Daniel Moynihan

Mr. MOYNIHAN

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, current Supreme Court Justice David Souter captured the legacy of jurisprudence left behind by William J. Brennan Jr., when he said: ``Justice Brennan is going to be remembered as one of the most fearlessly principled guardians of the American Constitution that it has ever had and ever will have.'' In an era when no institution is more embattled than the U.S. Constitution, we must make special note of the passing of such ardent guardians. In a manner that endeared him equally to friend and foe, Justice Brennan matched the importance of his decisions with literary acumen. With language that could be compared to the authors of the Constitution, Justice Brennan guarded the constitutional principles-- most especially the freedom to criticize one's government. Madison's original version of the first amendment submitted on June 8, 1789, provided that: ``The people shall not be deprived or abridged of their right to speak, to write, or to publish their sentiments; and the freedom of the press, as one of the great bulwarks of liberty, shall be inviolable.'' Justice Brennan's identification of Madison's inviolable protection was crucial during the civil rights movement when members of the press were being figuratively gagged for their criticism of public officials. Thus, Brennan wrote in The New York Times versus Sullivan: We consider this case against the background of a profound national commitment to the principle that debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open, and that it may well include vehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials. * * * A rule compelling the critic of official conduct to guarantee the truth of all his factual assertions--and to do so on pain of libel judgments virtually unlimited in amount-- leads to a comparable ``self censorship.'' Allowance of the defense of truth, with the burden of proving it on the defendant, does not mean that only false speech will be deterred. * * * Under such a rule, would-be critics of official conduct may be deterred from voicing their criticism, even though it is believed to be true and even though it is in fact true, because of doubt whether it can be proved in court or fear of the expense of having to do so. They tend to make only statements which ``steer far wider of the unlawful zone.'' The rule thus dampens the vigor and limits the variety of public debate. It is inconsistent with the 1st and 14th Amendments. In 1789, James Madison warned that, ``If we advert to the nature of republican government, we shall find that the censorial power is in the people over the government, and not in the government over the people.'' Exactly 200 years later, Brennan expanded this underlying premise of constitutionally protected forms of free expression in the case, Texas versus Johnson, 1989: If there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that the Government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable. * * * There is, moreover, no indication--either in the text of the Constitution or in our cases interpreting it--that a separate juridical category exists for the American flag alone. Indeed, we would not be surprised to learn that the persons who framed our Constitution and wrote the amendment that we now construe were not known for their reverence for the Union Jack. The first amendment does not guarantee that other concepts virtually sacred to our Nation as a whole--such as the principle that discrimination on the basis of race is odious and destructive--will go unquestioned in the marketplace of ideas. We decline, therefore, to create for the flag an exception to the joust of principles protected by the First Amendment. * * * The way to preserve the flag's special role is not to punish those who feel differently about these matters. It is to persuade them that they are wrong * * * We can imagine no more appropriate response to burning a flag than waving one's own. * * * Justice Brennan came to embody the defense of a Madisonian concept of the first amendment. We shall not soon forget his legacy, nor the critical mantle he has left behind. I ask unanimous consent that an Editoral from the New York Times of July 25, and an article by Anthony Lewis of July 28, be printed in the Record.

Mr. MOYNIHAN

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, this morning I learned from the mayor of the Village of Owego of a problem he is having with the village's share of the local law enforcement block grant. As we are concluding the debate on the Commerce, State, Justice appropriations bill today, I thought it might be appropriate to bring the matter to the attention of the Senator from New Hampshire and the Senator from South Carolina. I intend to pursue the matter with the Justice Department, but I may need to ask their help at some point. Mayor Hogan informs me that after recently receiving a letter from the director of the Bureau of Justice Assistance concerning the application process for fiscal year 1997 funds, and while filling out the fiscal year 1997 application, village officials discovered that 1996 funds had been available to them. They had never been notified. A Bureau official then told them that some requests for applications had been sent to incorrect addresses. Village officials contacted the supervisor of the nearby Town of Owego, who remembered receiving the application notice meant for the village. However, the application deadline passed 9 months ago. The village lost out on $10,840 through no fault of its own. Mr. President, $10,840 may not seem to be a large sum these days, but for the Village of Owego it is. It constitutes three-quarters of 1 percent of the village tax base. If three-quarters of 1 percent of the total Federal receipts for 1998 were at stake, we would be talking about $11.7 billion, and that would have our attention. I hope the Senators from New Hampshire and South Carolina will consider assisting in this matter if necessary.

Mr. MOYNIHAN

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, throughout this week, hundreds of volunteers will gather together for the annual ``On and Under the Delaware River Cleanup'' on the upper Delaware River. People from New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania will work together to clean up the Delaware River, picking up trash and removing debris from the shores, surface, and bottom of a 70-mile section of the river. Once again, Ruth Jones and the folks at Kittatinny Canoes will lead this effort and supply the boats, cleaning materials, trash removal, and other services needed for the effort. National Park Service employees and a member of my staff will also participate. The Delaware River is the longest free-flowing river in the country. It starts in my home county, Delaware County, NY, at the confluence of the east and west branches of the river in Deposit, NY and continues down through Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware, ultimately feeding into the Atlantic Ocean. The west branch starts in Stamford, NY, just 25 miles from my home in Pindars Corners. This river is one of New York's and the Nation's great treasures. I applaud Ms. Jones for sponsoring this event and thank all the volunteers for their hard work in helping to keep the river clean.

Mr. MOYNIHAN

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, Dr. Robert C. Weaver, adviser to three Presidents, director of the NAACP, and the first African-American Cabinet Secretary, passed away last week at his home in New York City. Dr. Weaver spent his entire life broadening opportunities for minorities in America. I rise today to pay tribute to this great man. Dr. Weaver began his career in government service as part of President Franklin D. Roosevelt's ``Black Cabinet,'' an informal advisory group promoting job and educational opportunities for blacks. The Washington Post called this work his greatest legacy, the dismantling of a deeply entrenched system of racial segregation in America. In 1960 he became the president of the NAACP, and would become a key adviser to President Kennedy on civil rights. Dr. Weaver was appointed in 1961 to the Housing and Home Finance Agency, an organization that later became the Department of Housing and Urban Development. In 1966, when President Johnson elevated the agency to Cabinet rank, Dr. Weaver was, in Johnson's phrase, ``the man for the job.'' He thus became its first Secretary, and the first African- American to head a Cabinet agency. Following his government service, Weaver was, among various other academic pursuits, a professor at Hunter College, a member of the School of Urban and Public Affairs at Carnegie-Mellon, and the president of Baruch College in Manhattan. Dr. Weaver earned undergraduate, master's and doctoral degrees in economics from Harvard, wrote four books on urban affairs, and was one of the original directors of the Municipal Assistance Corp. designed to rescue financially strapped New York City in the 1970's. America, and Washington in particular, has lost one of its innovators, one of its creators and one of its true leaders--for Robert Weaver, like so few of leaders today, led not only with his words but more importantly with his deeds. I ask that an editorial in Monday's Washington Post and an obituary from Saturday's New York Times be printed in the Record. The material follows: [From the Washington Post, July 21, 1997] Robert C. Weaver Native Washingtonian Robert C. Weaver, who died on Thursday in New York City at age 89, had a life of many firsts. Dr. Weaver served as a college president, Cabinet secretary, presidential adviser, chairman of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and as a director of the Municipal Assistance Corp., which helped save New York City from financial catastrophe. But his greatest legacy may be the work he did, largely out of public view, to dismantle a deeply entrenched system of racial segregation in America. Before the landmark decade of civil rights advances in the 1960s, Dr. Weaver was one of a small group of African American officials in the New Deal era who, as part of the ``Black Cabinet'' pressured President Franklin D. Roosevelt to strike down racial barriers in government employment, housing and education. It was a long way to come for the Dunbar High School graduate who ran into racial discrimination in the 1920s when he tried to join a union fresh out of high school. Embittered by that experience, Bob Weaver went on to Harvard (in the footsteps of his grandfather, the first African American Harvard graduate in dentistry) to earn his bachelor's, master's and doctorate in economics. At another time in America, his university degrees might have led to another career path. For Bob Weaver in 1932, however, those credentials--and his earlier job as a college professor--made him an ``associate advisor on Negro affairs'' in the U.S. Department of the Interior. Subsequent work as an educator, economist and national housing expert--and behind-the-scenes recruitment of scores of African Americans for public service--led to his appointment as New York State rent administrator, making him the first African American with state cabinet rank. President John F. Kennedy appointed him to the highest federal post ever occupied by an African American--the Housing and Home Finance Agency. Despite the president's support, however, the HHFA never made it to Cabinet status, because Dr. Weaver was its administrator and southern legislators rebelled at the thought of a black secretary. Years later President Lyndon Johnson pushed through the Department of Housing and Urban Development and named Robert Weaver to the presidential Cabinet. For the nation, and Robert Weaver, the appointment was another important first. For many other African Americans who found lower barriers and increased opportunity in the last third of the 20th century, Robert Weaver's legacy is lasting. [From the New York Times, July 19, 1997] Robert C. Weaver, 90, First Black Cabinet Member, Dies (By James Barron) Dr. Robert C. Weaver, the first Secretary of Housing and Urban Development and the first black person appointed to the Cabinet, died on Thursday at his home in Manhattan. He was 90. Dr. Weaver was also one of the original directors of the Municipal Assistance Corporation, which was formed to rescue New York City from financial crisis in the 1970's. ``He was a catalyst with the Kennedys and then with Johnson, forging new initiatives in housing and education,'' said Walter E. Washington, the first elected Mayor of the nation's capital. A portly, pedagogical man who wrote four books on urban affairs, Dr. Weaver had made a name for himself in the 1930's and 1940's as an expert behind-the-scenes strategist in the civil rights movement. ``Fight hard and legally,'' he said, ``and don't blow your top.'' As a part of the ``Black Cabinet'' in the administration of President Franklin D. Roosevelt, Dr. Weaver was one of a group of blacks who specialized in housing, education and employment. After being hired as race relations advisers in various Federal agencies, they pressured and persuaded the White House to provide more jobs, better educational opportunities and equal rights. Dr. Weaver began in 1933 as an aide to Interior Secretary Harold L. Ickes. He later served as a special assistant in the housing division of the Works Progress Administration, the National Defense Advisory Commission, the War Production Board and the War Manpower Commission. a behind-the-scenes civil rights strategist during the 1930's and 1940's Shortly before the 1940 election, he devised a strategy that defused anger among blacks about Stephen T. Early, President Roosevelt's press secretary. Arriving at Pennsylvania Station in New York, Early lost his temper when a line of police officers blocked his way. Early knocked one of the officers, who happened to be black, to the ground. As word of the incident spread, a White House adviser put through a telephone call to Dr. Weaver in Washington. The aide, worried that the incident would cost Roosevelt the black vote, told Dr. Weaver to find the other black advisers and prepare a speech that would appeal to blacks for the President to deliver the following week. Dr. Weaver said he doubted that he could find anyone in the middle of the night, even though most of the others in the ``Black Cabinet'' had been playing poker in his basement when the phone rang. ``And anyway,'' he said, ``I don't think a mere speech will do it. What we need right now is something so dramatic that it will make the Negro voters forget all about Steve Early and the Negro cop too.'' Within 48 hours, Benjamin O. Davis Sr. was the first black general in the Army; William H. Hastie was the first black civilian aide to the Secretary of War, and Campbell C. Johnson was the first high-ranking black aide to the head of the Selective Service. Robert Clifton Weaver was born on Dec. 29, 1907, in Washington. His father was a postal worker and his mother-- who he said influenced his intellectual development--was the daughter of the first black person to graduate from Harvard with a degree in dentistry. When Dr. Weaver joined the Kennedy Administration, whose Harvard connections extended to the occupant of the Oval Office, he held more Harvard degrees--three, including a doctorate in economics--than anyone else in the administration's upper ranks. In 1960, after serving as the New York State Rent Commissioner, Dr. Weaver became the national chairman of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, and President Kennedy sought Dr. Weaver's advice on civil rights. The following year, the President appointed him administrator of the House and Home Finance Agency, a loose combination of agencies that included the bureaucratic components of what would eventually become H.U.D., including the Federal Housing Administration to spur construction, the Urban Renewal Administration to oversee slum clearance and the Federal National Mortgage Association to line up money for new housing. President Kennedy tried to have the agency raised to Cabinet rank, but Congress balked. Southerners led an attack against the appointment of a black to the Cabinet, and there were charges that Dr. Weaver was an extremist. Kennedy abandoned the idea of creating an urban affairs department. Five years later, when President Johnson revived the idea and pushed it through Congress, Senators who had voted against Dr. Weaver the first time around voted for him. Past Federal housing programs had largely dealt with bricks-and-mortar policies. Dr. Weaver said Washington needed to take a more philosophical approach. ``Creative federalism stresses local initiative, local solutions to local problems,'' he said. But, he added, ``where the obvious needs for action to meet an urban problem are not being fulfilled, the Federal Government has a responsibility at least to generate a thorough awareness of the problem.'' Dr. Weaver, who said that ``you cannot have physical renewal without human renewal,'' pushed for better-looking public housing by offering awards for design. He also increased the amount of money for small businesses displaced by urban renewal and revived the long-dormant idea of Federal rent subsidies for the elderly. Later in his life, he was a professor of urban affairs at Hunter College, was a member of the Visiting Committee at the School of Urban and Public Affairs at Carnegie-Mellon University and held visiting professorships at Columbia Teachers' College and the New York University School of Education. He also served as a consultant to the Ford Foundation and was the president of Baruch College in Manhattan in 1969. His wife, Ella, died in 1991. Their son, Robert Jr., died in 1962.

Mr. MOYNIHAN

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, my friend and colleague, Senator D'Amato, has clearly set out the reasons why Fort Drum needs these two projects. They are essential to the training and readiness we and the Army have come to expect from the 10th Mountain Division. It seems whenever there has been a deployment in recent years, the 10th has been part of it. I simply add my support and my hope that the gunnery range and the training and education center will be included when the Senator from Montana and his conferees reach an agreement on military construction projects.

Mr. MOYNIHAN

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, I join my friend and colleague from New York as a cosponsor of this amendment out of deep concern about the effects of the VERA initiative. Not only were the two biggest cuts in the Nation taken from the two VA service networks in New York, but New York was selected to go first, to be the guinea pig for the new program. The results are alarming. Since the merger of the hospitals at Castle Point and Montrose in the Hudson Valley, 200 jobs have been eliminated and the mortality rate is up 80 percent. The acting director of the hospitals said this increase is not significant, that there are always ups and downs in the mortality rate. That may be, but when there is so dramatic an increase during so dramatic a staff cut, we have to stop what is going on and take a careful look. This is not an isolated example. I have similar reports from Canandaigua and other VA facilities around the State. One of the Veterans Health Administration's guiding principles with VERA is that ``the decrease in overall costs shall not compromise the care given to its veteran population.'' In New York we have empirical evidence that this principle has been trampled underfoot. I join my colleagues in asking that the General Accounting Office begin an investigation immediately into the quality of care being given to veterans under the constraints of the VERA formula, with particular attention being given to the two New York service networks. I hope the Senators from Missouri and Maryland will support this request.

Mr. MOYNIHAN

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, I noted in Friday's New York Times the demise of Woolworth's, one of the Nation's best known retailers and one with its origins in upstate New York. The Times article quotes Hofstra professor Robert Sobel; ``Woolworth was 100 years ago what Walmart is today.'' Perhaps in a century Walmart will similarly be remembered as an icon of a by-gone era, but the mercantile comparison is apt. With over 8,000 stores worldwide, and with an emphasis on volume purchases and discount prices, Woolworth's was a retailing giant. The early efforts of Frank Winfield Woolworth did not portend such success. Born on a farm in Jefferson County in 1852, his favorite boyhood game was playing store but initially he was not very good at it. At 19 he began working in a village grocery store at no pay, and did so for 2 years. After a similar 3-month internship at Moore & Smith in Watertown, he finally secured gainful employment as a store clerk at $3.50 a week. Dollar stores might seem to be a late 20th century development, but in 1875 there was a profitable 99 cent store in Watertown. Mr. A. Bushnell hired Woolworth as a $10-dollar-a-week clerk in a 99 cent store he was opening in Port Huron, MI. Woolworth's lack of salesmanship led to a $1.50 cut in his salary. Still, he saw the possibilities of a store with all merchandise priced the same. In 1877 Woolworth returned to Moore & Smith. The next year he persuaded his employers to try a counter at a county fair on which all items sold for five cents. It was a great success. Woolworth persuaded Mr. Moore to back him with $300 for a five cent store on Bleeker Street in Utica, but it failed after 3 months. Woolworth realized that he had not had enough variety in his stock so in 1879 he opened a new store in Lancaster, PA with a line of ten-cent items as well. This one succeeded. Woolworth soon perfected the combination of inexpensive items you occasionally needed with inexpensive items you occasionally wanted. He opened his second store in Reading in 1884 and continued to expand. By 1909 Woolworth was in a position to commission the tallest building in the world, which the Woolworth Building was when it was completed in 1913. Woolworth's early partners had opened their own chains of five and tens. In 1912 they all were absorbed by the F.W. Woolworth Co., giving Woolworth control over 596 stores. He constantly strived to expand his line of five and ten cent merchandise, and was able to keep costs down by having goods manufactured especially for his chain, sometimes buying an entire year's output from a factory. Frank Woolworth died in 1919. His empire continued to grow. By 1954, 75 years after his first sale, Woolworth's had 2,850 stores and $700 million in annual sales. Six years later sales topped $1 billion. But changes on the American landscape and in the retail world were underway, and they would eventually lead to Friday's announcement. The emigration to the suburbs and competition from drug stores, specialty stores, malls, and large retailers along the highways finally wore down one of the pillars of Main Street. Woolworth's will be fondly remembered by millions of its customers who dined at the lunch counter and purchased some of life's little necessities there. The company also stands as a testament to the possibilities when one person has one good idea and endless determination.

Mr. MOYNIHAN

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, I rise to note that the passage of the energy and water appropriations bill brings us one step closer to the completion of the West Valley demonstration project in western New York. In 1982 we authorized the West Valley demonstration project, in which we would learn to take liquid nuclear waste and mix it with glass. The process is called vitrification, and yields ten foot high glass logs that can be stored safely. After 14 years of preparation, research, and testing, vitrification began last July. On May 28 the 100th glass log was produced. The success of the vitrification process developed at West Valley and at Savannah River in Georgia led the Department of Energy to select it as the preferred method of disposal for such wastes. This is an accomplishment that the many hundreds of people in western New York who worked on the project can be most proud of. They have another 110 logs to go at West Valley, but the method works. Through fiscal year 1997 we have spent $1.2 billion on the project. The final amount in the bill for next year has not been determined, but it will it will bring the total over $1.3 billion. This has been money well spent, and will continue to be. We have learned to dispose of one type of hazardous waste, and can dispose of others with the vitrification process. Jeffords/Bryan Amendment to S. 1004

Mr. MOYNIHAN

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, it is now over half a century since the end of the Second World War. Millions of us who served in that war returned home to resume our lives and enjoy the blessings of peace. To all of us the end of the war was a relief. To the survivors of the Nazi concentration camps it was the difference between certain death and a chance to continue life after years of unspeakable deprivation and horror. Much has been written and said about the 6 million European Jews who were slaughtered during the Holocaust. A magnificent museum not far from this building pays moving and appropriate tribute to them, and to the millions of non-Jewish victims of Nazi Germany, as well. Much has been said about the dead. But far too little has been said about, or done for, the survivors. Almost half a million of them are still alive, including over 125,000 in this country and about the same number in Eastern and Central Europe and Israel. The youngest among them are now in their sixties; most of them are in their seventies and eighties and in increasingly frail health, complicated in many cases by the suffering they endured over half a century ago. The German Government has long recognized its moral obligation to assist the survivors of the Holocaust. The landmark reparations agreements of the early 1950's between the West German Government and Jewish groups were predicated on this simple premise. Yet, as years go by, it has become increasingly apparent that a large number of survivors, particularly those living in Eastern and Central Europe, were excluded from these agreements and are now being denied assistance on the flimsiest of technical grounds. In addition, tens of thousands of Holocaust survivors in North America and Israel have been similarly refused reparations for a variety of reasons that all pale when contrasted to Germany's half-century of generous pensions to German and non-German veterans of the notorious Waffen-SS. It is only fair and logical that the survivors of the Holocaust be treated in their old age with at least the same measure of support being afforded their torturers and prison guards. It is also only fair and logical that these aging survivors, as well as those who already receive reparations, be assisted in meeting their increasing medical expenses. It is for this purpose that I join Senators Graham, Hatch, and Dodd in submitting this resolution which speaks to the simple proposition that it is the sense of Congress that the German Government should expand and simplify its reparations system, provide reparations to Holocaust survivors in Eastern and Central Europe, and set up a fund to help cover the medical expenses of Holocaust survivors.

Mr. MOYNIHAN

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, the headline on the front page of the Business Section in today's Washington Post reads ``Government Said To Move Too Slowly on Year 2000 Computer Problem.'' Mr. President, slowly at best. The Federal Government has been outright dilatory in addressing this problem. There are three stages in the process: assessment, renovation, and implementation--the third stage takes the longest. According to the OMB report released today, of the 4,500 mission critical computer systems in the Federal Government, 6 percent have been implemented, 17 percent have been renovated, and only 65 percent of the systems have even been assessed. A spokesman for the GIGA firm of Cambridge MA, that specializes in this issue, said: ``They're not on a time schedule that looks like it's going to be doable.'' I need not remind my colleagues that the clock is ticking. Be assured that in the year 2000, we will be blamed if we have not addressed the problem. And rightly so. Cosponsored by six other Senators, my bill, S. 22, will create a commission to see that the problem is fixed and increase the lagging private sector awareness of this crisis. I ask that the text of the Washington Post article be printed in the Record. The article follows: Government Said To Move Too Slowly on Year 2000 Computer Problem (By Rajiv Chandrasekaran) The federal government could face a partial computer crash in the year 2000 because it is moving too slowly to fix its machines so they will understand dates that don't begin with ``19,'' according to a growing number of technology specialists. Of the nearly 4,500 ``mission-critical'' computer systems the government needs to repair--which include those that handle defense, air traffic control and income tax functions--only 6 percent have been fixed, according to an Office of Management and Budget report that will be released at a House subcommittee hearing today. About 35 percent of those computers needing repairs have not even undergone a systems analysis, the first and simplest step in the renovation process, the report said. ``They're not on a time schedule that looks like it's going to be doable,'' said Ann K. Coffou, a research director at Giga Information Group, a Cambridge, Mass., industry research firm that specializes in so-called year 2000 issues. ``They're suffering from `analysis paralysis.' There's too much work to be done . . . and at this point in the game, it's very, very distressing.'' Most large computer systems use a two-digit dating system that assumes 1 and 9 are the first two digits of the year. Without specialized reprogramming, the systems will think the year 2000--or 00--is 1900, a glitch that is expected to make most of them go haywire unless the problem is fixed. For the government, the year 2000 problem could result in computers that come to a sudden halt and others that generate erroneous data, such as wrong Medicare checks or tax bills, computer experts say. In a worst-case scenario, computers that control military defense systems or sensitive communications between federal agencies could be rendered inoperable, some specialists warn. Thomas D. Oleson, a year 2000 computer analyst at International Data Corp., a consulting firm in Framingham, Mass., characterized the government's situation as ``way behind the eight ball.'' Fixing the government's computers on time, he said, ``is nearing the point of impossibility.'' Oleson and other industry analysts expect the federal computer systems that handle the government's most critical functions to be fixed before the Dec. 31, 1999, deadline. But many other systems, including some that perform significant tasks for federal employees and ordinary people, could still be in the electronic repair shop in 2000, they warn. ``It's become increasingly clear that agencies are not going to be able to correct everything before the year 2000,'' said Joel C. Willemssen, the director of information resources management at the General Accounting Office, the watchdog arm of Congress. ``We're going to have to start making priorities among all the systems we view as critical.'' The specialists said it is too early to identify specific systems that might not be reprogrammed in time, but they said those would become clearer later this year as agencies begin focusing their efforts. In its report, which was produced at the behest of a congressional committee, the OMB maintains that the progress of federal agencies is generally on schedule and that the agencies ``have made a good start in addressing the year 2000 problem.'' Of the 7,649 computer systems in the executive branch other than the Social Security Administration, 21 percent--or 1,598--already comply with year 2000 requirements. An additional 9 percent will be fully replaced and 8 percent will be scrapped, the report said. At Social Security, long hailed as the federal agency that has been most attentive to year 2000 problems, 71 percent of its systems don't need to be fixed. Of those that do need repairing, half have been fixed, the report said. The report estimates the cost of renovating computers throughout the government at $2.8 billion, a $500 million increase from an estimate released by the OMB in February. OMB officials said yesterday that figure is expected to cross the $3 billion mark and could eventually grow to as much as $5 billion. ``There's still a lot of work to be done, but I think we're on track,'' said Sally Katzen, OMB's director of information and regulatory affairs, who has been spearheading the government's year 2000 efforts. The report identifies the Agriculture, Education, Justice and Transportation departments as those that have about half their systems or more left to analyze. No department, except for Interior and Veterans Affairs, has more than 25 percent of its systems renovated. At the Department of Housing and Urban Development, which has 206 computer systems, 115 need to be repaired. Although the department is halfway through analyzing those 115 systems, it has only renovated 2 percent of them, the report said. At the Defense Department, which has almost 4,000 systems, by far the most of any government agency, more than 2,700 of them need to be fixed. The agency is only 23 percent done with renovating the systems, and only 8 percent of them actually have been tested and are considered fully fixed, according to the document. The government's progress is expected to come under fire from members of the House Science Committee and the Government Reform and Oversight Committee, which are holding a joint hearing into the matter today, congressional aides said. In addition to questioning the pace of repair work, committee leaders will criticize several agencies' schedules for repairs, which call for finishing work in November and December 1999. ``They haven't left themselves with a margin for error in case something goes wrong,'' said Rep. Constance A. Morella (R-Md.), chairwoman of the Science Committee's technology subcommittee. Committee members also will probe whether any government agencies are now buying software that is not year 2000 compliant, aides said.

Mr. MOYNIHAN

Mr. MOYNIHAN. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 537

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, we must have order.

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Madam President, might I just take a moment to observe that, with no uproar, we are about to do something rather important. In this vote on budget procedures we are going to legislate a change in the inflation index used to update official calculations of baseline spending. Under section 257 of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Gramm-Rudman-Hollings), required inflation adjustments are made using a ``fixed-weight index'' produced by the Commerce Department's Bureau of Economic Analysis. Section 1559(a)(3), of the changes in budget enforcement procedures now before us, require that in the future the adjustments should be based on the ``domestic product chain-type price index''--also produced by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Given the improvements in index number theory, this is a perfectly appropriate change. Might I also just remind my colleagues that the Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics compiles two other indexes used by the Government--CPI-U which is used to adjust provisions of the Tax Code and CPI-W which is used to adjust benefits such as Social Security. For the record I note that none of these indexes give the same estimate of inflation. Here are the numbers for 1996: [In percent] CPI-U...............................................................3.0 CPI-W...............................................................2.9 Fixed Weight Price Index............................................2.3 Chain Weight Price Index............................................2.1 Today's vote on budget procedures should be recalled when we return-- as we must--to the issue of producing an accurate cost of living index for the purpose of automatic indexation of Government programs. No one is referring to today's legislative actions as ``politicizing'' the calculation of budget updates. We are just getting the numbers right. And no one should refer to legislating a correction in automatic indexation formulas as a ``political'' fix.

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Madam President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the amendment was agreed to.

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Madam President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the motion was agreed to.

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

Mr. MOYNIHAN. I move to lay it on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 569 (Purpose: To modify the pay-as-you-go requirement of the budget process to prohibit the use of tax increases to pay for mandatory spending increases)

Mr. MOYNIHAN. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 570 (Purpose: To establish procedures to ensure a balanced Federal budget by fiscal year 2002)

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

Mr. MOYNIHAN. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 538 (Purpose: To ensure that future revenue windfalls to the federal Treasury are reserved for tax or deficit reduction--not additional spending)

Mr. MOYNIHAN. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 572 (Purpose: To extend the number of hours for debate on a reconciliation bill and make other improvements)

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Yes, sir. Mr. LOTT addressed the Chair.

Mr. MOYNIHAN. I move to lay it on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 522, as Modified (Purpose: To provide for a trust fund for District of Columbia school renovations)

Mr. MOYNIHAN. I move to lay it on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 573 (Purpose: To increase the excise tax on cigarettes by 43 cents per pack and increase the tax on other tobacco products by a proportionate amount, and direct $12,000,000,000 of the resulting revenues be applied to the children's health initiative)

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