Daniel Moynihan

Mr. MOYNIHAN

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. MOYNIHAN

Mr. MOYNIHAN. On behalf of the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations, Mr. Helms, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand in recess for 3 minutes that we might greet our distinguished visitor, the Honorable John Howard, the Prime Minister of Australia. [Applause.] Recess

Mr. MOYNIHAN

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, I yield myself 2 minutes to say to the Senator from Montana that his was an immensely honorable and accurate statement. You raised your hand, as did we all, for $24 billion of child health. I have been 21 years on the Finance Committee and there has never been such a moment or such a provision. And that happened in a compromise in which the Republican majority agreed to a large tax increase we could use for the child health care. Senator Roth was remarkable throughout, and no words of praise are too great. In our world, your word is all you have. We gave our word. I think we did it responsibly and I think we will be seen to have done such.

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Precisely.

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, the Senator from Massachusetts is correct. That is fine.

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, I yield the distinguished Senator from Louisiana such time as he may require from the bill.

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Well said.

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, in brief, sir, in the history of child health care, in the U.S. Congress there has been no measure equivalent in size and range to the measure the distinguished chairman brings before you. We spent much of the 103d Congress on this subject and did not add a penny to child health care. In 2 days, the Finance Committee added $24 billion, which we bring to you in this amendment, which I am sure will be supported on both sides.

Mr. MOYNIHAN

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

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

Mr. MOYNIHAN

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, I rise today with my distinguished fellow Senator from New York to introduce legislation that will redesignate sections of New York and Pennsylvania Route 17 as Interstate 86. The southern tier of New York has waited over 40 years for this historic legislation that will correct a mistake made in 1955 that has contributed to the economic decline of this once prosperous region. When the original plans were being developed for the New York Interstate System, Route 17 was to be designated the main east-west interstate route. The (Federal) Bureau of Public Roads thought otherwise. They preferred the New York State Thruway which was already under construction using state moneys. Albany did not object nor did representatives of the region. The error had no significance at the time, since no special funding was available for interstates. The very next year, however, the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956 was enacted, creating a Highway Trust Fund to be funded through gasoline taxes. The Federal Government would now pay 90 percent of the cost of any interstate segment. The Southern Tier Expressway--Route 17--was not eligible for those interstate funds. In the 1950's the region was still bustling--IBM was in Binghamton, half the television sets in the world were built in Elmira, Corning was a high tech contender, and Jamestown was a major manufacturing center. What begun as an Indian trail, became a great railroad, and a strikingly creative industrial corridor, was allowed to languish. It is time we do something about it. This legislation we introduce today would finally ameliorate the legacy of an opportunity missed long ago. The bill would immediately designate 360 miles of Route 17 between Erie, PA and Harriman, NY, that meet Federal interstate construction standards as Interstate 86, creating connections to I-90, I-390, I-81, I-84, and I-87. The remaining 30 miles of Route 17 would be designated as a future part of the interstate system and will become I-86 as soon as the State Department of Transportation upgrades them. I am confident the NYDOT, working together with the Federal Highway Administration, will soon have the rest of Route 17 up to interstate standards. The southern tier region, along with the rest of Upstate New York, has suffered enduring economic hardship and job losses, even as the national economy has boomed. The bill I propose to redesignate Route 17 as I-86 would help enhance the visibility of this important region and highlight its potential for business development and tourism. I would also like to recognize the efforts of Samara Barend, a southern tier native, who was so effective in mobilizing support for this issue. I urge my colleagues to join with me in support of this most important legislation. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. MOYNIHAN

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, as we begin the debate on the second of two budget reconciliation bills called for under the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 1998, I again want to commend and thank the chairman of the Finance Committee, Senator Roth, for the fine bipartisan manner in which he has led us this year. I look forward to that spirit of bipartisanship continuing today as we work toward the adoption of the tax bill by the full Senate. It is my belief, although it is not much shared just now in Congress or in the White House, that this is no time for tax cuts. Just yesterday, in a report released by Treasury Secretary Rubin, the International Monetary Fund, in its annual review of the U.S. economy, stated that the United States should delay tax cuts ``in order to achieve an earlier reduction in the budget deficit'' and strengthen the credibility of the balanced-budget pact between Congress and President Clinton. Were it up to this Senator, we would continue on the deficit reduction course begun in the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, which has had extraordinary results. The economy is in its best shape in 30 years. CBO projects that the deficit will be $67 billion for fiscal year 1997, far below original estimates. Inflation was just two-tenths of 1 percent in May--equivalent to an annual inflation rate of only 2 percent. The unemployment rate stands at 4.8 percent, its lowest in more than a quarter century, and the Wall Street Journal reported today that the measurement of consumer confidence in the economy is at a 28-year high. Given this success, we may well come to regret having enacted the tax cuts in this bill. Nevertheless, we do not have a majority in the 105th Congress. The congressional leadership and the President have agreed that there will be tax cuts this year. And so given that reality, I joined with other Democratic members of the Finance Committee in working with Chairman Roth--in a bipartisan mode--to help shape the bill now before us. The resulting legislation is not altogether what some of us would prefer, but even so it does include a number of redeeming provisions. I would particularly wish to commend and thank the chairman for the inclusion of the following provisions: Making permanent the single most successful tax incentive for education, the exclusion from income of employer-provided educational assistance under section 127. The Roth- Moynihan bill to make 127 permanent now has over 50 cosponsors, including all 20 members of the Finance Committee; repealing the cap on issuance of section 501(c)(3) bonds for universities, colleges, and nonhospital health facilities; providing $2.3 billion in funding for Amtrak by allocating one-half cent per gallon of the Federal gasoline excise tax; and extending the fair-market value deductibility of gifts of appreciated property to private foundations.

Mr. MOYNIHAN

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, I rise today with my distinguished fellow Senator from New York to introduce legislation that will redesignate sections of New York and Pennsylvania Route 17 as Interstate 86. The southern tier of New York has waited over 40 years for this historic legislation that will correct a mistake made in 1955 that has contributed to the economic decline of this once prosperous region. When the original plans were being developed for the New York Interstate System, Route 17 was to be designated the main east-west interstate route. The (Federal) Bureau of Public Roads thought otherwise. They preferred the New York State Thruway which was already under construction using state moneys. Albany did not object nor did representatives of the region. The error had no significance at the time, since no special funding was available for interstates. The very next year, however, the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956 was enacted, creating a Highway Trust Fund to be funded through gasoline taxes. The Federal Government would now pay 90 percent of the cost of any interstate segment. The Southern Tier Expressway--Route 17--was not eligible for those interstate funds. In the 1950's the region was still bustling--IBM was in Binghamton, half the television sets in the world were built in Elmira, Corning was a high tech contender, and Jamestown was a major manufacturing center. What begun as an Indian trail, became a great railroad, and a strikingly creative industrial corridor, was allowed to languish. It is time we do something about it. This legislation we introduce today would finally ameliorate the legacy of an opportunity missed long ago. The bill would immediately designate 360 miles of Route 17 between Erie, PA and Harriman, NY, that meet Federal interstate construction standards as Interstate 86, creating connections to I-90, I-390, I-81, I-84, and I-87. The remaining 30 miles of Route 17 would be designated as a future part of the interstate system and will become I-86 as soon as the State Department of Transportation upgrades them. I am confident the NYDOT, working together with the Federal Highway Administration, will soon have the rest of Route 17 up to interstate standards. The southern tier region, along with the rest of Upstate New York, has suffered enduring economic hardship and job losses, even as the national economy has boomed. The bill I propose to redesignate Route 17 as I-86 would help enhance the visibility of this important region and highlight its potential for business development and tourism. I would also like to recognize the efforts of Samara Barend, a southern tier native, who was so effective in mobilizing support for this issue. I urge my colleagues to join with me in support of this most important legislation. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. MOYNIHAN

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, our age has lost a scholar of epic achievement and range with the passing of Marvin H. Pope of the Yale Divinity School. A Biblical scholar of unsurpassed originality and range, he died at age 80 in the First Church of Round Hill, Greenwich, CT, just after he and his wife Ingrid had read a passage from the Bible for the congregation. He was an effervescent member of the American Schools of Oriental Research, where he will be mourned as well as celebrated. As was said about Job, it could be said of Marvin H. Pope: ''. . . thou hast blessed the work of his hands, and his substance is increased in the land.'' I ask that an an article on Marvin Pope, from the New York Times be printed in the Record. The article follows: [From the New York Times, June 1997] Marvin Pope, 80, Profesor and Authority on Ancient Ugarit (By Holcomb B. Noble) Marvin H. Pope, a retired Yale professor who was one of the world's leading authorities on Ugarit, the ancient city in Syria where excavations shed important light on the ancient Scriptures, died on Sunday at First Church of Round Hill in Greenwich, Conn. He was 80. He and his wife had just finished reading passages from the Bible to the congregation and returned to their pew when he collapsed. Mr. Pope was a professor of Near Eastern languages and civilizations from 1949 to 1986 and taught at the Yale Divinity School and in the religious studies department. In addition, he helped prepare the first major revision of the King James Version of the Bible, the Revised Standard Version, in the 1940's. In the 1980's he worked with others advising the National Council of Churches on the New Revised Standard Version, which removed some traditional language regarded as sexist. These are the two versions used in most Protestant churches. Many of Mr. Pope's contributions to the study of the Hebrew text of the Bible and to modern English translations stemmed from a day in 1928 when a farmer plowing a field in northern Syria struck what he thought was a stone. It emerged, instead, as part of the extensive remains, uncovered by archeologists over the next year, of a cosmopolitan city on the Mediterranean that had thrived in 2000 B.C. but had been ransacked and burned in about 1200 B.C. Among the discoveries were Ugaritic art and clay tablets whose language was similar to biblical Hebrew, of which Mr. Pope, over the years, became a major translator. They added significant new meanings, nuances and detail to the early writings of the Old Testament and the culture of their time. The tablets were traced to a period from 1500 B.C to 1180

Mr. MOYNIHAN

Mr. MOYNIHAN. You most assuredly have, sir.

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, may I simply affirm the statement of the distinguished chairman. These are agreed to on both sides of the aisle.

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

Mr. MOYNIHAN

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Unanimously.

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, today the Senate is considering two important changes approved by the Finance Committee for the Medicare Program: increasing the eligibility age from 65 to 67, and increasing premiums for higher income beneficiaries. Raising the eligibility age will simply bring Medicare into line with the retirement age under Social Security. And means-testing the part B premium is in fact overdue. I was a member of the administration of President Johnson when Medicare legislation was developed and enacted, and I remind Senators that at that time the part B provision for physician's bills was meant to be paid one-half by the individual and one-half out of general revenues--50-50. In 1972, we limited the increase in the part B premium to the rate of increase in Social Security benefits, which are tied to the Consumer Price Index. Inasmuch as medical costs grew at a much faster rate than that, generally, of prices, that 50-50 share gradually dropped to what is now a quarter, 25 percent. In no way do we change that 25-75 arrangement that has emerged, but we do ask that high-income retired persons pay a higher premium. About 6 percent to 7 percent of retirees will be affected. Retired couples with incomes under $75,000, will not in any way be affected; individuals with incomes under $50,000 will not in any way be affected. We are really only returning somewhat to the original intention and the original provisions of Medicare part B. If my distinguished chairman would permit me, I yield the balance of my 5 minutes to the distinguished Senator from Louisiana.

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, some may have thought that there has been a leakage of reality about the social insurance programs of the American Nation; that only crisis brings us forward to some sensible responses. But I think today we proved just the opposite. The vote earlier on extending the eligibility age for Medicare over the next generation to 67 years parallels exactly the measure we took at a time of crisis in 1983 with respect to Social Security. This was recommended by a commission of which I was a member. Senator Dole, our beloved former majority leader, was a member. Sir, I don't know about other Members of this body but I have not heard a word about that. It has been accepted. It is something that is going to take place over a generation. It makes sense. The same on this matter of contributions of high-income persons--what is basically an intergenerational subsidy on retirement benefits and health-care benefits. In 1983, we began to tax Social Security benefits for high-income persons up to 50 percent of their benefit. In 1993, in legislation I brought to the floor from the Finance Committee, we took it to 85 percent. That is the actuarial income that is not paid by the contributor himself or herself. Sir, there has been no response or reaction to that, save acceptance that it is fair, and it makes sense. This is fair, and it is necessary. I would say once again I was a member of the administration of President Johnson when the planning for Medicare and Medicaid took place. On part B we specified that half the premium would be paid by the person choosing to take the option of buying this form of health insurance. In 1972, we limited increases in the premium to the rate of increase in Social Security benefits, which are tied to the Consumer Price Index. But because of the higher rise in medical costs in the years that followed, above the rate of price increase, we dropped it to 25 percent. It is 25 percent today--not what we planned when we began this program, when the costs were much lower and unsustainable in the years ahead. The annual part B subsidy right now per person is $1,600 of general revenue--not trust fund. And if we have to provide that a $500,000 earner pays 2.9 percent, why can we not do so? I think, Mr. President, we are going to. I thank the Chair.

Mr. MOYNIHAN

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, tragedy has beset the family of Malcolm X and Betty Shabazz with such abundance that I doubt few of us can comprehend their grief. Yesterday, Betty Shabazz the proud educator and activist wife of the late Malcolm X, died of complications that ensued after she suffered burns over 80 percent of her body in a fire at her Yonkers apartment on the first day of this month. Dr. Shabazz had battled her way through five extensive operations since the fire, but the injuries proved too extensive for her to overcome this final tribulation. Having witnessed the assassination of her husband, defended one of her children against charges of an alleged murder plot, and sought to ease the troubles of her grandchildren, Dr. Shabazz rose above it all to defy critics and symbolize an ability to overcome all means of adversity. In trying to reconcile this tragedy, I recall the words of Oscar Wilde who wrote: ``It often happens that the real tragedies of life occur in such an inartistic manner that they hurt us by their crude violence, their absolute incoherence, their absurd want of meaning, their entire lack of style.'' My deepest sympathy goes out to this family that has too often been forced to grapple with the ``absolute incoherence of tragedy.''

Mr. MOYNIHAN

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, I would like first to thank our revered chairman for his concise and comprehensive account of this epic legislation. It comes to the floor from a unanimous Finance Committee. These are the first substantive changes made in Medicare and Medicaid since these measures were enacted a generation ago. I was present in 1965. I am here in 1997. I so state, our problem --and it is a curious problem in social policy, is that I am not sure we will be heard because we are not making enough noise. And we are not making enough noise, Mr. President, for the simple reason that we are in agreement. We have changed our minds about certain basic things. We have recognized the events of the past generation that require us to do so. We came into these programs little expecting how much they would come to take over in the Federal fisc at a time when medicine was just on the verge of a great shift in its capacity, its ability to cure, to treat, to heal. Fee for service was the only form of medicine available to most persons, not otherwise known, and Medicaid was thought to be a very minor aside. We reached a point where health care, partly because we have so much better health care, became hugely expensive. The chairman noted that in 1992, Medicaid grew by 29 percent. Mr. President, that means it doubles every 3 years, or more accurately, doubles every 30 months. You cannot sustain that. We are therefore profoundly reforming the system, not so much returning it to an earlier good state, as bringing it forward to deal with the present realities and possibilities offered by managed care and the general change in medicine of recent years. I say again, before there was agreement in these matters, we could have had a markup in our committee that went on for 3 months, we could have had rallies, speeches, petitions, filibusters, heavens knows what, because there was not in fact agreement. When agreement is arrived at, when there is consensus, the most extraordinary changes can take place in a seemingly everyday manner, without a voice raised or a single dissent. This is also particularly owed to the work of the Senator from Texas, who chairs the Subcommittee on Health, as the chairman observed, and whom I am happy to note is here on the floor. He found that agreement and he put it in place. There are other things in the legislation. I do want to note that we have added $8 billion for child health care in the form of insurance, for a total in the two reconciliation bills of $24 billion. I can recall the days when Wilbur Cohen assured us the whole program would cost $24 billion a year, and indeed for a while there it did. I think it should be clear that this was the work of Senator Hatch, who cares so very much about this matter. Equally, Senator Rockefeller was able to bring about an increase in the moneys that will be available to low- income families as part of the child tax credit in combination with the earned-income tax credit. Senator Bob Kerrey, who does not intend that things should always be done the way they always have been done--save perhaps in the U.S. Navy--proposed, and we agreed, that the time had come to begin to ask higher income persons to pay a higher premium to get this insurance, which they do not have to take. It is optional, but which if they can afford to pay something more like the original anticipated contribution, well then, they ought to. That is just good sense. I think this will be understood by the Senate and in time by our colleagues in the House. We also move the Medicare eligibility age from age 65 to 67, bringing it into conformity with Social Security. Finally, Mr. President, I think it has to be said--and I know the chairman will agree with me--that we did miss an opportunity of lasting consequence for Federal finance this year by failing to take action on how we measure the cost of living. Our chairman has been an outspoken advocate of developing an accurate cost-of-living index, which we do not now have. We have cost-of-living indexes all over the place. You find them in the Department of Labor, the Department of Commerce, and the Health Care Financing Administration. But we had agreement, from an initiative taken in the Finance Committee, to produce an adjustment to the Consumer Price Index--which is not cost of living--by 1.1 percentage points. It would have produced $1 trillion in 12 years, and it would have put the Social Security trust funds in actuarial balance until the year 2052. This was in our hands, and it was let slip at the last moment. We blinked, and the opportunity is now history. But part of that history is also that the chairman of the Finance Committee and the members of the Finance Committee--I do not speak for all of them; I certainly speak for myself--realized this should be done. It is a correction that should be made. The sooner we do, the more we will be able to address other problems that remain because, as the chairman said, we have a series of measures here that ensure the viability of Medicare for 10 years. But we mean to be around more than 10 years, and we will have to address this subject also. Finally, there are exceptional measures in this bill to make provision for teaching hospitals and medical schools. One of the unanticipated consequences, to use the chairman's phrase, the phrase of Robert K. Merton in 1935, I think, that the economic rationalization of health care has been that the teaching hospitals and medical schools, which necessarily must charge more for the care they provide because they are teaching and training and do research, find themselves in an exposed situation which we can take care of from the gains we acquire in the course of rationalization. But if we do not, we shall find that one of the unanticipated consequences is that we spoiled our medical schools at this moment in the great age of medical science. This bill precisely addresses the matter in ways I think are constructive. And we will look into the issue further in the commission which the chairman proposes. It remains for me, sir, simply once again to congratulate our revered chairman. If you would so measure the quality of his achievement, observe the silent awe which is now observed in the Nation. Mr. President, I yield the floor. Mr. GRAMM addressed the Chair.

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. MOYNIHAN

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, I rise to pay tribute to Mr. Patrick Bistrian, Jr., of Amagansett, NY, on the occasion of his retirement from the board of education of the Amagansett Union Free School District after 30 years of service. As a student, Pat Bistrian earned recognition in both academic and athletic pursuits. He held almost all the high school track and field records. Local legend has it that some of them still stand today. His leadership in school evolved into a devotion to community service. Throughout his 30 years on the board, he never wavered in his commitment to the children of the Amagansett School District. Guided by common sense and an admirable dose of doggedness, his can do attitude was always applied for the good of the children. After a fire destroyed the school gymnasium in 1975, Patrick Bistrian fastidiously saw to every detail regarding the replacement of the building. To his credit, the facility exceeded even the grandest expectations and came in under budget. While voluntarism has now become fashionable throughout the land, the concept is not new to Patrick Bistrian; for him, it is a way of life. I am certain the Members of the Senate join me in saluting Patrick Bistrian for his 30 years of selfless commitment to the Amagansett community. Much like his athletic accomplishments in track and field, he has left behind a legacy that will surely go unrivaled for some time to come.

Mr. MOYNIHAN

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, this Friday, June 20, marks the last day Steven J. Shimberg will work here in the Senate as staff director and chief counsel of the Committee on Environment and Public Works. Next month, he will begin a new career with the National Wildlife Federation. Steve Shimberg is a New York native and a magna cum laude graduate of the State University of New York at Buffalo. Upon graduating from Duke University School of Law, Steve spent 3 years as a trial attorney with the U.S. Department of Justice's Land and Natural Resources Division before joining the staff of the Committee on Environment and Public Works in 1981. I have been a member of the Committee since I entered the Senate in 1977. I served as the chairman or ranking minority member of the Water Resources Subcommittee from the 96th Congress through the 103d Congress, and I served as full committee chairman from September 1992 through January 1993. So, over the years, I have seen Steve shepherd through the committee enormously complicated and thoroughly bipartisan legislation to protect our natural resources. I can attest to Steve's personableness, his sense of humor and good cheer, his comity, and his utter competence. Consummately professional, always courteous, and always calm. Environmental policy, to be supportable, must be based on sound science. And so I have argued that the committee needs more scientists and fewer lawyers on the staff. Steve certainly is an exception; he has been indispensable. While I applaud Federation officials for their astuteness in hiring Steve, I lament the loss his departure means to the committee, and to the Senate. We will miss him. Sir Christopher Wren's tombstone reads, ``Lector, si monumentum requiris circumspice.'' With regard to Steve's work over the past 17 years on the committee, the products are around us all: cleaner air, cleaner water, a greatly redeemed physical and human environment.