Connie Mack

Mr. MACK

Mr. MACK. Mr. President, I rise today to thank the distinguished chairman of the subcommittee for his hard work in getting this bill to the floor today. I also want to express my personal thanks for his including a truly historic appropriation for land acquisitions related to the Everglades restoration effort in my State of Florida. I would like to take a moment of the Senate's time today to engage the Senator from Washington in a colloquy. As the chairman well knows, the restoration effort encompasses all of south Florida, from the Kissimmee River in the north to the Florida Keys in the south. I understand that while the $66 million has been allocated for land acquisitions in Everglades National Park, the bill contains language allowing the Secretary to use these funds to purchase lands elsewhere in the south Florida ecosystem. Is that correct?

Mr. MACK

Mr. MACK. Mr. President, my colleague Senator Gorton has introduced an amendment which would return federal funding for education programs serving grades K-12 directly to school districts. Currently, nearly one third of all the money spent on education by the federal government ends up at the Department of Education. However, of that amount, only 13.1 percent actually reaches local school districts. Mr. President, the Federal Government currently administers so many education programs which it cannot efficiently control, nor can it determine if it is money well spent. The vast number of these programs are redundant and could be easily combined. Over the years, as new ideas and innovations in education have been enacted, we have not reviewed programs currently in place which serve similar purposes. The result has been a growing Washington bureaucracy, with more federal regulations affecting the day-to-day workings of our local schools. Clearly, when it comes to the education of our young people, one size does not fit all. This amendment would remove Washington bureaucrats from what should be local decisions. Parents, teachers, and local school officials are far better prepared to determine how best to use scarce resources. We should express our confidence in parents, our teachers and our principals to decide how best to use limited resources to meet the needs of children--who ultimately are the ones we must serve. Washington bureaucrats, far removed from these local situations, cannot accurately make those decisions. Mr. President, I am sure that during debate on this amendment and debate on this bill, we will hear from others in this body about the need to preserve Congress' role in providing for the education of our nation's children. Certainly, there is a role for Congress in this area, but I believe it is a more limited role. I must point out that this amendment would not reduce by one dime the amount of funding provided by the federal government for education nationwide. Instead, it will ensure that the status quo which has sentenced our schools to mediocrity will be reformed to enable parents, teachers and local decisionmakers to enact innovative reforms to our education system. Mr. President, I believe in this approach because I believe in parents--who have the biggest stake in their parent's success and fulfillment. I believe in teachers--who, everyday, stand before classrooms of children and challenge their minds with knowledge and ideas, who inspire them to dream and imagine, who help them open the doors to success. These are the ones we should seek to help, because their efforts will determine how America fares in the 21st Century-- they will determine whether we continue to lead in the world or whether we will allow that leadership to fall on some other nation. I'm confident that our parents, teachers, and students can build the best education system in the world, if only Washington ``experts'' will just get out of the way. Let's show them that Congress believes in their abilities to make the right decisions for the future of our children by supporting this amendment. I thank the chair and I yield the floor. Medicare Commission Provision

Mr. MACK

Mr. MACK. Madam President, I have an amendment on behalf of myself and my colleague from Florida, Senator Graham, that I send to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration.

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

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

Mr. MACK. Madam President, this amendment would provide an additional $5.2 million to fund the construction phase of the Mary McLeod Bethune Memorial Fine Arts Center and Hospitality Management Training Facility. It would bring the fiscal year 1998 appropriation for this center to $6.6 million, which is the same as the House committee recommendation. This center was authorized in 1992 as a freestanding bill and became Public Law 102-423. It would be offset by decreasing the salaries and expense accounts. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that this amendment be temporarily laid aside.

Mr. MACK. Madam President, I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. MACK

Mr. MACK. Mr. President, we have good reason to celebrate what we have just accomplished by passing the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997. We set out to help families pay for the education of their kids. It's done. We set out to provide a $500 credit for children. It's done. We set out to provide meaningful death tax relief. It's done. We set out to expand IRA's to encourage savings. It's done. We set out to provide significant capital gains relief. And it's done, too. The Taxpayer Relief Act is a great victory for the American people. But we cannot rest on this accomplishment, when there is much else that needs to be done. I am today introducing legislation to permanently extend the research and experimentation tax credit. In the tax bill we just passed, the research and experimentation tax credit is extended a mere 13 months, to June 30, 1998. This extension is disappointing. The research credit has provided a valuable economic incentive for U.S. companies to increase their investment in research and development in order to maintain their competitive edge in the global marketplace. A permanent extension of the research credit is critical to fast- growing research-intensive companies such as those in the computer, telecommunications, and biotechnology industries. For these companies, an incentive to increase investment in research plays a critical role in determining whether future research projects, many of which span many years in length, are started, continued, or abandoned. The incentive benefit of the current research credit is reduced because of its temporary and uncertain nature. The bill I am today introducing will correct this problem, and make the research tax credit an incentive that our high-technology companies can count on.

Mr. MACK

Mr. MACK. I also appreciate the comments of the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, and agree with him that the Judiciary Committee has jurisdiction over a number of these matters. I share Senator Hatch's commitment to a safe and beautiful national capital, and look forward to working with him to implement this important act.

Mr. MACK

Mr. MACK. Mr. President, just over 1 week ago, Congressman Chris Cox, together with many other Members of the House of Representatives, including Ben Gilman, Gerald Solomon, Duncan Hunter, Tillie Fowler, Chris Smith, Ed Royce, Bill McCollum, Henry Hyde, and Ileana Ros- Lehtinen introduced an 11-point legislative plan to address our Nation's failure to truly engage the People's Republic of China. Senator Tim Hutchinson and I joined in the unveiling of the House proposals to show our support for the good work done by our House colleagues and endorse the leadership of Congressman Cox. I also promised at that time to introduce companion legislation in the Senate. Mr. President, I rise today to offer that bill, the United States- People's Republic of China National Security and Freedom Protection Act. I am proud to say that Senator Hutchinson and Senator Ashcroft are joining me in introducing this bill today. Mr. President, I also want to congratulate Senator Abraham for his interest and work on developing a China policy. He has played an instrumental role in advancing the debate on this important issue. Mr. President, I come to this discussion of China policy following my 7 years of involvement with the people of Hong Kong and their commitment to freedom and democratic reforms. As Senate cochair of the congressional caucus on Hong Kong, I traveled to Hong Kong and China in late March of this year with the Democratic cochair, Senator Joe Lieberman. I must confess that on this recent trip, my concerns for the people of China and the future United States-People's Republic of China relationship increased. I was struck by the dichotomy between the people and the leadership in China. People's Republic of China officials expressed the view that people made governing difficult, as if the people exist for the benefit of the government. This fundamentally opposes my belief that people know what is best for themselves, and that government is for the benefit of the people. The official People's Republic of China view puts people at odds with government. Mr. President, in China, I attended church and visited with people at the Forbidden City, and saw in the eyes of children and parents throughout China the same thing I see here in America. I saw children full of hope and wonder, and parents full of pride and ambition for their children. I fear that these differences between the United States and China will lead us toward conflict unless we have a sound policy for which we can actively work toward improving relations. The administration calls their policy ``strategic engagement.'' I call it appeasement. Any policy which does not allow Americans to address their concerns with the People's Republic of China will prove irresponsible. I am introducing this bill today so that the children of China and the United States can grow up in peace, benefiting from each others' freedom and prosperity. Mr. President, this bill takes root in a belief that our China policy must contain five essential elements. First, United States policy should seek liberalization of the People's Republic of China Government, responsible behavior by the People's Republic of China, and integration of the People's Republic of China into the community of nations. United States interests are best served in China, as they are everywhere, when they are defined by the United States national security strategy: in the proliferation of democracy and the liberalization of authoritarian forms of government. Second, United States policy should continue to maintain a strong presence and commitment to leadership and involvement in the Asian Pacific region. The policy should be regionally and globally integrated. The United States shares a stake in China's future with the people of China, the region, and the world. Third, United States policy should encourage friendship between our nations while protecting national interests and acting on national values. The People's Republic of China does not today, and will not for the foreseeable future, pose a direct military threat to the United States. The People's Republic of China is not an enemy of the United States and should not be made out as such. Fourth, United States policy toward China should contain resolute and straight-forward toughness. United States policy toward China must not paper over issues which make China feel uncomfortable, but these issues should not dominate the relationship either. United States policy should seek to overcome these differences with the People's Republic of China. The People's Republic of China expects the United States to act honestly and directly, and the American people require a foreign policy which is honest and direct. And finally, United States policy should be a policy of meaningful engagement which includes the mechanisms of this act. In order to fulfill a meaningful policy with respect to the People's Republic of China, more tools are needed to address American interests beyond those available in the current policy. Mr. President, this bill provides a broad and positive context for dealing with the People's Republic of China and encouraging China's democratic development. It is divided into three main sections: national security, human rights, and trade. It uses targeted sanctions and increased diplomacy as its primary tools. Economic sanctions are imposed against the People's Liberation Army, which is banned from operating commercially in the United States. Political sanctions are imposed against human rights violators by denying entry into the United States to those responsible for religious persecution, coercive family planning practices, and political oppression. The act also calls for military sanctions as provided for in the Gore-McCain Nonproliferation Act. The sanctions are complemented by additional advocacy and reporting requirements placed upon United States diplomatic and customs officers in the People's Republic of China. The act provides for additional authorizations to meet these requirements, as well as to improve the broadcasting effectiveness of Radio Free Asia. To demonstrate support for Taiwan and clarity in our Taiwan policy, the Act requires a bilateral study assessing the need for and feasibility of providing TMD to Taiwan. The bill concludes with a title calling for review of the mechanisms called for in this act based upon China's behavior. Mr. President, perhaps within our lifetimes, and almost certainly in the lives of our children, China will become a premier Asian power. Whether that is a threat or a promise depends in large part on whether we rise to the occasion by asserting our values and interests while at the same time helping China meet its new responsibilities. Continuing down a policy track which offers choices only between inadequate engagement or quixotic containment is a journey that will end as it began, in frustration without alternatives. We cannot allow that to be our legacy.

Mr. MACK

Mr. MACK. Mr. President, just over 1 week ago, Congressman Chris Cox, together with many other Members of the House of Representatives, including Ben Gilman, Gerald Solomon, Duncan Hunter, Tillie Fowler, Chris Smith, Ed Royce, Bill McCollum, Henry Hyde, and Ileana Ros- Lehtinen introduced an 11-point legislative plan to address our Nation's failure to truly engage the People's Republic of China. Senator Tim Hutchinson and I joined in the unveiling of the House proposals to show our support for the good work done by our House colleagues and endorse the leadership of Congressman Cox. I also promised at that time to introduce companion legislation in the Senate. Mr. President, I rise today to offer that bill, the United States- People's Republic of China National Security and Freedom Protection Act. I am proud to say that Senator Hutchinson and Senator Ashcroft are joining me in introducing this bill today. Mr. President, I also want to congratulate Senator Abraham for his interest and work on developing a China policy. He has played an instrumental role in advancing the debate on this important issue. Mr. President, I come to this discussion of China policy following my 7 years of involvement with the people of Hong Kong and their commitment to freedom and democratic reforms. As Senate cochair of the congressional caucus on Hong Kong, I traveled to Hong Kong and China in late March of this year with the Democratic cochair, Senator Joe Lieberman. I must confess that on this recent trip, my concerns for the people of China and the future United States-People's Republic of China relationship increased. I was struck by the dichotomy between the people and the leadership in China. People's Republic of China officials expressed the view that people made governing difficult, as if the people exist for the benefit of the government. This fundamentally opposes my belief that people know what is best for themselves, and that government is for the benefit of the people. The official People's Republic of China view puts people at odds with government. Mr. President, in China, I attended church and visited with people at the Forbidden City, and saw in the eyes of children and parents throughout China the same thing I see here in America. I saw children full of hope and wonder, and parents full of pride and ambition for their children. I fear that these differences between the United States and China will lead us toward conflict unless we have a sound policy for which we can actively work toward improving relations. The administration calls their policy ``strategic engagement.'' I call it appeasement. Any policy which does not allow Americans to address their concerns with the People's Republic of China will prove irresponsible. I am introducing this bill today so that the children of China and the United States can grow up in peace, benefiting from each others' freedom and prosperity. Mr. President, this bill takes root in a belief that our China policy must contain five essential elements. First, United States policy should seek liberalization of the People's Republic of China Government, responsible behavior by the People's Republic of China, and integration of the People's Republic of China into the community of nations. United States interests are best served in China, as they are everywhere, when they are defined by the United States national security strategy: in the proliferation of democracy and the liberalization of authoritarian forms of government. Second, United States policy should continue to maintain a strong presence and commitment to leadership and involvement in the Asian Pacific region. The policy should be regionally and globally integrated. The United States shares a stake in China's future with the people of China, the region, and the world. Third, United States policy should encourage friendship between our nations while protecting national interests and acting on national values. The People's Republic of China does not today, and will not for the foreseeable future, pose a direct military threat to the United States. The People's Republic of China is not an enemy of the United States and should not be made out as such. Fourth, United States policy toward China should contain resolute and straight-forward toughness. United States policy toward China must not paper over issues which make China feel uncomfortable, but these issues should not dominate the relationship either. United States policy should seek to overcome these differences with the People's Republic of China. The People's Republic of China expects the United States to act honestly and directly, and the American people require a foreign policy which is honest and direct. And finally, United States policy should be a policy of meaningful engagement which includes the mechanisms of this act. In order to fulfill a meaningful policy with respect to the People's Republic of China, more tools are needed to address American interests beyond those available in the current policy. Mr. President, this bill provides a broad and positive context for dealing with the People's Republic of China and encouraging China's democratic development. It is divided into three main sections: national security, human rights, and trade. It uses targeted sanctions and increased diplomacy as its primary tools. Economic sanctions are imposed against the People's Liberation Army, which is banned from operating commercially in the United States. Political sanctions are imposed against human rights violators by denying entry into the United States to those responsible for religious persecution, coercive family planning practices, and political oppression. The act also calls for military sanctions as provided for in the Gore-McCain Nonproliferation Act. The sanctions are complemented by additional advocacy and reporting requirements placed upon United States diplomatic and customs officers in the People's Republic of China. The act provides for additional authorizations to meet these requirements, as well as to improve the broadcasting effectiveness of Radio Free Asia. To demonstrate support for Taiwan and clarity in our Taiwan policy, the Act requires a bilateral study assessing the need for and feasibility of providing TMD to Taiwan. The bill concludes with a title calling for review of the mechanisms called for in this act based upon China's behavior. Mr. President, perhaps within our lifetimes, and almost certainly in the lives of our children, China will become a premier Asian power. Whether that is a threat or a promise depends in large part on whether we rise to the occasion by asserting our values and interests while at the same time helping China meet its new responsibilities. Continuing down a policy track which offers choices only between inadequate engagement or quixotic containment is a journey that will end as it began, in frustration without alternatives. We cannot allow that to be our legacy.

Mr. MACK

Mr. MACK. Mr. President, today I join my friends Senator Graham and Senator Kennedy in introducing a bill which would ease the transition into implementation of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 [IIRAIRA] for certain Central American immigrants. This legislation, which has been requested by President Clinton, is designed to ensure that those immigrants who were in the administrative pipeline at the time IIRAIRA took effect will have their cases decided under the set of rules in place before enactment of IIRAIRA. This legislation will by no means grant amnesty to anyone; it will ensure that each individual will have their application for suspension of deportation given full and fair consideration. This legislation is a matter of freedom, justice, human rights and fundamental fairness. During consideration of IIRAIRA, I maintained that those immigrants who were already in this country should not have the rules changed on them midstream. Many Central American immigrants have planted deep roots in the United States and are valued members of their communities. They should be free from the fear of deportation without a full consideration of their request for suspension of that deportation under the set of rules in place at the time that they applied. Ten years ago, in the mountains of Nicaragua, I spoke to thousands of young men who were fighting for freedom. I told them then that we would not forget them, and I tell them now that we will not forget them. I urge the Senate's expedient consideration and passage of this legislation.

Mr. MACK

Mr. MACK. Mr. President, I rise today with my colleague from Florida, Senator Graham, to introduce legislation approving an agreement between the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida, and the State of Florida. This agreement arose from disputes surrounding the construction of Interstate 75 through the Miccosukee Reservation in Florida. By way of background, Mr. President, when the interstate was built from Naples across to Fort Lauderdale, the Florida Department of Transportation dredged fill dirt off the northern Miccosukee Indian Reservation and used it to construct the roadbed. The Miccosukees subsequently sued in Federal District Court on the basis of an unlawful taking of property. The State and the Miccosukees subsequently worked out a settlement whereby Florida would keep the fill-dirt and the Indians would get several parcels of State land. One parcel is adjacent to the tribe's permit lands on Tamiami Trail and another is near the Krome Detention Center in Miami. This agreement has been signed by the Miccosukees and the Department of Interior and was endorsed unanimously by the Governor and Cabinet of Florida. The bill we are introducing today will direct the Secretary of the Interior--as the Federal trustee of the Miccosukees--to: First, aid and assist in the fulfillment of the settlement agreement in a reasonable manner; second, upon finding that the agreement is legally sufficient, the Secretary should sign the agreement on behalf of the United States; third, facilitate the transfer of Miccosukee land--the fill-dirt--to the Florida Department of Transportation under the terms of the agreement, and; fourth, receive in Federal trust--on behalf of the Miccosukees--the land put up by the State for the swap-- adjacent to Permit Area and Krome. Mr. President, this legislation has also been introduced by Representative Diaz-Balart in the House of Representatives. The enactment of this legislation is very important to the Miccosukee Tribe and I urge my colleagues to join us in this effort. Thank you, Mr. President.

Mr. MACK

Mr. MACK. Mr. President, I rise today with my colleague from Florida, Senator Graham, to introduce legislation approving an agreement between the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida, and the State of Florida. This agreement arose from disputes surrounding the construction of Interstate 75 through the Miccosukee Reservation in Florida. By way of background, Mr. President, when the interstate was built from Naples across to Fort Lauderdale, the Florida Department of Transportation dredged fill dirt off the northern Miccosukee Indian Reservation and used it to construct the roadbed. The Miccosukees subsequently sued in Federal District Court on the basis of an unlawful taking of property. The State and the Miccosukees subsequently worked out a settlement whereby Florida would keep the fill-dirt and the Indians would get several parcels of State land. One parcel is adjacent to the tribe's permit lands on Tamiami Trail and another is near the Krome Detention Center in Miami. This agreement has been signed by the Miccosukees and the Department of Interior and was endorsed unanimously by the Governor and Cabinet of Florida. The bill we are introducing today will direct the Secretary of the Interior--as the Federal trustee of the Miccosukees--to: First, aid and assist in the fulfillment of the settlement agreement in a reasonable manner; second, upon finding that the agreement is legally sufficient, the Secretary should sign the agreement on behalf of the United States; third, facilitate the transfer of Miccosukee land--the fill-dirt--to the Florida Department of Transportation under the terms of the agreement, and; fourth, receive in Federal trust--on behalf of the Miccosukees--the land put up by the State for the swap-- adjacent to Permit Area and Krome. Mr. President, this legislation has also been introduced by Representative Diaz-Balart in the House of Representatives. The enactment of this legislation is very important to the Miccosukee Tribe and I urge my colleagues to join us in this effort. Thank you, Mr. President.

Mr. MACK

Mr. MACK. I thank the Senator very much for his work and dedication to this issue. I look forward to our continued cooperative effort in resolving this critical issue.

Mr. MACK. I would like to commend Senator Bond for addressing the section 8 contract expiration issue by including S. 513, the Multifamily Assisted Housing Reform and Affordability Act of 1997 in the VA/HUD appropriations bill. This legislation, which is cosponsored by my colleague from Missouri and Senators D'Amato, Bennett, Domenici, Faircloth, Grams, and Chafee, is a national priority for reforming the Department of Housing and Urban Development's HUD multifamily housing programs and reducing the escalating costs of project-based section 8 renewals. According to preliminary estimates by the Congressional Budget Office, this legislation will save the American taxpayer about $4.6 billion in section 8 funds over the next 10 years. This legislation not only saves scarce Federal resources, it also protects the Federal investment in affordable housing by screening out distressed properties and noncompliant owners from the Federal programs and addresses HUD's management problems with this portfolio by utilizing capable public and private third parties. It is critical to enact this legislation into law this year. The Banking Committee unanimously approved S. 513 as part of its budget reconciliation package this June. Unfortunately, the Senate and House subconferees were unable to come to an agreement on this legislation and subsequently, it was dropped out of the reconciliation package. Accordingly, I will continue to push this legislation and strongly support Senator Bond's effort in passing S. 513 as part of the appropriations bill. When Secretary Cuomo testified before the Banking Committee on S. 513, he raised several concerns about the restructuring process outlined in the bill. But he also indicated his willingness to address those concerns through negotiations with the Senate. I want to point out that significant progress has been made to address the administration's concerns with the bill. Two major areas where agreement was reached relate to the use of third parties or participating administrative entities [PAE] and the use of tenant-based assistance. On the use of PAE's, HUD has agreed to maintain the Senate's priority for State and local housing finance agencies to serve as restructuring entities. However, the Senate has agreed to provide additional flexibility to the Secretary in selecting qualified PAE's while protecting the public purpose. Also, the Senate and administration have agreed to provide discretion to PAE's in determining whether tenant-based or project-based assistance will be provided for qualified properties after restructuring. I would like to ask Senator Bond for his assurance that, as this process moves forward, he will endeavor to assure that the agreements made with the administration are incorporated into the bill.

Mr. MACK

Mr. MACK. Mr. President, I want to thank the Senator from Texas for her comments this morning and for her involvement in expressing the importance of the actions on the part of the Governmental Affairs Committee. I also want to express my support for the committee itself and the inquiry that began some 6 months ago. As elected officials, it is our duty not only to change the laws when necessary but to abide by them. The hearings that began in the Governmental Affairs Committee yesterday are an inquiry into just how well the Clinton administration abided by the law during the last election cycle. The Democrat Party and the White House would like the American public to think that they did nothing different than anyone else, and that everybody does it and therefore we must change the law. That just simply is not true. No, not everybody does it. Before we begin considering what new laws to pass, we ought to examine who has violated the ones we have on the books now. In my view, the administration will have no standing to debate the issue of campaign finance reform until they prove that we can live and that they can live within the law as it currently stands. It does little good to create new laws if our leaders don't follow them with principle, integrity, and some semblance of morality. We ought to have leaders who adhere to the spirit of the laws--rather than to push the envelope of propriety. Unfortunately, there are credible allegations that the Clinton administration exhibited precious little principle, integrity, or morality in the conduct of their last campaign. The committee will be looking into whether the Clinton administration knowingly accepted illegal foreign contributions, allowed money laundering to occur, or actively engaged in the unlawful solicitation of campaign donations in Federal buildings. Worst of all, the committee must determine the true nature and extent of what appears to be a calculated attempt by the Chinese Government to buy influence in the last election. Senator Thompson's committee has uncovered evidence of a detailed plan by China to illegally increase their influence over the United States legal process. They found that China has invested substantial sums of money in this effort and that the White House was made aware of the plan prior to the election but did nothing to prevent it from succeeding. Disturbingly, the Chinese plan continues today. The committee must now determine who knew or should have known about this plan and how it came to be implemented. I commend Senator Thompson and his team for uncovering this shocking infiltration of our electoral system by another government. Judging by the level of complaining by Democrats, he must be close to the truth. When you get right down to it, these hearings are about the lack of shame in this administration. No one in this administration is ashamed of the fact that they may have broken the laws to win the election. No one in this administration seems to be ashamed of the fact that the President and Vice President reportedly leaned on donors from the comfort of the White House. That is illegal. And no one in this administration seems to be ashamed of the fact that overnight stays in the Lincoln bedroom were for sale to the highest bidder. The White House should not be for sale. No one in this administration seems to be ashamed of the fact that poor religious people were preyed upon for illegal donations. They should be beyond such political manipulation. No one in this administration seems to be ashamed of the fact that fundraising safeguards were jettisoned so that illegal foreign cash came rolling in with no questions asked. Compliance with our country's election laws is not optional. No one in this administration seems to be ashamed of the fact that a midlevel political appointee potentially compromised our national security. He should never have been in a position to do so. This administration seems incapable of being ashamed of any of this. Rather, they continue to rationalize their actions in an attempt to deflect the negative publicity with hollow calls for campaign finance reform. Unlike others who attempt to tear down our current system, I hope Senator Thompson and the members of the Governmental Affairs Committee are able to restore some confidence in our system through these hearings. Calling people to publicly account for their wrongdoing is the first step in that journey. Finally, I want to thank Senator Thompson for his forbearance. He has shown great tolerance and conducted himself like a gentleman, at times when courtesy has been hard to muster. The administration continues to stonewall the committee on producing documents; witnesses have claimed their fifth amendment privilege; targets have fled the country; and a paper trail consisting of millions of pages have been left for the committee to unravel. Today, I express my gratitude to him for taking on this unpleasant job, and I wish the committee members patience and good judgment in exercising their duties to uncover what has heretofore been covered up. I thank the Chair and I yield the floor. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. MACK

Mr. MACK. Mr. President, I rise today to join my colleague, Senator Lieberman, to introduce the Hong Kong Press Freedom Act. Mr. President, as we consider China and Hong Kong in these final weeks before Hong Kong reversion, it is important for us to reflect on the facts, and what drives our behaviors toward China. We fought the Cold War for freedom and democracy. The war is over, but we know of 1.2 billion people still wearing the yoke of communism-- or at least nondemocratic oppression. On July 1, we might be forced to witness that number grow by 6 million as Hong Kong falls under control of the People's Republic of China. If the defining moment of the 1980s was the crumbling of the Berlin Wall and the spread of freedom and democracy, we should not allow this decade to be remembered most by the victory of totalitarianism over human dignity. One essential element of freedom is press freedom. Until recently, Hong Kong enjoyed one of the freest presses in the world. But already, experts point to instances of self censorship occurring on the island. All indications are that this freedom will continue to deteriorate following Hong Kong's reversion. Today, I am introducing a bill in the Senate to encourage press freedom in Hong Kong. A similar measure was introduced in the House by Representative Porter and 27 other members in February. The measure supports those Hong Kong journalists who chose to remain loyal to the standards of honest and open reporting. Specifically, this bill provides special immigration status to journalists and their families should they be threatened as a result of their reporting. When Senator Lieberman and I visited Hong Kong earlier this year, we heard several stories of self-censorship occurring in the Hong Kong press. Many of the larger papers were losing circulation and the underground and small papers were growing. It is this free thought and competition which we seek to preserve. Without press freedom, what other freedom can survive? While this is a small and specific measure, its impact can be profound. I urge immediate consideration and passage of this measure.

Mr. MACK

Mr. MACK. Mr. President, I rise today to join my colleague, Senator Lieberman, to introduce the Hong Kong Press Freedom Act. Mr. President, as we consider China and Hong Kong in these final weeks before Hong Kong reversion, it is important for us to reflect on the facts, and what drives our behaviors toward China. We fought the Cold War for freedom and democracy. The war is over, but we know of 1.2 billion people still wearing the yoke of communism-- or at least nondemocratic oppression. On July 1, we might be forced to witness that number grow by 6 million as Hong Kong falls under control of the People's Republic of China. If the defining moment of the 1980s was the crumbling of the Berlin Wall and the spread of freedom and democracy, we should not allow this decade to be remembered most by the victory of totalitarianism over human dignity. One essential element of freedom is press freedom. Until recently, Hong Kong enjoyed one of the freest presses in the world. But already, experts point to instances of self censorship occurring on the island. All indications are that this freedom will continue to deteriorate following Hong Kong's reversion. Today, I am introducing a bill in the Senate to encourage press freedom in Hong Kong. A similar measure was introduced in the House by Representative Porter and 27 other members in February. The measure supports those Hong Kong journalists who chose to remain loyal to the standards of honest and open reporting. Specifically, this bill provides special immigration status to journalists and their families should they be threatened as a result of their reporting. When Senator Lieberman and I visited Hong Kong earlier this year, we heard several stories of self-censorship occurring in the Hong Kong press. Many of the larger papers were losing circulation and the underground and small papers were growing. It is this free thought and competition which we seek to preserve. Without press freedom, what other freedom can survive? While this is a small and specific measure, its impact can be profound. I urge immediate consideration and passage of this measure.

Mr. MACK

Mr. MACK. Mr. President, I rise today with my colleague, Senator Graham, to introduce the Florida Coast Protection Act. This legislation will cancel the six oil and gas leases on the Outer Continental Shelf closest to Florida's coast. Representative Scarborough is leading a similar effort in the House of Representatives. Mr. President, Floridians have always been justifiably concerned about the prospect of oil and gas exploration in the waters off our State. We are well aware of the risk this activity poses to our environment and our economy. Throughout my tenure in the Senate I have opposed exploration and drilling off Florida's coasts. My goal--and the goal the entire Florida congressional delegation--is to permanently remove this threat from our coastlines. In recent years, we have stood together in opposition to drilling and have successfully extended the annual moratorium on all new leasing activities on Florida's continental shelf. The reason for our concern is simple, Mr. President. In Florida, a healthy environment means a healthy economy. Millions of people come to our State each year to enjoy the climate, the coastlines, and our fine quality of life. It would only take one disaster to end Florida's good standing as America's vacationland and we cannot afford to let that happen. Mr. President, if the current exploration plan runs its course, there is the potential for the operation of up to 400 drill rigs off Florida's panhandle. A recent permit report from the Environmental Protection Agency states that a typical rig can be expected to discharge between 6,500 and 13,000 barrels of waste. This presents a huge potential for damage to our near-shore coastal waters and beaches. The report warns of further harmful impact on marine mammal populations, fish populations, and air quality. We cannot afford these risks in Florida and we do not want these risks in Florida. But while the opposition of Floridians to oil drilling is well documented, the reality remains that leases have been let, potential drilling sites have been explored and it is likely that actual extraction of resources will take place 17 miles off the coast of Florida. Mr. President, if this is allowed to happen, the drill rigs will be within the line of sight from vacationers in Pensacola. This Congress must not allow that to happen. The legislation we are introducing today is very simple. It provides for cancellation of the lease tract 17 miles off Pensacola. Under the OCS Lands Act, Mr. President, the current holders of these leases would be entitled to fair compensation for their investment. This is only fair. The bill also makes permanent the moratorium on any new leasing activity in order to ensure the past mistake of leasing in the OCS off Florida is not repeated. If the threat of oil and gas exploration is to be permanently removed from our shores, it will require responsible leadership from the Congress. This legislation, in my view, is absolutely necessary to protect our state's economic and environmental well-being. I urge my colleagues to support this worthwhile effort.

Mr. MACK

Mr. MACK. Mr. President, I rise today with my colleague, Senator Graham, to introduce the Florida Coast Protection Act. This legislation will cancel the six oil and gas leases on the Outer Continental Shelf closest to Florida's coast. Representative Scarborough is leading a similar effort in the House of Representatives. Mr. President, Floridians have always been justifiably concerned about the prospect of oil and gas exploration in the waters off our State. We are well aware of the risk this activity poses to our environment and our economy. Throughout my tenure in the Senate I have opposed exploration and drilling off Florida's coasts. My goal--and the goal the entire Florida congressional delegation--is to permanently remove this threat from our coastlines. In recent years, we have stood together in opposition to drilling and have successfully extended the annual moratorium on all new leasing activities on Florida's continental shelf. The reason for our concern is simple, Mr. President. In Florida, a healthy environment means a healthy economy. Millions of people come to our State each year to enjoy the climate, the coastlines, and our fine quality of life. It would only take one disaster to end Florida's good standing as America's vacationland and we cannot afford to let that happen. Mr. President, if the current exploration plan runs its course, there is the potential for the operation of up to 400 drill rigs off Florida's panhandle. A recent permit report from the Environmental Protection Agency states that a typical rig can be expected to discharge between 6,500 and 13,000 barrels of waste. This presents a huge potential for damage to our near-shore coastal waters and beaches. The report warns of further harmful impact on marine mammal populations, fish populations, and air quality. We cannot afford these risks in Florida and we do not want these risks in Florida. But while the opposition of Floridians to oil drilling is well documented, the reality remains that leases have been let, potential drilling sites have been explored and it is likely that actual extraction of resources will take place 17 miles off the coast of Florida. Mr. President, if this is allowed to happen, the drill rigs will be within the line of sight from vacationers in Pensacola. This Congress must not allow that to happen. The legislation we are introducing today is very simple. It provides for cancellation of the lease tract 17 miles off Pensacola. Under the OCS Lands Act, Mr. President, the current holders of these leases would be entitled to fair compensation for their investment. This is only fair. The bill also makes permanent the moratorium on any new leasing activity in order to ensure the past mistake of leasing in the OCS off Florida is not repeated. If the threat of oil and gas exploration is to be permanently removed from our shores, it will require responsible leadership from the Congress. This legislation, in my view, is absolutely necessary to protect our state's economic and environmental well-being. I urge my colleagues to support this worthwhile effort.

Mr. MACK

Mr. MACK. Mr. President, I rise today to commemorate the 30th anniversary of the reunification of Jerusalem and to congratulate the people of Israel on their commitment to freedom. Jerusalem, Mr. President, is a city unique in all the world. We know much of its 3,000 year history. We know that Jerusalem has been a great city for many people; we know that it remains a holy city for people throughout the world; we know that it is an inseparable part of the Jewish state, a fundamental part of Jewish identity; and we know that it is the undivided capital of the State of Israel. It was on the hill which we call the Temple Mount that overlooked the Jerusalem of Abraham, where God called upon Abraham to bring his son to be sacrificed; it was here that God made His covenant with man. Jerusalem holds the remains of the first and second temples including the Western Wall of the temple's courtyard, Judaism's holiest site. It is to Jerusalem that Jews everywhere in the world turn in prayer and, no matter where they live, they conclude their celebrations with the refrain ``next year in Jerusalem.'' Mr. President, I would like to read from perhaps the most moving description of this great city delivered by one of Israel's greatest leaders and statesmen. In 1995, the late Prime Minister Yitzak Rabin delivered the following remarks here in the U.S. Capitol: Jerusalem is the heart of the Jewish people and a deep source of our pride. On this festive occasion, thousands of miles from home, here and now, we once again are raising Jerusalem above our highest joy, just like our fathers and our fathers' fathers did. Jerusalem has a thousand faces--and each one of us has his own Jerusalem. My Jerusalem is Dr. Moshe Wallach of Germany, the doctor of the sick of Israel and Jerusalem, who built Sha'arei Zedek hospital and had his home in its courtyard so as to be close to his patients day and night. I was born in his hospital . . . My Jerusalem is the focus of the Jewish people's yearnings, the city of its visions, the cradle of its prayers. It is the dream of the return to Zion. It is the name millions murmur, even on their death bed. It is the place where eyes are raised and prayers are uttered. My Jerusalem is the jerrycan of water measured out to the besieged in 1948, the faces of its anxious citizens quietly waiting in line for bread, the sky whose blackness was torn by flares. My Jerusalem is Bab el-Wad--the road to the city--which cries out, ``Remember our names forever.'' It is the ashen faces of dead comrades from the War of Independence, and the searing cold of the rusting armored cars among the pines on the side of the road. My Jerusalem is the great mountain, the military cemetery on Mount Herzl, the city of silence whose earth holds the treasured thousands of those who went to bitter battle--and did not return. My Jerusalem is the tears of the paratroopers at the Western Wall in 1967 and the flag which once more waved above the remnant of the Temple. My Jerusalem is the changing colors of its walls, the smells of its markets and the faces of the members of every community and every faith, where all have freedom of thought and freedom of worship in the city where holiness envelops every stone, every word, every glance. And my Jerusalem is the City of Peace, which will bear great tidings to all faiths, to all nations, ``For the Torah shall come forth from Zion and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem . . . Peace be within thy walls and prosperity within thy palaces.'' We differ in our opinions, left and right. We disagree on the means and the objective. In Israel, we all agree on one issue: the wholeness of Jerusalem, the continuation of its existence as capital of the State of Israel. There are no two Jerusalems. There is only one Jerusalem. For us, Jerusalem is not subject to compromise, and there is no peace without Jerusalem. Jerusalem, which was destroyed eight times, where for years we had no access to the remnants of our Temple, was ours, is ours, and will be ours--forever. ``Here tears do not weaken eyes,'' wrote the Jerusalem poet Yehuda Amichai. ``They only polish and shine the hardness of faces like stone.'' Jerusalem is that stone. Mr. President, Jerusalem is more than the heart of the Jewish people. It is sacred throughout the world. Jesus was crucified inside today's city, and Mohammed was said to have ascended into Heaven from the Temple Mount. Mr. President, Jerusalem indeed is a great city; it is a city of the world, a city revered by the world, and a city for the world. Its freedom is invaluable. Unfortunately, from 1948 to 1967, beginning with the war waged against the new State of Israel and ending with Israel's victory in the Six-Day War, Jerusalem was a divided city. During this time, Israelis of all faiths and Jews from around the world were prohibited from entering the eastern part of the city and from praying at the holy sites there. Jerusalem had lost its freedom, and the world had lost its Jerusalem. This week, Mr. President, marks the anniversary of the liberation of the holy city and its return to freedom. That is why we are congratulating the people of Jerusalem. Today, Jerusalem is a city of growth, prosperity, and freedom. Upon their victory in 1967, those denied the city for so long did not deny it to the defeated. To this day, perhaps the most holy site for all three major religions of the city remains housed in a Moslem mosque, the Dome of the Rock. But it is a place which can be visited by anyone who desires. So, beyond honoring the freedom of this great city, I want to congratulate the people of Jerusalem and of Israel for their commitment to religious freedom and the principle that religious faiths should not pay the price of political disputes. The Jews of Israel know very well the importance of religious freedom, and the pain of its denial. Today, as we remember Jerusalem's proud and turbulent past, and honor its freedom-loving residents, we must appreciate the continuing threat to the city's future. Thirty years ago today, Mr. President, Israel was at war, fighting for the freedom and indivisibility of Jerusalem. I submit that today, Israel remains at war. We must remember, as the peace which seeks to end this war ebbs and flows, that many people in and around Israel are trying to accomplish through other means what they failed to do in 1967--push Israel into the Mediterranean Sea. In this environment, we must not assume all parties are equally right and equally wrong. The middle of a dispute is usually not halfway in between the belligerents. Treating bombs in cafes and on buses as morally equivalent to bulldozers on deserted hilltops jeopardizes peace. The Senate, on May 20, passed Senate Concurrent Resolution 21, marking the anniversary of Jerusalem's reunification and congratulating the people of Israel. The measure had 88 initial cosponsors and passed unanimously. This clear message cannot be misunderstood. There is only one Jerusalem and it is the undivided capital of Israel. As the peace process continues there should be no doubt about where the U.S. Senate stands. The Senate strongly believes that Jerusalem must remain an undivided city in which the rights of every ethnic and religious group are protected as they have been by Israel during the past 30 years and calls upon the President and Secretary of State to publicly affirm as a matter of United States policy that Jerusalem must remain the undivided capital of the State of Israel.

Mr. MACK

Mr. MACK. Mr. President, on June 4, 1989, the People's Republic of China perpetrated a bloody massacre against her own people. Thousands of freedom-seeking people took to the streets only to be put down violently by the long arm of the Chinese Government. Today, 8 years later, what has changed with that Government to reassure us that such atrocities will not happen again? Not much. Those in power remain in power, and they express no remorse. The only significant change is that every major dissident in China today is imprisoned. Today, those same rulers in Beijing, their princeling children, and the military leaders of the People's Liberation Army strengthen themselves through operating commercial activities in the United States. We allow a regime willing to use violence against its own people, surely capable of directing that violence outwardly, to develop and strengthen through profits obtained in the United States. This is intolerable and must be stopped. On the occasion of the eighth annual remembrance of the Tiananmen Square massacre, I call upon the President and Congress to work together to address this gross error in U.S. policy which threatens even our own national security. This must be an essential element of a new China policy which creates effective ways to address U.S. trade, human rights, and security concerns. We have the opportunity of the 1997 MFN debate to address our concerns with, and even support for, China. We must use this opportunity to engage in an earnest debate over the proper form of engagement. We should not accept the simple refrain, engagement is better than containment as a substitute for a substantive policy.

Mr. MACK

Mr. MACK. Mr. President, I thank the Chair for the recognition. I, like my colleagues, have come to the floor of the Senate today to express my fond feelings for Senator Thurmond, the Senator from South Carolina. As he is fond of saying about so many of us that he campaigns for, he is a man of character. He is a man of capacity. And I would add that he truly is a man who cares about his fellow man. Senator Stevens said a moment ago that Senator Thurmond is someone we can all learn from. I can tell you as a fellow who was running, campaigning for the Senate in 1988, Senator Thurmond volunteered to come to Florida to campaign for me. One of the things he said prior to making that commitment was that ``if I come, I want to be busy. I do not want to come down there for just one or two events. I want to come down there, I want to be busy.'' We picked him up at about 5:30 in the morning and we finished that day about 10 o'clock at night. We traveled from Jacksonville, FL, down through the center part of the State, to Lakeland and Tampa, and then an event close to Winter Haven that evening, never missing a beat. And again, I say I learned not just about campaigning but I truly learned about the heart of the man because about halfway through the day there was a press conference set up. He asked me if he could make a phone call before we did that press conference. And, of course, I said sure. And as I stood by him I realized what he was doing. He was calling a family in South Carolina that experienced the loss of a family member. Here is this man who has been elected and reelected and reelected and reelected, and loved in South Carolina in the middle of a tough day campaigning taking a moment out of that busy schedule to reach out to that family in South Carolina to say we understand your concern, the pain that you are feeling, we are concerned about you; I am concerned about you. Your family member was a great, great person; he meant so much to me. Can you imagine the sense of love the family felt that day. If anybody ever questions why Senator Thurmond has been elected and reelected and reelected and reelected, it is because he is a man who truly cares about others, whose heart is filled with love. I came to the Senate 9 years ago, and in a sense Senator Thurmond acts as a bridge between one generation of my family and myself. My step-grandfather retired from the Senate in December 1952, and Senator Thurmond, if I have that correct, was sworn in to the Senate in the next Congress, and so he served in that interim period of time between the time that my step-grandfather retired from the Senate and I came to the Senate. What an inspiration he has been to me. Frankly, Senator Thurmond, you have created a new dimension of what service to this country is all about. You have created a new dimension about service to the Senate. A moment ago I heard Senator Stevens talk about a strong heart, and it triggered in my mind that in essence, Senator Thurmond, you are a modern day brave heart, and it is has been a true honor to serve with you in the Senate. I yield the floor.

Mr. MACK

Mr. MACK. I ask for the yeas and nays.