Mary Landrieu

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Yes, that is fine.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I thank the chairman, the Senator from Alaska, for his leadership in steering us to this point. We are just a short time away from having an opportunity to mark up this historic bill, if you will, this historic effort in his committee. I want to say that all of our committees have tremendous responsibilities and very significant efforts are underway. But our committee, Energy and Natural Resources, in addition to this effort, has the chairman negotiating a restructuring of our electricity industry for this Nation and he is trying to maneuver through a waste disposal bill that has been a source of great controversy. I thank him for giving his time and energy and determination in moving through a historic piece of legislation for the environment. Perhaps if we can accomplish this--and I believe we can--future generations will look back on this effort. I thank him and our majority leader, the Senator from Mississippi, who knows full well, from the perspective of a producing State, the significant negative impacts that are associated with an industry that both of us support and the opportunity here to do something positive for our States of Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alaska, as well as other States in the Nation. I will reserve the remainder of my time, and at this point yield to one of my colleagues from South Dakota, who has so graciously joined us on the floor for this colloquy. As a member of one of the interior States, and as one of the leading spokespersons on this bill, I thank Senator Johnson for being with us today. I yield to him 5 minutes to speak on this important issue.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Thank you, Mr. President. I thank the Senator from South Dakota for those remarks, and again for his hard work in getting us to this point. I would like to yield, if I can, 4 minutes to my colleague from Arkansas, for her remarks on this bill as well.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from Arkansas for describing with such enthusiasm what this bill brings to her State of Arkansas and to all of our States. Let me take the remainder of my time to recap for a moment and to speak from the Louisiana perspective as one of the producing States and share with this Congress and with the Senate some of our perspectives. First of all, as the majority leader said, this bill is a historic effort to provide a permanent and steady stream of revenue to do several important things: To fully fund the Land and Water Conservation Fund; to provide a reliable stream of money for wildlife wetlands habitat preservation; and to provide much-needed revenue for the coastal impact assistance. We are also hoping to include some funding for historic preservation and urban park initiatives. From the Louisiana perspective, you may not realize that over 80 percent of the Federal oil and gas that is produced annually from the Outer Continental Shelf is produced from waters adjacent to the State of Louisiana. The onshore activities that support the Federal OCS development in the Gulf of Mexico occur largely within the boundaries of our State. Mississippi contributes to that, as well as Texas. Almost all of the oil and gas produced from the gulf moves through the State of Louisiana in pipelines thousands and thousands of miles in length--delivering oil to refineries and to natural gas distribution systems throughout our Nation. We are happy to do our part to help this Nation in its need for energy supply. However, we can no longer abide by the Federal Government's unwillingness to share even a portion of these revenues with our State to help offset the adverse environmental impact and the public service impact on Louisiana. That view is shared by Mississippi, Alaska, Texas, and others. Let me explain. The Mineral Leasing Act of 1920 provides that 50 percent of the revenues received by the Federal Government for the development of oil and gas and other minerals on shore will be shared with States in which those minerals are produced. Some of our interior States benefit from that arrangement. In addition, because the Federal minerals are within the geographic boundaries of particular States, the State has the power over and above that sharing of 50 percent to collect a severance tax on the production and payment in lieu of taxes from the Federal Government for the acres of Federal land used for this endeavor. The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, which governs the production of Federal oil and gas minerals on the Outer Continental Shelf, however, contains no similar provision. In fact, from 1940, when this production began, until 1986, the State of Louisiana and other coastal States received no portion of these oil and gas revenues. Not until 1986 were we able to receive a very small portion of those revenues generated between a 3-mile and 6-mile line. Just yesterday, however, exploration officials from British Petroleum announced the discovery of the largest deep-water find in history 125 miles southeast of New Orleans. The underwater find is dubbed ``Crazy Horse.'' It was discovered in 6,000 feet of water. Imagine the kind of equipment that is going to take to mine this kind of find. We are happy to do this. The industry provides economic opportunity. But can you imagine providing the infrastructure in your State, for a construction company building hundreds of skyscrapers such as this in your backyard? These underwater skyscrapers all have to be built and parts manufactured and moved to the site. All of this material moves through the fragile environment of coastal Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas. If this monument, or if this structure, were out of the water to be seen, it would be as if you stacked the Washington Monument end to end 10 times. It is the kind of structure that has to be built to mine these sorts of finds in the gulf. In 1998, Federal mineral development from offshore totaled approximately $2.8 billion. That is what we sent to the Federal Government. Yet we only received $20 million. That is less than a tenth of 1 percent. Let me state that again--a tenth of 1 percent is what Louisiana was able to retain. Other States retained 50 percent. In addition, they received other payments. This situation is obviously not just; it is unfair, and this bill attempts to help correct that inequity. As a result of OCS activity, Louisiana has suffered a significant negative environmental impact. We have lost over 1,000 square miles of coastal wetlands over the last 50 years. If we don't take action today, we are liable to lose another 1,000 square miles more in the next 50 years. To bring this down to size, we lose a football field every day. We lose an area the size of the State of Rhode Island every year. These losses are partially due to natural erosion but are aggravated by the way we have levied the Mississippi River, which, again, serves as a port for our entire Nation and not just our State, and it is also impacted by the activities associated with oil and gas drilling. The people of Louisiana, while understanding that this is very important and this is a national asset--and, again, we are happy for the industry and want to promote an environmentally sensitive way of drilling as we know it today--believe that we should be more justly compensated for these impacts. The distribution formula in S. 25 is weighted to provide an extra portion to those six States with Federal offshore oil production. We are not giving any incentive for future production. We want this to be a drilling-neutral bill, if you will, but a revenue-sharing bill that acknowledges the contribution made by our producing States. As proposed in S. 25, Louisiana will only receive 10 percent of the Federal revenues that are generated. Again, historically, we have received less than one-tenth of 1 percent. Historically and to date in the law, the interior States have received 50 percent. We are asking for our fair share and modest share of this money, and S. 25 outlines a 10-percent portion. The cosponsors of S. 25 believe it is appropriate to share a portion of Federal OCS revenues with coastal States that do not and will not have any offshore oil production. Today there is no dedicated source of funding for the variety of coastal environmental problems that are being experienced around the Nation, even in those States that are not producing. S. 25 recognizes that the producing States should be acknowledged and those States which are nonproducing also have challenges with their coastline--beach erosion, et cetera. When Congress created the Land and Water Conservation Fund over 30 years ago, it was intended ``to provide a steady revenue stream to preserve 'irreplaceable lands of natural beauty and unique recreational value.' Royalties from offshore oil and gas leases will provide the money, giving the program an interesting symmetry. Dollars raised from depleting one natural resource would be used to protect another.'' This, unfortunately, has not come true. These moneys were given but taken away. They were appropriated in different amounts over the years. This bill will attempt to use the dollars produced by depleting one natural resource to preserve many areas of natural beauty in our Nation, both on the coast and in our interior States. This is an important bill for Louisiana and the gulf coast, but it is important for the entire Nation. Our legacy as leaders will be the land we leave to our children and their children. At the rate we are going, we might not have very much to give them. This bill will give us a steady stream of revenue to provide full funding for our land and water conservation, to give much-needed resources for our coastal States to mitigate some of this negative impact and also to share justly with the other States in our Nation. I thank the Chair for allowing us to have this time today. I, again, thank the majority leader and the chairman, and to the 20 or more sponsors we have for this legislation. It is my hope that we can mark this up shortly and move this bill through the process. I yield back the remainder of my time.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, before the recess, with the help and support of my colleagues Mr. Helms, Mr. Leahy, and Mr. McConnell, I offered an amendment to Senate Bill 1234, which would provide some relief for the hundreds of thousands of orphans who find themselves confined to institutions and have no one to provide the love, affection and guidance that they so desperately need. Sadly, the disruption and extreme poverty which followed the end of the Cold War Era has had a devastating impact on the lives of the children in the Eastern block. In both Russia and Romania, it is the children, the future of democracy, who are struggling to survive. It is my hope that the funds designated by this amendment will allow the governments in each of these two countries to protect the health, safety and well being of their children and in doing so, build for a stronger and brighter tomorrow. Specifically, this amendment ensures that $2,000,000 of the funding appropriated for aid to Russia and the Independent States is used to further the innovative efforts of nongovernmental organizations, such as Christian World Adoption Agency, to provide vocational and professional training for those children who are about to ``age out'' of orphanages. When this body created Independent Living, it recognized that such training and support is essential to the future of the young adults who have, for whatever reason, grown up in an institution rather than in a family. With the help of help organizations like Christian World, these children can be given the tools they need to become confident and successful adults. Further, my amendment provides that $4,400,000 of the funds provided for aid to Eastern Europe and the Baltic States will be used to support the Romanian Department of Child Protection and their work to save the lives and improve health of the more than 100,000 Romanian children in orphanages. Just the other day, myself and several of my colleagues met with the present Secretary of the Department of Child Protection, Dr. Cristian Tabacaru. With great passion, Dr. Tabacaru painted for me a picture of the dire circumstances faced by his country's children. At present, Romania has the highest infant mortality rate in Europe. What is worse, is that 60% of these deaths are from preventable causes such as malnutrition and premature births. The Romanian Department of Child Protection is working desperately to save their most precious resource, their children. They have instituted programs that provide nutritional supplements to these children, they have developed their first ever in-home foster care program and are working to improve the services available for those with special needs. While they have made a great deal of progress in very little time, they need and deserve our help. This small amount of money will help them out of their present crisis and to build a child welfare system of which they can be proud. In closing, I want to again thank Mr. Helms, Mr. Leahy, and Mr. McConnell for their support of my amendment. As we continue to aid the children of this world, we can be confident that we are building the hope of a bright and wonderful future, a future in which few children will grow up without a family to call their own.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I rise to reiterate the importance of an amendment that we agreed to earlier today by unanimous consent. This amendment offered by Senator Jeffords and myself will increase the availability, safety, and quality of Federal child care. I firmly believe that the Federal Government should serve as a model for other employers to implement child care services in this country. These services must be affordable, safe, and be provided in an atmosphere that supports healthy development and growth of children. We have already made much progress within the Department of Defense with the enactment of legislation that ensures quality, safe and affordable child care to defense employees. The DoD program is now considered one of the finest in the world. It is now time to take this exemplary model and expand it to all Federal agencies. The executive branch of Government has responsibility for over 1,000 child care centers--788 through the military, 109 through the General Services Administration, and 127 through other Federal departments. Over 215,000 children are being provided child care through these various Federal programs. Unfortunately, almost 1/3 of Federal employees with young children may not have access to any Federal child care services. We need to ensure all children of Federal employees, not just those under the Department of Defense, have access to high quality and affordable child care. Every parent should know that when they drop their children off at a Federal day care facility that their child is safe--because we have enacted uniform safety standards for these child care facilities. We also must make efforts to ensure that child care is made available to every Federal employee regardless of their income. Now, more than ever, Federal employees are struggling to balance work and family obligations. They are also struggling to pay for the cost of child care. Currently, the cost of quality child care services ranges from $3,000 to more than $10,000, depending on where a person lives. In my State, this care ranges from $3,000 to $6,000. Unfortunately, many families in Louisiana cannot afford this cost. In fact, there are over 500,000 children throughout Louisiana whose families earn under $27,000. One of the first steps that the Federal Government can and should take is to provide a model for other employers to follow, so more individuals will have greater access to affordable and quality child care. Moreover, if the Federal Government is to remain a credible provider of child care services, Congress must enact this important amendment. I look forward to working my colleagues in the House and Senate to ensure adoption of this legislation in the conference report.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Will the Senator from Oklahoma yield for a question?

Ms. LANDRIEU. Based on the argument he just made, would the Senator from Oklahoma then be in favor of repealing all tax benefits--tax subsidies or tax benefits to corporations in America that offer general health care plans to their employees?

Ms. LANDRIEU. I would argue then that this argument makes no sense because this Senate and this Congress gives hundreds of millions, billions of dollars in subsidies to corporations all over this world that provide health care benefits. I will also argue that the Senator from California is correct; this is picking on a small group of employees.

Ms. LANDRIEU. In my mind, this amendment is not really about abortion one way or the other. It really is about the rights of employees, our employees who we are supposed to protect and treat fairly, men and women alike. It is not about direct subsidy. This is their wages that they earn, that they use to pay for their health care benefits. Since we give subsidies to all corporations everywhere, why can't we help our own employees for something that is legal? I reserve the remainder of my time.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. I thank my colleague and I look forward to working with him to provide for a strong integrated bioenvironmental hazards research capability for the Navy. distance learning

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, the Defense Department needs the capability to assess and prevent both the adverse impacts of its operations and training activities on the environment, as well as the adverse health effects of contaminated environments on its troops and employees. One particular area of interest is in bioenvironmental hazards research, which focuses on the development of biosensors and biomarkers of exposure for human and ecological system. The Office of Naval Research (ONR) and the Naval Oceanographic Office (NAVOCEANO) are currently expanding existing research capabilities in basic and applied environmental sciences of aquatic systems. The purpose of this research is both to understand the processes of riverine and gulf systems and to understand the impacts of human development on estuaries and harbor systems throughout the world. This work complements other ``brown water'' research initiatives in ONR, particularly the STRATAFORM program which is looking at issues of sea level change, climate variability, and riverine runoff. The joint technology development of the biosensors can be used in autonomous underwater vehicles, which have direct application in support of NAVOCEANO military surveys in the Littoral Zones and the pre-invasion mission to detect mines and obstacles for clearance/ avoidance in the Very Shallow Water (VSW) and Surf Zone (SZ) approaches to the amphibious landing areas. Specifically, the biosensor's role during military surveys conducted by NAVOCEANO will be to collect the natural ``background'' environmental harmful agents to personnel that work in the waters of the littoral zones. Development of this definitive database will support the intelligence requirements of the SEAL, EOD, and amphibious assault teams. Moreover, biosensors will improve the probability of mission success, endurance and survivability of SEAL swimmers through detection of harmful agents during the initial environmental surveys. This health-risk assessment will involve the prediction and monitoring of waters polluted (either naturally or by intention or both by the opposing forces) with heavy metals, microbial hazards, chemical hazards, environmental chemicals, toxic organisms, and areas of outflow from waste treatment plants prior to the hunt for mines and obstacles. Congress should encourage the Defense Department and the Navy to pursue research and development of technologies and methods for better measuring and understanding the full range of impacts of biological hazards, including biological warfare, to humans (both military and civilian) and other living organisms. This will improve our ability to develop suitable preparations or responses to such hazards. I would like to ask my colleague from Alaska, would he be willing to look at this need and, if appropriate, provide additional support for this research effort before we are asked to give final approval to the Defense Appropriations bill later this year?

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I thank our chairman, Senator Warner, and the ranking member, Senator Levin, for agreeing to this very important amendment. As a new member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, I was a little taken aback by the way the Committee launched into major legislation at the very start of this session. I am glad that we did. From the very start of the year, it was clear that we had a very real problem in retention that threatened to reach crisis proportions. Furthermore, this crisis was looming just when our country most needed every talented soldier, sailor, and airman that we could keep in the service. The structural reasons behind the retention shortfalls have already been well documented on the floor; a booming economy, long deployment, and a lack of predictability for family life have all taken their toll. However, what I have found very frustrating is that we have no sense of priority behind these problems. Are soldiers leaving because the pay is too low, or because the retirement package is insufficient? Do we need to address operations tempo first, or health care? The evidence is all anecdotal. We have a strong sense of the universe of problems, but no qualitfiable data on their relative importance. As it stands, each service is responsible for exit surveys which are conducted on a voluntary basis when a person separates from the military. These surveys are not standardized, do not seek the same information, nor are they scientifcally tested. In short, they are not much better than the anecdotal evidence that we collect by word of mouth. The dimensions of our difficulties in retention demand that we have much better information. For that reason, I have introduced this amendment to the Defense Authorization bill, which will give us the data that we need to assess the steps Congress needs take in coming years to stem this tide. The amendment instructs the Secretary of Defense to develop and implement a survey of all military personnel leaving the service starting in January 2000 and ending six months later. The survey will provide uniformity of data, and be scientifically tested so as to give as some real feedback as to why our men and women are leaving the service. Additionally, there are specific issues of content that the survey must address, namely: the reasons for leaving military service, plans for activities after the separation, affiliation with a Reserve component, attitude toward pay and benefits, and the extent of job satisfaction during their tenure. I believe that the answers to these questions are vital to the Senate's role in addressing retention and other readiness concerns. The future of our all-volunteer force depends on our ability to continue to recruit and retain the manpower necessary to support our national security priorities. To do so, we need forward thinking policy which makes the most of our scarce resources and protects the quality of life of our armed services. This amendment will give us the data and intellectual framework to begin such policy. Again, I thank Senators Warner and Levin for accepting it.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, just a little over a week ago, I had the privilege of traveling with the Secretary of Defense down to my home state. It was a terrific trip and I believe the Secretary was very impressed with the work that we are doing in Louisiana at our military installations and with our defense industry. One of the real highlights of the trip was the ribbon cutting ceremony for the Naval Information Technology Center in New Orleans. This facility, hosted by the University of New Orleans, is home to the Defense Integrated Military Human Resources System, as well as other personnel software projects for the Navy. The DIHMRS project is one of those rare proposals that instantly captures the support of those that understand it. The military services have spent countless billions of dollars in developing and supporting ``stove pipe'' personnel software systems, that were out-of-date before they were complete, had no capacity for interconnectivity and did not provide the breadth of personnel information to be of real utility to our military leadership. DIHMRS seeks to change all of that. It will provide an integrated system of personnel information, that will ultimately tie all the services all the personnel systems and records, and do so in a easily accessible fashion that will give commanders the information about training and experience that they need to make deployment decisions. This project fits perfectly into our efforts to craft smaller, faster and more flexible force structures. One of the key ingredients to creating smaller, more effective forces, is the ability to quickly identify individuals with the experience and training that needed for particular missions. This is daunting task for any service now, it becomes more so if you are trying to put together an inter-service task force. When fully operational DIHMRS will address this need. These advantages do not even address the enormous savings that the Department of Defense will realize by terminating the innumerable individual human resource computer systems that track only one kind of data for one branch of the military. Thus, this project is a boon to both readiness and economic efficiency. For that reason, I have introduced an amendment which emphasizes the Senate Armed Service Committee's support for this effort. It is important to note that a project like DIHMRS requires innovation and division. Thus, the management structure for the program has also required a degree of innovation and flexibility. I believe that the unique structure adopted for the DIHMRS project is critical for its ultimate success. For that reason, the amendment reemphasizes the support for the present management structure expressed in Section 8147 of Public Law 105-262. That appropriations law directed the Department to establish a Defense Reform Initiative enterprise program for military manpower, personnel, training and compensation using a revised DIHMRS project as the baseline. Additionally, the amendment also expresses the intention that the DoD maintain this enterprise project, and the management and executive responsibility be contained within the Systems Executive Office for Manpower and Personnel. The President's budget request includes $65 million dollars for DIHMRS. I believe that these monies must be used according to the direction given in last year's Defense Appropriation's conference report to maintain the success of the program. Specifically, these funds should be used to: (1) address modernization and migration systems support for service information systems within the enterprise of manpower, personnel, training and compensation; (2) to continue support for infrastructure improvements at the Naval Information Technology Center; and, (3) to continue Navy central design activity consolidations and relocations already begun under the Systems Executive Officer and the Naval Reserve Information Systems Office. The consolidation of the personnel information reform efforts is necessary for both budgetary concerns, and valuable as a tool for managing our soldiers, sailors and airmen better. I believe that DIHMRS will make an invaluable contribution to that effort. I thank the mangers for accepting this amendment, and I look forward to working with the Navy to make this project a real success. amendment no. 500 (Purpose: To authorize a demonstration program on open enrollment in managed care plans of the former uniformed services treatment facilities) In title VII, at the end of subtitle A, add the following:

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I rise after this very long but, I think, good debate on the defense authorization bill to thank the distinguished chairman of our committee, the Senator from Virginia, and our ranking member, the Senator from Michigan, for their hard work on this bill. I have to add all the staff that worked very hard too. It is a huge authorization, as you know, Mr. President. It represents 16 percent of the total expenditures of our Government, for the Department of Defense. We fund and try to prepare for the finest military and strongest military operations in the world; over a million men and women--1.4 million active-duty men and women. This bill has provided, because of the hard work on both sides of the aisle, some significant and much-needed increases to support our men and women, to help our forces be even more ready, more professional, better trained and better prepared for all the new threats that we face in the world today. So I thank them for their work, and acknowledge that in this bill that received an overwhelming vote, we had one of the largest increases of expenditures for the readiness of those active forces, pay provisions to help make the salaries more competitive with the booming economy we are currently enjoying here in the United States. Thanks to the leadership of our great colleague from Georgia, Senator Cleland, we were able to add some additional funding for GI benefit expansions, the first in over two generations, so the men and women in our armed services can share those benefits with their spouses and their children, improving educational opportunities across the board. There are many other provisions funding the increase in technology, the first downpayment on our missile defense system, which has come a little bit too late for some and right on time for others. I think it is the right step for our Nation. I join my colleagues in thanking the leadership that has brought this bill to final passage today. There is more work to be done. There were some disappointments, obviously some shortcomings, but no piece of legislation is perfect. We will have opportunities to work in the future, as this Congress progresses. Because the floor was so busy earlier today I waited until now to take this opportunity, but I did not want this day to end without noting the historic event that took place today with the indictment of Yugoslavian President Milosevic by the International War Crime Tribunal. As was recorded earlier, Justice Louise Arbour announced that he and his four deputies and military leaders have in fact been indicted for the atrocities they have committed. This body passed almost unanimously--it was unanimously for those present--a resolution earlier this week, urging the Tribunal to act, saying the United States will put up what resources are necessary to make sure justice is done; that not only can war criminals be identified, but cases can be built in the proper and legal way so they can be successfully prosecuted for what has occurred. I was particularly moved by an article I plan to pass around to the Members of the Senate and to send to family and supporters around the Nation, written by Carol Williams of the Los Angeles Times. That reported in horrific detail some of the crimes being committed against the Kosovars. What was particularly troubling in this article was her focus on the systematic use of rape as a weapon of war. She recounted in great detail the experiences of a group of young women, young girls--very young, 12, 13, 14 and 15--who had been violated over and over again; sometimes, as she outlined in this article, within hearing distance--but not sight or comfort--of parents. In this particular part of the world, though, what makes this doubly horrific and horrifying and tough is that victims of rape often accuse themselves, as if they themselves committed the crime. There is shame that is brought, in this particular culture, to them and to their families. So after having barely lived, surviving this ordeal, they are then turned away, in many instances, from their fathers, their mothers, their brothers, their sisters. So there is a tremendous injustice that is occurring. Many of the women in the Senate talked at great length today about this and were joined by our colleagues in various meetings throughout the day. I just want to say, as we break for this Memorial Day, that while we may take a few days of rest from our work, as one Senator, I am prepared to come back and daily, weekly, monthly and for years if necessary, continue to come to this floor and talk about war crimes and justice and holding people accountable. Had we done a better job of this in Bosnia, I think we could have perhaps prevented the atrocities we are seeing in Kosovo today. I hope the international community in every way--whether it is a large country or small country, and the people in the United States-- will let their elected officials know we want these war criminals prosecuted, we want justice brought to these families, and we want the resources and the comfort and counseling available to these young women--women of all ages--who have lived through the horror and the terror of what has been wrought in that part of the world. Thank God we live in this country. It is not perfect, terrible things have happened, but I can say on the eve of this Memorial Day recess how proud I am and mindful and grateful of the great sacrifice that has been made by men and women in uniform who have given their lives so that we, in this country, can live in relative peace and prosperity without fear of being pulled from our homes at night, having our homes burned and our family members violated or executed. We have gone through periods of history of which we are not proud. But I am proud of the work this Congress does in putting forth legislation and finances to support efforts that are so important, like the one in which we are engaged. We will not stop until we have a military victory. We will not stop until the diplomatic means have been accomplished. We will not stop until we have been able to help the Kosovars move back into their nation and help this part of Europe join the mainstream of Europe so they can live in peace, prosperity, and democracy and, finally, until justice is done to the women, children, and families who have been so barbarically handled in the last several months. Again, I thank the leadership for their good work on this legislation. I thank the Chair.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Thank you, Mr. President. I commend my colleagues, the Senator from Washington and the Senator from Maine, for presenting this amendment, on a very important issue, to the body today for us to discuss and to walk through. She has courageously offered this amendment for many, many years, and each year we seem to gain some support. I hope this year we will gain enough support to make this amendment part of the law of our land, because it makes such common sense and good sense. When we ask women to join our military--and we are truly recruiting them rather vigorously, because we need their strength and their talent and their abilities to help make our military be the strongest and the best in the world--it is just inconceivable that we would say: Come join the military. Put on the uniform. Put yourself in harm's way. But we are simply not going to extend to you all of the rights that are guaranteed to other Americans for medical decisions that should be yours to make. It just makes no sense. So I urge Senators, regardless of how you might feel about this issue--and good arguments have been made on both sides--to think about this as it truly is--not asking for any new privileges, not asking for any expansion of the law, but simply to allow the women who we are recruiting at this age to serve in the military, to give them the medical options they may need at a very tough time for them. One other point I want to make is, those who have opposed this amendment over the years have said: We most certainly would not mind except that we do not want this to be at Government expense. Let me remind everyone that this is not at Government expense, that these women are individuals prepared to pay whatever medical costs are associated with the procedures that they may need. But if we do not change the law to allow this to happen, the taxpayers have to pick up a greater burden in transporting these women, sometimes in transport and cargo airplanes and helicopters back to the United States, which takes time away from their service. I argue that costs substantially more, than the taxpayers are underwriting, for medical procedures. So it makes no sense from a military standpoint--for human rights, for civil rights, for equal rights--to just have the same laws apply. It really makes no sense for the taxpayers to have to pick up an additional expense, when every dollar is so precious that we need to allocate well and wisely in our military. So I thank the Senator from Maine, the Senator from Washington, and others, who have spoken. I urge my colleagues, regardless of how you consider yourself or label yourself on this issue, to think of this as the right, commonsense thing to do for women and their families, their dependents, and, yes, their spouses, their husbands in the military, for our families who are in the military, serving at our request to protect our flag, to protect democracy, to protect freedom around the world, to please consider that in their votes this afternoon. I yield back the remainder of my time to the Senator from Washington State.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Yes.

Ms. LANDRIEU. On an equally important note, I rise to support the sense-of-the-Senate resolution, now in amendment form, offered by the distinguished Senator from Pennsylvania and myself. We feel very strongly about presenting it to the whole chamber, and we hope to get a very strong bipartisan vote, in just a few minutes, on this resolution. Madam President, at the close of World War II, Europe was devastated. The allied armies, in liberating Eastern Europe, had uncovered a horror beyond imagination--6 million Jews, men, women, and innocent children, had been massacred, and millions of other civilians and soldiers had been killed on all sides by fruitless wars of aggression. Once Germany itself had been occupied, the documentary evidence of these atrocities came to light. Along with victory came the eventual capture of the Nazi leadership, and slowly but surely, the German war leaders who did not kill themselves outright, fell into allied hands. At that time there were two competing ideas on how to deal with these prisoners. The English and the Russians simply wanted to take the leaders of Nazi regime outside and shoot them. After all, it was the way victors had treated the vanquished in Europe for hundreds of years, particularly when the vanquished had been so merciless themselves. However, the American Secretary of War, Henry Stimson, proposed a very different, and actually, radical solution. He wanted to use the atrocities perpetrated by Nazi Germany to make real the notion of international law. In retrospect, it seems very strange, indeed, that a Secretary of War would be the primary advocate for holding a legal proceeding. But Secretary Stimson was wise. He understood something very fundamental: America had not joined World War II to prop up the same, tired cycle of war and revenge that had made Europe the bloodiest continent on Earth during the 20th century. We entered the war to create a fair and lasting peace. We had no territorial demands. We asked for no war reparations, and we did not come to loot and rob Germany of its treasures. All we wanted in exchange for the great sacrifice that we made as a people was the assurance that after the war, peace, democracy and freedom would prevail. The Nuremberg trials were one of the central steps in fulfilling this objective. Instead of revenge, the trials stood for justice. Instead of collective blame, these trials stood for individual accountability. Instead of Europe's bloody past, the Nuremberg trials held the promise that we could break the cycle of violence. Over 50 years since the conclusion of those trials, the Nuremberg principles are being called into question. I believe we reached the right conclusions at those trials. We hit upon some universal truths about what needs to be done to bring true peace to a region wracked by war. We determined it was necessary to establish justice, to hold individuals accountable for their acts, and to try to stop future wars of revenge. Those principles ring true even today. Ironically, as this map shows and as we are well aware, another conflict in Europe now puts the lessons of the Nuremberg Trials to the test. We began strongly enough. In May of 1993, the United Nations Security Council created the first international war crimes court since the Second World War, since the Nuremberg trials. The International Criminal Tribunal for former Yugoslavia was formed to investigate and try war crime cases resulting from the war in Bosnia. It was hailed then as the first step towards reconciliation of the warring factions. If the international community could bring justice to Bosnia, if they could expose the wanton destruction of human life by the Bosnian Serbs, there might be a real chance for the same collective soul searching that occurred in Germany at the end of World War II. That reflection and acknowledgment of wrongdoing has generated a peace between the great powers of Western Europe that was simply unthinkable at the beginning of this century. If it can happen between the Germans and the French, why not between the Croats and the Serbs? For a number of reasons, mostly political, the international community has simply not grasped the opportunity that this international tribunal has offered to us. In the 6 years since its formation, the Tribunal has indicted 84 people. However, of those 84 indicted, it has completed only 6 trials. Twenty-five others are now in custody, either awaiting trial, or involved in proceedings. But six convictions in 6 years is a very mediocre showing for a conflict that was marked by intense brutality on all sides. Furthermore, the most significant war criminals remain at large. We are aware of where they are, but they continue operating unmolested. The reality is that while the vast majority of war crime indictments were against Bosnian Serbs, the Croatian and Muslim indictees are far more frequently held in custody because their governments have been cooperating with the Tribunal. Unfortunately, the moment for effective action has passed and the results are clear. When we do not uphold the principles established at Nuremberg, it gives license to thugs and dictators to pursue their aims by brutality and illegal means. We can only wonder if there would have been different headlines today had we been more insistent that the perpetrators of war crimes in Bosnia stand before the bar of justice. I am joined by my colleague, the senior Senator from Pennsylvania, in introducing this amendment that seeks to prevent a repeat of our mistakes. Let us make the Tribunal truly effective. That is what this amendment offers. The chief prosecutor, Justice Arbor, has made clear that the Tribunal's jurisdiction does extend to Kosovo. We need to ensure that when this war is over--and one day, hopefully soon, it will be--the parties responsible for these crimes will be made to answer personally. Our amendment addresses a number of the obstacles currently facing the tribunal. First, the amendment asks that the United States, in coordination with other United Nations contributors, provide the resources necessary for a rigorous investigation of the war crimes committed in Kosovo. I am happy to report, as was mentioned by my friend from Pennsylvania, that an additional $18 million has already been passed by this Senate in the supplemental appropriations bill for this specific purpose. At present, the Tribunal has a mere 70 investigators at its disposal. This number covers not only the 600,000 refugees from Kosovo, but all of the ongoing investigations of Bosnian war crimes. Clearly, the Tribunal is undermanned to undertake a project of the enormity presented by Kosovo. Secondly, the resolution calls on our Government, through our intelligence services, to provide all possible cooperation in the gathering of evidence necessary to prosecute war crimes. While testimonial evidence is sufficient to bring charges against those responsible for the mass execution, the rapes, gang rapes and arson, but such evidence rarely addresses the crimes of a country's leadership. Such is the case in Kosovo. Milosevic is not out in the field shooting civilians himself, but the situation certainly looks as if he is issuing the orders--proving that connection requires intelligence sources that only we and our NATO allies can provide. And we should do it forthwith. Additionally, we cannot be afraid of where the war crimes evidence leads. This resolution will make it clear that no one--no one--will be exempt. We shall not compromise long-term peace prospects for short- term political expediency. Wherever the evidence leads, indictments will follow. Equally important, this resolution reflects the fact that all nations have an obligation to honor arrest warrants issued by the International Criminal Tribunal. Many of those already indicted are living normal lives while their whereabouts are well known. Such selective prosecution and inaction breeds cynicism and creates an atmosphere that supports the sort of thugs now operating in Serbia. It undermines our effort and it should not be tolerated. This must stop. The resolution we introduce today calls on the United States to use all appropriate means to apprehend war criminals already under indictment. Lastly, and most critically, this resolution insists that NATO should not accept any diplomatic resolution to the war in Kosovo that would bar the indictment, apprehension, or prosecution of war criminals. The proper resolution of this conflict may be our last opportunity to bring a lasting peace to this region. It cannot be done if those responsible for the war are not punished for their actions. It is often easier to exclude tyrants from justice to secure a temporary lull in the fighting than to support a thorough and complete peace. If we go for easy answers, we will doom the people of that region to repeat these same horrors again and again. As historians have often noted, one war frequently sows seeds for the next. This is particularly true of the kind of incessant ethnic warfare going on in the Balkans. The only way to change this reality is to insist that individuals be held accountable for their barbaric actions and be brought to justice. People must understand that there are international standards of behavior and they will be held accountable. It makes a huge difference in the way they interact with their neighbors. In short, we must demonstrate that might does not make right and that no one can benefit from the misery of their neighbors. Our State Department recently issued a report entitled ``Erasing History: Ethnic Cleansing in Kosovo.'' This is one of a hundred pictures that have been taken, showing the horrors of mass executions and murder of innocent men, women and children. That report details much of what is already known--700,000 refugees forced to flee their homes; 500 villages looted and burned; at least 70 instances of summary executions; the systematic rape of women and young girls, and the list goes on. What is odd about ethnic cleansing is that while it tries to erase history, it actually has the opposite effect. It brands indelibly into people's minds the memories of the fire, torture, the shooting, the rape, the running, the horrors of the night and the morning. The entire history of the Balkans reads like one giant tragedy where the past motivates evil in the present. Instead of erasing history, Yugoslavia must move beyond it, and NATO needs to continue to press them in that direction to achieve those ends. Justice, provided impartially and equally, is the most effective means for doing that, and we can do that through a strong, well-financed, determined War Crimes Tribunal. There may be no clean hands in the Balkans, but there can be new beginnings. I believe this resolution will anchor the United States policy to creating one. I would like to put up another chart of something that shows a video capture from a tape recently smuggled out of Yugoslavia.

Ms. LANDRIEU. I thank the Senator. The Senator from Pennsylvania surely brings a tremendous amount of expertise, having been a prosecutor and having dealt with these issues on a domestic basis and an international basis. Let me just conclude by pointing out and explaining what this picture is. This looks like a picture of people burying bodies. But actually, because this is part of a 20-minute video, this is a snapshot, of people exhuming bodies, digging up a mass grave, to try to hide or relocate these victims. The State Department believes that the Serbs are placing the bodies around bomb sites to mislead the Yugoslavian people and the international community. This is an important part of the world. If I can close by putting up a map of Yugoslavia--this is not a small, insignificant area-- Yugoslavia lays in the heart of Europe on the Mediterranean Sea where civilizations have lasted for thousands and thousands of years. We have fought wars and millions of soldiers have died. Americans have spent fortunes and generations of blood helping Europe to achieve peace. In large part we have succeeded. With this one important exception. Establishing law and order through the Tribunal is the first step on a long road of recovery. That is the point of this resolution. I hope we will be successful today, and that it will give us the strength to maintain our resolve to bring justice to people who are depending on us. Thank you, Madam President. I yield the floor.

Ms. LANDRIEU. I thank the Chair. Madam President, I thank our chairman for the fine work that he has done in bringing this very important bill to the floor and to acknowledge the work of my colleague from Maine. As a Senator who represents another State with a great maritime tradition, I most certainly appreciate the hard work and the intensity to which she brings to bear in making sure we maintain adequate naval power to support all of our missions around the world. Her leadership has been tremendous. I look forward to working with her, along with our chairman, in the years to come.

Ms. LANDRIEU. I understand, I believe, what the Senator from Virginia is asking me. But I think the language of this amendment covers his concerns. We have not been allowed into Kosovo 1 day, but when we are, it will reveal atrocities and evidence of those responsible. It will happen in the same way as when we entered into Central Europe to find the concentration camps. This resolution simply states that no resolution of this conflict should give immunity in advance to anyone who could be charged and then later convicted of war crimes. I think the language is clear on that intent.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Absolutely. It is quite a serious point of this resolution, and I recognize that it may take a tool off the table, but it is purposefully done that way. I happen to believe it would be a great mistake for this Nation and our NATO allies to enter into any agreements that give immunity to people who are charged with war crimes, with the brutality of gang rapes, and torture. And there are hundreds of examples that we have had now from eyewitness accounts that we hope to prosecute.

Ms. LANDRIEU

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

Ms. LANDRIEU. I thank the Chair. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, this resolution, from the Senator from Pennsylvania and me, attempts to address the serious issue of war crimes. It calls for the Senate to make its voice clear on the issue of war crimes and the prosecution of those guilty of such crimes.