Richard Lugar

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I rise today to honor the accomplishments of Maj. Gen. Ronald E. Brooks. General Brooks' patriotism and service to our country have been impressive. America should be proud of his dedication and hard work around the world. I would like to elaborate a moment on General Brooks' tremendous career, which he will complete this fall. General Brooks grew up in Tennessee and began his military service in the Reserve Officers Training Corps at East Tennessee State University. In 1961, he earned the bachelor of science degree in business administration from that institution and was commissioned in the U.S. Army. He later earned the master of business administration degree from Butler University. General Brooks has also studied at the Army War College and the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College. General Brooks has a military record of distinction. Beginning as a platoon leader in the 2d Infantry Division, General Brooks rose steadily in a number of administrative positions. In addition to service throughout the United States, he has served as commander of the transfer and reception station in Puerto Rico, and as an adjutant general in Vietnam and in Europe. The culmination of his distinguished work came in 1990, when he assumed command of the U.S. Army Soldier Support Center at Fort Benjamin Harrison in Indiana. Mr. President, I am pleased today to pay tribute to a great American. General Brooks stands as a symbol of American military achievement, and it is my privilege to salute his life and work.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce today the Minor Use Crop Protection Act of 1995 to help ensure the availability of minor use pesticides for farmers and an abundant and varied food supply for our Nation. This legislation has gained broad bipartisan support as evidenced by the 41 Senators who have joined as original cosponsors. This strong show of support will help us move swiftly toward enactment of this bill. Minor use pesticides are generally used on relatively small acreage or for regional pest or disease problems. Manufacturers incur a significant cost to develop scientific data to register or reregister these products and yet face a limited market potential once the pesticide is approved for use. Therefore, Minor use pesticides are not being supported or are being voluntarily canceled for economic, not safety reasons. This situation has been exacerbated by the Environmental Protection Agency's pesticide reregistration requirements. A law enacted in 1988 required that all pesticides, and their uses, registered before November 1984, be reregistered. Loss of minor use pesticides could cause substantial production problems for many fruit, vegetable, and ornamental crops. Farmers also fear that loss of minor use pesticides will put them at a competitive disadvantage with foreign producers who would still have access to the pesticides. While this is an important industry, fruits and vegetables have also taken on a more important role in the diet of Americans. Health experts recommend increased consumption of fruits and vegetables. A reduction in the availability of these foods or an increased cost due to less production would have a disproportionate impact on the health of low income Americans, who spend a greater amount of their disposable income on food. The bill offers several incentives for manufacturers to maintain and develop new safe and effective pesticides for minor uses without compromising food safety or adversely affecting the environment. Here are some examples where this bill would have a positive impact. Last year fire blight posed a serious threat to apple and pear production in Washington State. This bill would help to encourage registration of new products to control fire blight. Exports are also impacted by this pest. Japan restricts the entry of apples from areas near those where fire blight occurs. Last year half of the acreage in the State initially eligible for exports was later denied due to fire blight. In my home State of Indiana, alternatives are needed for Dimethenamid used for weed control for strawberries. The manufacturer has not reregistered this product for this use due to economic reasons. Obviously, Indiana is not a large strawberry producing State. However, strawberry growers there still do need products to control Lambsquarters and Johnsongrass which can lower yields and in some cases reduce quality. In California, sodium orthophenolphenate [OPP] has been used for decay control in citrus packinghouses. OPP is used in very small amounts and the manufacturers will not be supporting this use since the costs of reregistration outweigh the annual sales volume. This bill could help provide funding for additional studies required for reregistration if growers wanted to band together to continue this use and would also help encourage the development of additional alternative minor use products. This is an important issue for our Nation's farmers and consumers. I pledge timely consideration of this bill within the Senate Agriculture Committee. I urge my colleagues to join me in cosponsorship and support of this needed legislation. I ask unanimous consent that the bill and a summary be printed in the Record.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. I agree that we must urge the Department of Agriculture to ensure that the ``multiple planting issue'' is dealt within an equitable manner, consistent with the need for fiscal responsibility and program integrity.

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I understand and applaud the Senator's concern for her constituents. However, I must also urge the Department to be cautious in approaching the definition of ``family farm.'' In years past, the Farmers Home Administation made emergency loans to large farmers in California and other States that led to millions of dollars in individual indebtedness and enormous losses to taxpayers. On March 31, a hearing in the Agriculture Committee pointed up the substantial losses that we are still likely to incur on these loans and made it clear that the Department has continued to write off debt owed by million-dollar borrowers, despite statements of outrage at past lending practices. Given this unfortunate history, I believe the Department should move with extreme caution and should act to avoid a repetition of past abuses. The Farmers Home Administration--now a part of the Consolidated Farm Services Agency--was intended to serve family of extremely large size is not a happy one.

Mr. LUGAR. Yes, I agree that the Department of Agriculture must ensure that ``area'' is defined in a fair and equitable manner, consistent with the need for fiscal responsibility and program integrity. The issue should be resolved administratively so that the definition of ``area'' is sufficiently flexible and sensitive to the agronomic practices of the area that has suffered the disaster.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I am pleased to join Senator Pressler, Senator Harkin and others in introducing legislation to encourage regulatory common sense. Our legislation will correct two problems: First, the regulation of edible oils in a manner similar to toxic oils like petroleum, and second, the requirement that Certificates of Financial Responsibility [COFR] accompanying vessels carrying edible oils equal those of vessels carrying toxic oils. This bill is similar to legislation which passed Congress last year, but was not given final approval. In response to the Exxon Valdez oil spill in 1990, Congress passed the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, which requires several Federal agencies to enhance regulatory activities with regard to the shipping and handling of hazardous oils. In 1993, the Transportation Department proposed regulations to guard against oil spills, and require response plans if spills did occur. DOT proposed to treat vegetable oils--that is, salad oils--in the same way as petroleum. Among other things, salad oils would have been officially declared ``hazardous materials,'' with all the regulatory requirements and extra costs which that designation entails. This was a classic example of regulatory overreaching. Vegetable oil, of course, is distinctly different from petroleum. Vegetable oil processors thought it entirely appropriate that they undertake response plans to guard against major spills. The industry did not argue that they should be exempt from regulation. The industry argued that regulators should take into account obvious differences--in toxicity, biodegradability, environmental persistence and other factors--between vegetable oils on the one hand, and toxic petroleum oils on the other. Secretary Pena eventually agreed with us and prompted modification of DOT's position. However, he does not have jurisdiction over all agencies with a role in regulating oil spills. More recently, the industry has been working with other agencies which have a role in regulating oils and ensuring adequate financial responsibility in the event of a spill. No one is any longer proposing to call salad dressing or mayonnaise ``hazardous material,'' but agencies are requiring that spill response plans for vegetable oils be quite similar to those for petroleum. The most recent problem arose in December when Coast Guard regulations subjected vessels carrying vegetable oil to the same standard of liability and financial responsibility as supertankers carrying petroleum. On December 28, 1994, the Coast Guard began requiring the same standard--a $1,200 per gross ton or $10 million of financial responsibility--on vessels carrying vegetable oil and petroleum oil in U.S. waters or calling at U.S. ports. On July 1, similar standards will be phased in on barges operating on U.S. navigable waterways. Prior to December 28, a COFR requirement of $150 per gross ton applied to all vessels regardless of the hazardous nature or toxicity of the cargo. The vegetable oil industry does not seek a return to this earlier standard, but seeks regulation under a $600 per gross ton COFR requirement that Coast Guard regulations apply to vessels carrying other commodities. It is worth noting that this new financial responsibility standard for edible oil would be four times the COFR required on toxic petroleum oils prior to December 28, 1994. Application of the most stringent standard to vessels carrying vegetable oil adds to the cost of transporting U.S. vegetable oil to foreign markets. The additional costs of these burdensome regulations are passed back to farmers in reduced prices for commodities. Consumers may also bear a burden in higher food prices. In addition, there have already been instances in 1995 where this unjustified additional cost has made U.S. vegetable oil uncompetitive and has resulted in lost exports. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a February 15, 1995 Journal of Commerce report detailing these losses be printed in the Record. Our bill would not exempt vegetable oil shipments from COFR requirements or regulation. It would only apply a more appropriate standard of financial responsibility to vegetable oil, similar to that applied to vessels carrying other commodities. The scientific data collected to date indicate that the animal fats and vegetable oils industry has an excellent spill history justifying differentiation of these edible materials from toxic oils. Specifically, these products account for less than one-half of 1 percent of all oil spills in the U.S. In addition, most spills of these products are less than 1,000 gallons. The industry seeks a separate category for vegetable oils. This is as much because of scientific differences in the oils as it is for economic reasons. There is no reason why non-toxic vegetable oils must be in the same category as toxic oils. Second, the industry seeks response requirements that recognize the different characteristics of animal fats and vegetable oils within this separate category. A separate category without separate response requirements reflecting different toxicity and biodegradability is nothing more than a hollow gesture. The Senate and House of Representatives last year passed virtually identical legislation on different legislative vehicles to ensure that both of these objectives were accomplished. Under our bill, the underlying principles of Oil Pollution Act of 1990 would remain unchanged with the language to require differentiation of animal fats and vegetable oils from other oils. The House approved this language twice last year as part of H.R. 4422 and H.R. 4852. The Senate passed the bill as S. 2559. Since final action on this legislation was not completed in the last Congress, we have introduced it again. This bill does not tell the Coast Guard or any other agency what it must put into regulations. The legislation simply says that in rulemaking under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act or the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, these agencies must differentiate between vegetable oils and animal fats on one hand, and other oils including petroleum on the other. differences in the physical, chemical, biological or other properties and the effects on human health and the environment effects of these oils. This bill does not exempt vegetable oils from the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 or any other statute. It is a modest effort to encourage common sense in an area of regulation that has not always been marked by that characteristic. I hope my colleagues will cosponsor the legislation. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I rise today to congratulate a group of young Indiana students who have shown great educative achievement. I would like to bring to the attention of my colleagues the winners of the 1994-95 Eighth Grade Youth Essay Contest which I sponsor in association with the Indiana Farm Bureau and Bank One of Indianapolis. These students have displayed strong writing abilities and have proven themselves to be outstanding young Hoosier scholars. I submit their names for the Record because they demonstrate the capabilities of today's students and are fine representatives of our Nation. This year, Hoosier students wrote on the theme ``Indiana Farmers-- Producers of Food, Jobs, and World Trade.'' Students were encouraged to consider and creatively express the role of Indiana agriculture in our country and in the world marketplace. I would like to submit for the Record the winning essays of Jamie Shonk of Clay County and Joe Roth of Pulaski County. As State winners of the Youth Essay Contest, these two outstanding students are being recognized today, Friday, March 31, 1995, during a visit to our Nation's Capital. The essays follow: Indiana Farmers--Producers of Food, Jobs, and World Trade (By Jamie Shonk, Clay County) Indiana agriculture has a far reaching effect on Hoosier economy and world trade. Indiana is one of the top five corn producing states in the United States. Corn production influences the Indiana job market and economy in various direct and indirect ways. Corn production begins with research in test plots, laboratories, and Purdue University, where germination testing is done. Planting seed corn requires laborers and detasslers. It is processed, bagged, and distributed, meaning jobs for sales people, secretaries, truckers and advertising. Farmers purchase seed, chemicals, fertilizer, fuel and equipment. Average costs per acre is $135.00. At harvest, grain is either stored or sold to local grain elevators. From there, corn is shipped by train or truck to central elevators. Corn is then sold to cereal mills and food processors. High oil corn is sold for livestock feed. Brokerage firms benefit because more farmers are selling on the futures market and the board of trade. Farming magazines, radio, and T.V. brings revenue to the advertising industry. Corn is also used to make ethanol. Corn is also a major source of food, from the Corn Flakes we eat in the morning to the oil we use for cooking. As Americans are becoming more health conscious, we are shifting away from animal fats to corn oil. Corn is sold to other countries where crops cannot be grown, and is profitable to Indiana in world trade. Modern corn production in Indiana involves high technology, business, marketing, research, advertising, and labor. This will be demonstrated in 1995 by the Farm Progress Show at the Jarvis Farm in Terre Taute. Area motels were booked full four hours after the location announcement. Corn production touches all Hoosiers some way by food, jobs, or trade.

Mr. LUGAR

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

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on the nomination.

Mr. LUGAR. I thank the Chair. Mr. President, I support the nomination of Dan Glickman to be Secretary of Agriculture. Mr. Glickman is a former chairman of the House Intelligence Committee and was, for 18 years a highly respected member of the House Agriculture Committee. Senators involved in agricultural debates and conferences with the House know Dan Glickman as a conscientious, studious, and thoughtful legislator. Mr. Glickman will begin his tenure at an important moment in the Agriculture Department's history. USDA is among the largest Federal Departments. It comprises agencies that oversee national forests, administer the School Lunch Program, distribute food stamps, and provide agricultural supports. In essence, 43 branches of USDA will be consolidated into 29 under the reform legislation adopted by the Congress last year. Thus, USDA is in need of strong leadership and direction at this moment. It requires active management by a Secretary who is knowledgeable, engaged, and assertive. Only in this way can the Department effectively implement its much needed reorganization. Only through vigorous leadership can the Department guide the development of the 1995 farm bill. The omnibus legislation we are about to consider in Congress will reauthorize many of USDA's programs. So far, the administration has made no proposals to the Congress detailing its views on what should be in that farm bill. The nominee has stated that he will become involved immediately in developing administration positions on the farm bill. Senate hearings on the subject have already commenced. It is important that the new Secretary be confirmed promptly. Mr. Glickman appeared before the Agriculture Committee of the Senate on March 21 and his nomination was favorably reported on March 23 by a unanimous vote. He answered Senators' questions on a wide variety of topics and was presented to the committee by our distinguished majority leader, Senator Dole; the chairman of the Labor and Human Resources Committee, Senator Kassebaum; and the chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, Mr. Roberts. All of these distinguished Kansas legislators spoke highly of him. In his responses to Senators' questions, Mr. Glickman was forthright and thoughtful. He and I do not agree on every issue, but we expect to work together cordially and cooperatively even when we have differences. I anticipate that there will be many more areas of agreement than disagreement. Dan Glickman should be confirmed by the Senate as Secretary of Agriculture, and I urge my colleagues to vote for his nomination. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. LUGAR

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

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, as the United States enters the 21st century, we must expand our economic opportunities. It is with this goal in mind that I introduce the Trade Agreement Implementation Reform Act. During the recent Uruguay round debate, I pointed out the shortcomings of existing fast-track procedures. These flaws unnecessarily fed public suspicion and mistrust of trade agreements. These agreements should not be burdened by unrelated legislative provisions. The Senate adopted the fast-track procedure in 1974. This important tool has allowed us to enter free-trade agreements with Canada, Israel, and Mexico. It has also been used to reduce trade barriers worldwide in the Uruguay round; as well as the earlier Tokyo round. Nations must be assured that once they reach an agreement with the United States, it will not be undermined by amendments that violate its provisions. I believe that the basic arguments for a fast-track process are solid. Hence, my bill does not drastically change it except for two major provisions. First, legislation submitted under fast track should contain only provisions absolutely necessary to implement an agreement. Prior law allowed provisions ``necessary and appropriate'' and encouraged deals with special interests in exchange for support. I believe that the integrity of the fast-track process during the Uruguay relevant to the agreement itself. Second, although past fast-track legislation has not been amendable, we should make one exception for future trade legislation. Senators should be able to amend or delete provisions which merely serve to offset revenue losses from tariff changes. Such provisions in the recent Uruguay round legislation included the controversial pioneer preference and pension reform titles. Under the pay/go rules, Congress must find offsets for revenue losses. Since these measures are not related to the agreement itself, we should be able to amend them, subject to overall time limits. My State of Indiana is more dependent on exports, on a per-capita basis, than all but two other States. As Indiana exports increase, so do job opportunities. Indeed, incomes and job security of all Americans depend on maintaining and expanding U.S. exports. With our first-rate labor force and business climate, the United States can meet global economic competition head-on and create jobs. The bottom line is that increased exports create jobs. Studies have shown that every $1 billion in exports supports 20,000 jobs. Our farmers, manufacturers, and service companies can compete in countries from which they would otherwise have been shut out. Therefore, we must continue to reduce trade barriers that have kept the United States from realizing its full potential and insist that other countries open their markets to our products. Mr. President, I believe that the changes I am proposing to existing law are modest but essential to our cooperation with the administration on trade agreements. That cooperation, which aims to strengthen America's economic performance, has been a good example of bipartisan leadership in Congress. It is in that spirit that I propose the Trade Agreement Implementation Reform Act.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to the outstanding life and service of Louis E. Curdes. Mr. Curdes, who recently passed away at his home in Fort Wayne, IN, served his country with honor, and was a recognized hero of World War II. Mr. Curdes demonstrated his skill and valor during his first 2 weeks as a fighter pilot in World War II, when he shot down a total of five German planes to become a flying ace. Several months later, when his plane was damaged in fighting, he was forced down in Italy and spent months in war prisons, until his eventual escape and walk to freedom. Late in the war, Louis Curdes saw action in the South Pacific. He shot down aircraft from Japan and Italy, as well as Germany. Two of the Italian aircraft he shot down are displayed at the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum. In 1963, Mr. Curdes retired as a lieutenant colonel after 22 years of service in the U.S. Air Force. He earned numerous medals including the Distinguished Flying Cross, Purple Heart, and Air Medals. Upon his retirement, he began Curdes Builders Co., and devoted his life to his family and work in Fort Wayne, IN. Mr. President, it is with great respect that I call to my colleagues' attention the contributions Louis Curdes made to his country. He is truly an example and inspiration for all who follow him .

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to the late Francis Marion ``Frank'' Hendley II, on the occasion of his 78th birthday on February 24, 1995. AL. After distinguished service with the Coast Guard in the South Pacific during World War II, Frank moved to Indiana, where he lived from 1946 to 1952. As regional manager for Gordon Foods Co., he ws instrumental in changing the Gordon Foods Co. slogan from ``Trucks Serving the South'' to ``Trucks Serving the Best.'' Frank was elected the first national president of the Hendley Family Association, Inc., on November 22, 1975. He led the association with distinction during his tenure as president from 1976 through 1977. Subsequent to his passing on November 15, 1986, he has been honored by the legislatures of the seven States in which he resided, including Kentucky, California, Georgia, Tennessee, and Florida, as well as the cities of Indianapolis and Beech Grove. It is with pleasure that I offer this tribute to a loyal and true patriot who served his family and his country with great distinction.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry will hold a full committee hearing to discuss ``Farm Programs: Are Americans Getting What They Pay For?''. The hearing will be held on Thursday, March 9, 1995, at 9:30 a.m. in SR-332. For further information please contact Chuck Conner at 224-0005.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, today, we consider S. 178, the CFTC Reauthorization Act of 1995. This legislation was sponsored by myself and Senator Leahy, and requested by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. The only provision of this legislation is to authorize appropriations for the CFTC through fiscal year 2000. While enactment of S. 178 merely continues the CFTC's responsibilities under existing law, it is important that Congress act now to leave no doubt about the continuing role of the CFTC. Further, Congress spent considerable time and effort addressing futures related issues before enacting the Futures Trading Practices Act of 1992. The bill before us will give the Commission adequate time to complete implementation of the 1992 act and allow time for review by Congress of that implementation and the CFTC's overall performance. A hearing on this legislation was held on Thursday, January 26, to review the CFTC's performance to date in implementing the requirements of the 1992 act, as well as access its operations generally. Testimony was taken from the CFTC, the four largest U.S. futures exchanges, two futures industry trade groups, and the National Futures Association, a self-regulatory organization. Concerns had been raised by some exchanges about the implementation of the enhanced audit trail requirements in the 1992 act which go into effect in October of this year. However, in the testimony of the CFTC Chairman, and in her responses to questions, it was made clear that the CFTC has not held that an electronic hand-held device is necessary to meet the enhanced requirements. Further, the CFTC Chairman assured the committee that after the exchanges have attained a high level of compliance, further incremental improvements will only be required as practicable and the cost of the improvements will certainly be an issue in determining what is practicable. In short, common sense prevailed. All witnesses at the hearing supported the reauthorization without amendments. In addition to the futures industry, this legislation has received the support of a number of agricultural groups including the American Farm Bureau Federation, the National Grain Trade Council, the American Cotton Shippers Association, and the National Grain and Feed Association. No futures industry groups, or agricultural groups have notified the committee of their opposition to this bill. The committee held a business meeting on February 1 to consider the bill. No amendments were offered and S. 178 was ordered reported favorably by the committee. futures-related legislation during the next 5 years. In fact, I expect the committee will want to conduct vigorous oversight and consider futures legislation as needed. Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to give their approval to S. 178.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, this past Saturday, January 28, in Richmond, IN, 150 persons from around the world gathered at Earlham College's Stout Meetinghouse for a memorial service in honor of one of the 20th century America's most prominent religious leaders, Dr. David Elton Trueblood. Dr. Trueblood, professor-at-large emeritus at Earlham, died on December 20, 1994 at Lansdale, PA. He was 94 years of age. Dr. Trueblood was no stranger to the Senate. He first served as the guest chaplain of the Senate in August 1972. I was pleased to serve as the cosponsor, along with his former Earlham student, our late colleague Senator John East of North Carolina, for Dr. Trueblood's second visit with us as guest chaplain on the National Day of Prayer, May 3, 1984. In addition, Mr. President, Dr. Trueblood was a close and valued personal friend of long standing to our colleague, Senator Mark Hatfield. The two men first met as Stanford University in 1946, when Dr. Trueblood was serving as the chaplain of that great institution and Senator Hatfield was a young graduate student there. Although he was born on a small farm near Indianola, IA, in 1900, Elton Trueblood had deep Indiana roots. His Quaker ancestors left North Carolina, where they had settled in 1682, and moved to Washington County, IN, in 1815. The Truebloods were part of the great migration of antislavery Quakers from the slaveholding States of the South to the increasingly abolitionist States of the North in the decades before the Civil War. By the time that Dr. Trueblood joined Earlham's faculty as professor of philosophy in 1946, he had already established a distinguished academic career and a growing national reputation as a religious writer and speaker. After graduating from Iowa's William Penn College, he had earned the graduate degree of bachelor of systematic theology from Harvard University in 1926. He was awarded his doctor of philosophy degree from the Johns Hopkins University in 1934. It was during Dr. Trueblood's studies at Johns Hopkins University that his career in the academic and religious worlds began to intersect with the Nation's political life. While completing his doctorate at Johns Hopkins, Dr. Trueblood served as the clerk of the Baltimore yearly meeting of the Religious Society of Friends. Already in demand as a preacher, Dr. Trueblood was invited to deliver the sermon at a Quaker meeting in Washington, DC. In the congregation that day was the first Quaker to become President of the United States, Herbert Hoover. That first encounter led to a long friendship between the two men which culminated in Dr. Trueblood's delivery of the eulogy at President Hoover's funeral some 35 years later. After completing his doctoral studies at Johns Hopkins, Dr. Trueblood accepted teaching assignments at Guilford College, in North Carolina, and then at Haverford College, in Pennsylvania. After a temporary assignment as the acting chaplain of Harvard, Dr. Trueblood became the chaplain of Stanford University in 1936. He held a dual faculty appointment at Stanford as professor of philosophy. The friendship between Herbert Hoover and Elton Trueblood blossomed when Dr. Trueblood arrived at the Stanford campus, to which President Hoover had moved after he left the White House in 1933. When President Hoover died in 1964, the Hoover family called Dr. Trueblood back from a round-the-world cruise to conduct the memorial services for the former President in West Branch, IA. After flying back to the United States from Saigon, Dr. Trueblood delivered a stirring eulogy to the 31st President before the 75,000 persons gathered for the funeral services on a hillside overlooking the Hoover Library. When, in 1946, Dr. Trueblood received his offer to come to Earlham in Indiana, he faced a difficult decision. He enjoyed the prestige of a tenured full professorship at one of the Nation's leading universities. He was, as I noted, also Stanford's chaplain and the close friend and neighbor of former President Hoover. Yet Dr. Trueblood yearned for a smaller educational institution, for a return to his Quaker roots, and for greater freedom to pursue his writing and public speaking. And so, Mr. President, Dr. Trueblood accepted Earlham's offer, a decision about which he wrote in an article entitle ``Why I Chose a Small College'' for Reader's Digest. After his arrival at Earlham in 1946, Dr. Trueblood's career as a religious writer and speaker earned him growing national following. Several years later, he was invited to speak in Washington, DC, before a church congregation that included President Dwight Eisenhower. President Eisenhower later invited Dr. Trueblood to the Oval Office at the White House. Ultimately, President Eisenhower asked Dr. Trueblood to join his administration as the Director of Religious Information for the U.S. Information Agency. During the Eisenhower administration, Elton Trueblood developed a friendship with the young man who would be the second Quaker to become President of the United States. The young man was Vice President Richard Nixon. Dr. Trueblood and Vice President Nixon stayed in regular contact after Dr. Trueblood returned to Earlham and throughout Mr. Nixon's post-Vice-Presidential years in California and New York. After Mr. Nixon took office as President in 1969, he honored Dr. Trueblood by inviting him to speak at the Sunday When the 1972 Republican National Convention nominated him for a second term as President, Mr. Nixon turned to Elton Trueblood to give the invocation. As a man of character and faith, Dr. Trueblood believed deeply in loyalty to his friends. Throughout the ordeal of the Watergate scandal, Dr. Trueblood offered his friend, President Nixon, religious solace and advice in private. When, in August 1974, Mr. Nixon reached his decision to resign, the President called Dr. Trueblood at Earlham to tell him about the action that he finally had concluded that he must take. The author of three dozen books, Dr. Trueblood was a world renowned writer. Perhaps the book for which he is best known was published the same year in which President Nixon resigned. Bringing his deep appreciation for the nexus between the spiritual life and the world of politics to its most creative fruition, Dr. Trueblood published ``Abraham Lincoln: Theologian of American Anguish.'' Critically acclaimed, Dr. Trueblood's study of President Lincoln's religious life became a great inspiration to numerous political leaders. President Gerald Ford kept a copy in his Oval Office. First Lady Nancy Reagan spoke of being deeply moved by Dr. Trueblood's Lincoln book when she found it in the White House Library. I am proud to say, Mr. President, that Elton Trueblood's ``Abraham Lincoln'' graces my own bookshelf as well. After an extraordinary career, Dr. Trueblood ended 42 years of service to Earlham College and the Nation when he retired to Pennsylvania in 1988. Today, Mr. President, Elton Trueblood is back home again in Indiana. Following Saturday's memorial service at Earlham, his ashes were interred in the outer wall of his beloved Teague Library on the Earlham campus. Mr. President, another of Dr. Trueblood's former Earlham College students, Steven R. Valentine, served as a Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Reagan and Bush administrations and is now the general counsel to our colleague, Senator Robert Smith of New Hampshire. Mr. Valentine traveled to Richmond, IN for the memorial services on January 28. He remembers Dr. Trueblood ``as not only a man of extraordinary intellect, but as a person with a great heart. Elton Trueblood has a beautiful eternal soul,'' Mr. Valentine says, ``and as I think of him now, I recall his words of Shakespeare:'' [A]nd, when he shall die, Take him and cut him out in little stars, And he will make the face of heaven so fine That all the world will be in love with night, And pay no worship to the garish sun. Mr. President, before he died, Elton Trueblood chose, as the convenor of his Quaker memorial service, another distinguished Indiana educator. Dr. Landrum Bolling, whom Dr. Trueblood brought to Earlham to teach political science, became the president of Earlham College in 1958. He left Earlham in 1973 to become the president of Lilly Endowment in Indianapolis, IN, and later served as the chairman of the Council on Foundations. In connection with his service as the convenor of Dr. Trueblood's memorial service, Dr. Bolling wrote a short biographical sketch of Elton Trueblood, which was printed and distributed to all in attendance. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to print that biographical summary in the Record.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry will hold a markup session on the Commodity Futures Trading Commission reauthorizaton (S. 178). The markup will be held on Wednesday, February 1, 1995, at 9:30 in SR-332. For further information, please contact Chuck Coner at 224-0005.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry will hold a full committee hearing on Tuesday, February 7, 1995, at 9:30 a.m., in room 332 of the Russell Senate Office Building. The topic for the hearing is ``What Tax Policy Reforms Will Help Strengthen American Agriculture and Agribusiness?'' For further information, please contact Katherine Brunett of the Agriculture Committee staff at 244-9778. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry will hold a full committee hearing on Tuesday, February 14, 1995, at 9:30 a.m., in room 332 of the Russell Senate Office Building. The topic for the hearing is ``What Regulatory Reforms Will Help Strengthen Agriculture and Agribusiness?'' For further information, please contact Terri Nintemann of the Agriculture Committee staff at 244-3921.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry will hold a hearing on the reauthorization of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. The hearing will be held on Thursday, January 26, 1995, at 9:30 a.m. in SR- 332. For further information, please contact Chuck Conner at 224-0005.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I submit for publication in the Record a copy of the rules adopted by the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry on January 12, 1995.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, the organizational meeting for the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry originally scheduled for Wednesday, January 11, 1995 has been changed to Thursday, January 12, at 10 a.m., in SR-332. If you have any questions, please contact Chuck Conner on 4-0015. committee on foreign relations

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce a bill to reauthorize the Commodity Futures Trading Commission [CFTC] to exercise its responsibilities to prevent manipulation, prohibit fraud, maintain financial integrity, and encourage innovation in the Nation's futures and commodity options markets through regulation and oversight. This legislation provides assurance to the national and international financial markets of the continuing authority of the CFTC, continues the CFTC's responsibilities under existing law, gives adequate time to complete implementation of the extensive amendments included in the Futures Trading Practices Act of 1992 [FTPA] and allows time for reviews of the effects of that implementation. The CFTC was established by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission Act of 1974 as a sunset agency, and its authority must be regularly extended by Congress. The FTPA authorized the agency for a period of only 2 years and the CFTC now operates under authority granted by Congress through the appropriations process, a deficiency this bill will correct. The CFTC's task of overseeing and regulating a rapidly expanding futures industry has been, is, and will be enormous. The volume of commodity futures and options contracts traded on the Nation's commodity exchanges, or designated contract markets, for 1994 exceeded half-a-billion transactions. [[Page S655]] These transactions directly or indirectly effect the financial well being of family farms, corporations, financial institutions, traders, and millions of individuals through pooled investments. All of this trading is carried out within a self-regulatory framework overseen and supplemented by the CFTC, an agency of less then 600 employees. The futures industry is an essential part of our Nation's financial markets and the CFTC is an essential player in the federal regulation of those markets. President Bush recognized the role of the CFTC in establishing the President's Working Group on Financial Markets, in the wake of the October 1987 stock market collapse, which included the Secretary of the Treasury, the Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors, the Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, and the Chairman of the CFTC. Former Secretary of the Treasury Bentsen reactivated the Working Group and the Chairman of the CFTC remains an active and vital participant in its efforts. Reauthorization of the CFTC will express congressional intent that the agency continue its role as a member of this group. The volume of exchange traded futures and commodity options contracts and the increased importance of this trading to all sectors of the financial markets is not confined to the United States. New markets are developing in other nations around the world and governments of those countries are grappling with regulatory issues. The CFTC has taken a leading role in dealing with these governments on a variety of futures related matters. Reauthorization will assist the CFTC in its dealings with these governments. This is an area of increasing importance as our financial markets compete with overseas markets to attract and serve customers around the world. Along with increasing volume, connections with other financial industries, and internationalization, the increasing complexity of financial transactions is a challenge facing the CFTC. The financial industry is now able to construct a bewildering array of instruments to serve the investment, or risk management needs of their customers. Often these instruments are lumped together under the term ``derivatives.'' Exchange traded futures contracts governed by the requirements of Federal law since 1922 and overseen by the CFTC since 1974 are certainly one form of derivatives, since their value is derived from the value of an underlying commodity. Development of the over the counter instruments knows as derivatives led to the question whether they were the economic or legal equivalents of futures contracts. Since prior to FTPA, Federal law required all futures trading to occur on organized exchanges, this led to legal uncertainty in the now huge derivatives market. Using the broad exemptive authority granted by Congress in FTPA, the CFTC has been addressing this problem. Reauthorization will give these new markets the confidence that the process will go forward in a orderly way. While the markets overseen by the CFTC have grown immensely in volume, variety of products, and diversity of users, the importance of futures trading to agriculture cannot be overstated. The development of futures trading allowed farmers to mitigate the boom and bust cycle of prices for their crops through intelligent marketing. Today futures trading is an integral part of pricing and risk management for U.S. agriculture. The volume of exchange traded futures and commodity options contracts on U.S. commodity exchanges totalled over 58 million transactions in 1994. This trading affected not only the market participants, but ultimately all producers, processors, merchandisers and consumers of agricultural products with prices affected by exchange trading. As the Congress reviews the current Federal commodity programs through hearings, and debates on the 1995 farm bill, the pricing and risk shifting functions of the futures markets may take on even more importance as we reconsider the role of the Federal Government in stabilizing prices and assuming price risks in agriculture. As we take on this task, we need to assure ourselves that the futures markets are operated appropriately and are properly overseen. Finally, after 4 years of hearings, debate, and consideration the Congress passed FTPA. The law addressed not only the tremendous growth in volume, variety of products, internationalization, and complexity issues discussed above; but also concerns about the interrelationship of the futures and securities markets in the wake of the October 1987 stock market collapse, fraudulent trading practices by numerous individuals on the Nation's exchanges as disclosed by FBI undercover operations and CFTC investigations, and the negative effect on soybean prices precipitated by an exchange emergency action that angered many producers. The Congress granted the CFTC new authorities to address these issues. Further, the Congress directed the agency to undertake numerous rulemakings and studies to implement the requirements of FTPA. That law amended the Commodity Exchange Act to: Improve the regulation of futures and options traded under rules and regulations of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission; to establish registration standards for all exchange floor traders; to restrict practices that may lead to the abuse of outside customers of the marketplace; to reinforce development of exchange audit trails to better enable the detection and prevention of such practices; to establish higher standards for service on governing boards and disciplinary committees of self-regulatory organizations; to enhance the international regulation of futures trading; to regularize the process of authorizing appropriations for the Commodity Futures Trading Commission; and for other purposes. . . . The committee intends to commence hearings in the near future to review the CFTC's progress in implementing FTPA. Enactment of this legislation will assure orderly implementation of FTPA and assure industry participants, commerce generally and the public of continued oversight of this vital sector of the American economy. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the full text of the bill I am introducing today be printed in the Record.