willing to act to make America a safer country. For starters, we must ban the possession and sale of handguns, semiautomatic weapons, by and to minors. We paused in this Chamber to observe a moment of silence in honor of the victims of gun violence in Colorado. We observe these moments of silence to pay tribute to those who have died and to express our sympathy for their loved ones. But now, with this latest tribute behind us, we need to be anything but silent. Those of us who want to act to reduce the gun violence need to be louder and clearer and stronger and, yes, more persistent than the NRA. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent I be allowed to proceed in morning business for 5 minutes.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize the 40th birthday of Little Caesars Enterprises, an extraordinary company headquartered in my home state of Michigan and my hometown of Detroit. It is not possible to talk about Little Caesars without recognizing the efforts of the founders of the company, Mike and Marian Ilitch. Mike and Marian are not only fine examples of entrepreneurship. They exemplify the American Dream itself. These two first-generation Americans, both of Macedonian descent, opened their first Little Caesars restaurant in Garden City, Michigan on May 8, 1959. After only three years, they sold their first Little Caesars franchise. The company became an international enterprise in 1969, with the opening of its first restaurant in Canada. By 1987, Little Caesars restaurants could be found in all 50 states. Today, Little Caesars' markets include the U.S., Canada, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, South Korea, Honduras, Dominican Republic, Turkey, the Philippines, Ecuador, Aruba and Egypt. The Ilitch family and the employees of Little Caesars have demonstrated a deep commitment to the City of Detroit. Several years ago, many people characterized the decision to move Little Caesars' headquarters to downtown Detroit was ``an act of faith.'' Today, other companies are following in Little Caesars footsteps and the City of Detroit's business climate is truly on the rebound. Throughout the years, Little Caesars has sponsored youth sports, especially hockey, and given generously to charitable causes. One of the most notable charitable endeavors supported by Little Caesars is the Little Caesars Love Kitchen Foundation, a mobile pizza restaurant which has fed more than 1.2 million people since it was created in 1985. The Love Kitchen Foundation has been recognized by Presidents Clinton, Bush and Reagan for its service to those in need. Many people credit the success of Little Caesars to its ``buy one, get one free'' concept. Others say its the creative, witty advertising. But anyone who knows Mike and Marian Ilitch knows that Little Caesars is truly a labor of love, and that they are at the heart of their company's success. And if the Ilitches are the heart and soul of Little Caesars, the hundreds of thousands of men and women who have worked for the company or who have owned a Little Caesars franchise have been its backbone. Those employees have helped to make Little Caesars the dynamic, successful enterprise it is today. Mr. President, I know my colleagues join me in offering congratulations and best wishes for continuing success to Mike and Marian Ilitch, their family, and the entire Little Caesars organization as they celebrate the company's 40th birthday.