Daniel Moynihan

Mr. MOYNIHAN

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, I think, lest I reveal further ignorance in regard to this measure, I had best be silent.

Mr. MOYNIHAN

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, as the Senate knows, John Chancellor died last Friday at age 68. He was so much a part of our lives for over 40 years as an NBC news commentator and anchor. We are diminished by his death, and yet, as Tom Brokaw suggested, enhanced by the realization of just how great a legacy he leaves. A legacy, Mr. Brokaw stated, that ``will always be secure.'' He was in some measure Irish; at least he once told me of a grandmother who had taught him to hate Oliver Cromwell. Which he must have done, and in so doing, evidently used up all the hate he had in him. For there was nothing else but love: for the life he lived, and the people he lived it with. Most especially, of course, his wife Barbara and their three children. Yeats once wrote of a man who was blessed and had the power to bless. Such a man was John Chancellor. He was a friend of 30 years and more. From first to last, one sensed in him a deep confidence that American democracy would prove itself in whatever crisis it faced; just as he would do. He faced many; always with grace and afterward, grand ``rollicking'' recollections, as Tom Brokaw put it. David Broder captures that quality in his column this morning. Many of us in print journalism lost a great friend last week in John Chancellor. He hung out with the political reporters who had nowhere near his celebrity because he always thought of himself as a reporter and he wanted to be with people who were more interested in the stories they were covering than in stroking their own reputations. He was modest and funny and generous in his praise. No journalist of his era enjoyed greater trust and affection from his colleagues--or the people he covered. And none deserved it more. The Senate honors his memory and salutes his legacy.

Mr. MOYNIHAN

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, the Members of the Senate are familiar with Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz's historic contribution both to the field of Jewish scholarship and to the resurgence of Jewish life in the former Soviet Union. In 1989, Rabbi Steinsaltz founded the Judaic Studies Center and synagogue in the Kunseva section of Moscow, the first such new school in the Soviet Union since the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution. I am privileged to serve on the center's board of advisors and to have hosted Rabbi Steinsaltz on his all-too-infrequent trips to Washington, DC. It is my unpleasant duty to share with the Senate the disturbing news that a fire of undetermined nature broke out last Friday night, July 12, in Rabbi Steinsaltz's Judaic Studies Center. All 50 students and worshipers in the building at the time were safely evacuated. Except for the Torah scrolls which were saved from the raging flames, the entire building was destroyed, including thousands of books and other equipment. The center had been a focal point of Russian Jewish life since its establishment. It was the key spiritual center for thousands and the first Jewish institution of learning officially permitted to function during the Glasnost period. During its years of operation, more than 1,000 Russian Jews were enrolled in intensive Judaic studies courses and many thousands more attended seminars and workshops. On Jewish holidays hundreds of Jews flocked there for communal celebrations. When the fire broke out, the center was hosting a seminar for Jewish communal workers from cities and towns throughout the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). Cities such as Chellabinsk, Siberia, Berditchev, Ukraine, and Vitebsk, Belarus, had sent one representative each for an intensive 3-month course in Jewish and communal service studies. Graduates of this program are expected to return to their native cities--far from the major Jewish centers--and apply what they have learned. Rabbi Steinsaltz, who is best known for his monumental modern commentary on the Talmud, was recently given the title of Duchovny Ravin--an historic title connoting the spiritual leader of Russian Jewry. In Jerusalem, Rabbi Steinsaltz responded to the news by quoting Isaiah 9:9. ``Bricks have fallen--we will rebuild with dressed stone. Sycamores have been felled--we will grow cedars instead.'' I know I speak for the entire Senate and for all Americans who cherish religious freedom and scholarship when I add my words of consolation and encouragement to Rabbi Steinsaltz on this occasion.

Mr. MOYNIHAN

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Will my distinguished friend yield for a question?

Mr. MOYNIHAN. We would welcome associates and--I do not presume to speak for my colleague, I just think I can say that we would like to be of help to anybody on this question.

Mr. MOYNIHAN. We have two here.

Mr. MOYNIHAN. We would not be able to agree to conferees.

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Would he not agree that this can be changed, but that if the bill is to go to conference, since we cannot bring it back up, it is possible for it to go to conference with an understanding on the part of the conferees that they will not return without a correction having been made?

Mr. MOYNIHAN. He used the word ``threat,'' but then said ``promise.'' The point here is that we had an understanding. Would he not agree we had an understanding?

Mr. MOYNIHAN. If I may just say, with one last question, does the Senator agree we should speak with our distinguished friend, the chairman of the committee, and see if we cannot work out instructions to the conferees at the time they are appointed?

Mr. MOYNIHAN

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, I introduce a bill to honor and remember a truly exceptional American, Ronald H. Brown. The bill would designate the Federal building located at 290 Broadway in New York, NY, as the ``Ronald H. Brown Federal Building''. It is a grand gesture to recognize the passing of this remarkable American and special friend, and I would ask for the support of all Senators of this legislation to place one more marker in history on Ron Brown's behalf. Ron Brown had a great love for enterprise and industry as reflected in his achievements as the first African-American to hold the office of U.S. Secretary of Commerce. His was a life of outstanding achievement and service to his country: Army captain; general counsel, deputy executive officer, and vice president of the National Urban League; partner in a prestigious law firm; chief counsel, and chairman of the National Democratic Committee; husband and father. And these are but a few of the achievements that demonstrated Ron's spirited pursuit of life. To have held any one of these posts in the Government, and in the private sector, is extraordinary. To have held all of the positions he did and prevail as he did, is unique. Indeed, Ron Brown was unfairly taken from us; however, while with us, he lived a sweeping and comprehensive life. And we are all diminished by his loss. Therefore, I cannot think of a more fitting tribute to this uncommon man.

Mr. MOYNIHAN

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, I introduce a bill to honor and remember a truly exceptional American, Ronald H. Brown. The bill would designate the Federal building located at 290 Broadway in New York, NY, as the ``Ronald H. Brown Federal Building''. It is a grand gesture to recognize the passing of this remarkable American and special friend, and I would ask for the support of all Senators of this legislation to place one more marker in history on Ron Brown's behalf. Ron Brown had a great love for enterprise and industry as reflected in his achievements as the first African-American to hold the office of U.S. Secretary of Commerce. His was a life of outstanding achievement and service to his country: Army captain; general counsel, deputy executive officer, and vice president of the National Urban League; partner in a prestigious law firm; chief counsel, and chairman of the National Democratic Committee; husband and father. And these are but a few of the achievements that demonstrated Ron's spirited pursuit of life. To have held any one of these posts in the Government, and in the private sector, is extraordinary. To have held all of the positions he did and prevail as he did, is unique. Indeed, Ron Brown was unfairly taken from us; however, while with us, he lived a sweeping and comprehensive life. And we are all diminished by his loss. Therefore, I cannot think of a more fitting tribute to this uncommon man.

Mr. MOYNIHAN

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, today, Israeli Prime Minister Bingamin Netanyahu delivered an important address to Congress in which he outlined his vision of continued close ties between our two democracies and of the peace process between Israel and her neighbors. A process with which we have been so closely involved. His address had many important elements, none more so than when he deviated from his prepared statement to pronounce the ancient Roman maxim: Pacta sunt servanda--agreements must be honored. It should not come as a surprise that the disciple of the disciple of Vladimir Jabotinsky speaks of the importance of international law when addressing the U.S. Congress. Jabotinsky found the Revisionist party--the forerunner of the present Likud party--in 1925 which had as its goal the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine under the protection of international law. When Prime Minister Netanyahu asserts that agreements must be honored, he aligns himself with a principle that was of vital importance in international affairs at the beginning of this century but which suffered neglect during the cold war. From its earliest days the leaders of the Soviet Union had asserted, in the words of Maxim Litvinov, People's Commissar for Foreign Affairs, in 1922 that ``there was not one world but two--a Soviet world and a non-Soviet world * * * there was no third world to arbitrate. * * *'' Which is to say there was no common law against which to measure conduct. This was the Soviet view until Mikhail Gorbachev came before the General Assembly of the United Nations on December 7, 1988, to remind the General Assembly of the political, juridical and moral importance of Pacta sunt servanda. Mr. Gorbachev went on: While championing demilitarization of international relations, we would like political and legal methods to reign supreme in all attempts to solve the arising problems. Our ideal is a world community of states with political systems and foreign policies based on law. This could be achieved with the help of an accord within the framework of the U.N. on a uniform understanding of the principles and norms of international law; their codification with new conditions taken into consideration; and the elaboration of legislation for new areas of cooperation. In the nuclear era, the effectiveness of international law must be based on norms reflecting a balance of interests of states, rather than on coercion. As the awareness of our common fate grows, every state would be genuinely interested in confining itself within the limits of international law. The chairman of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet had come to New York and offered terms of surrender. Gorbachev knew what it meant for the Soviets to assert that they would be bound by norms of international law. Quite simply, official Washington did not, for it no longer actively felt that the United States was bound by such norms. Passively, yes; if pressed. But this was not something we pressed on others in general or thought much about. I wrote: In the annals of forgetfulness there is nothing quite to compare with the fading from the American mind of the idea of the law of nations. In the beginning this law was set forth as the foundation of our national existence. By all means wash this proposition with cynical acid and see how it shrinks. Prime Minister Netanyahu has raised the possibility that we may one day close that chapter in the annals of forgetfulness. I hope that my colleagues and those in the administration have taken note. Mr. Netanyahu stresses that the peace agreements that Israel has made with her neighbors will be followed and that future agreements will be based on law. As he stated, ``we seek to broaden the circle of peace to the whole Arab world and the rest of the Middle East.'' This is an important day for both our countries. I congratulate Mr. Netanyahu for his address and wish him well as he embarks on his term as Prime Minister.

Mr. MOYNIHAN

Mr. MOYNIHAN. I ask unanimous consent if I might use 3 minutes of the leader's time for Senator Conrad.

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, I am sure I can speak for the chairman, Senator Roth, when I say to Senator Graham of Florida that it is we who are indebted to him for having brought this matter to the committee, set forth the issues with clarity and succinctness, and won unanimous support for obviously an important subject--important not just to Florida but, as the map shows, to States across the Nation. I see Senator Conrad has risen. I am happy to yield 8 minutes to him.

Mr. MOYNIHAN

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Well, this is certainly an issue that needs to be addressed.

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, I will not take a great deal of time this morning as I spoke yesterday, and there are Senators who wish to speak to other provisions of this bill. But I would take as much time as is required to state my gratitude to and admiration for the work of the chairman, our chairman, Senator Roth. Mr. President, would you care to pause for a moment and ask, how many unanimous, bipartisan, 100-page bills have you seen come to the Senate floor in the 104th Congress? I think not many. I dare to think there has not been even one. The chairman has crafted a major tax cut--a major tax cut. It comes from a unanimous Finance Committee, and it has other matters attached to it. But I hope that as we debate those other matters, we would not overlook the substantive, important revenue provisions in this bill. I just want to say it is very difficult to make it look easy, and the chairman has managed that. I want to express my appreciation. I would particularly call attention to the employer-provided educational assistance provisions in this bill. This, Mr. President, is almost surely the most successful education program the Federal Government sponsors. A million persons a year are provided higher education by their employers, and the tuition is tax free. I had occasion to speak about this yesterday. Outside the organizations involved, not many people would know of this program. There is no bureau in the Department of Labor for employer-provided educational assistance, and no bureaucracy; it has no titles, no confirmations, no assistant secretaries. A million persons a year are sent by their employers to higher education, about a quarter for graduate-level education, with the understanding that they are capable of doing work at higher levels and skills and compensation, and that it is mutually rewarding to the individual and the firm. To say again, a quarter of these individuals are going to graduate schools, and very complex ones. Ask any major employer about their training systems, and they will say nothing is more helpful than being able to send a promising young person, or middle management person, to a graduate school to learn a new field, learn a field that has developed since that person had his education. That can be very rapid in many technologies. Consider the area of software: 16 years is another era. We have had employer-provided educational assistance in place since 1978, but we have been on and off about keeping it in place. It has expired. Now we are going to bring it back--retroactive to the last day's expiration, up to December 31 of this year. In the managers' amendment, we extend it another year. I would like to simply say to the chairman that I hope early in the next Congress we can make this provision permanent so it can be depended on. This will permit workers to make it part of their plans. They can go off to the University of Delaware and take another degree in advanced chemistry, and then come back in another, better, position. It is part of your career program, and it should be. This is a wonderful piece of unobtrusive social policy. I would also like to thank the chairman for including in the managers' amendment a version of the expatriation proposal I first introduced in 1995. I will not go into the details at great length, but we have resolved the expatriation issue in this bill. Expatriation is the matter of individuals, wealthy individuals, who renounce their American citizenship in order to avoid American taxes. This is no small sum. In the course of the next 10 years, this provision will pick up $1.7 billion. This issue arose in 1995 when the Finance Committee reported a bill to restore the health insurance deduction for the self-employed. We were going to include expatriation at that time, and yet we had a series of communications from scholars of the first order, including Prof. Paul B. Stephan III, a specialist in both international law and tax law at the University of Virginia Law School; Mr. Stephen E. Shay, who served as international tax counsel at the Department of the Treasury; Detlev Vagts of Harvard Law; Andreas F. Lowenfeld of New York University Law; and particularly Prof. Hurst Hannum of the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University, who raised the question of whether our statute was legal under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which the United States ratified in 1992. It is our law, treaty law, and it is therefore the supreme Law of the Land under article VI of our Constitution. Section 2 of article 12 of the international covenant states: ``Everyone shall be free to leave any country, including his own.'' The expatriation legislation had seemed to legal scholars to raise a question of infringement of the treaty and, in effect, the law would fall before the treaty, the treaty being the higher law. Professor Robert F. Turner, a professor of international law at the U.S. Naval War College, so testified before the Finance Committee. Although other experts gave us contrary opinions, it was clear to us that the Senate should not act improvidently on the matter. Genuine questions of human rights under international law, and the solemn obligations of the United States under treaties, were in question. So when the conference committee met on the self-employed health deduction bill, we had no alternative but to defer a decision on the matter until we got it straight. To do otherwise, obviously, would have been not only imprudent but irresponsible. Even so, there are persons in the Chamber who wondered whether or not we were looking after millionaires who renounce their citizenship and move to the Bahamas, and there were some rather heated exchanges. I said at that time that you never have to be more careful of human rights than when you are dealing with persons who are despised. Nobody thinks very much of a millionaire who chooses to become a Bahamian and keeps his membership in the Woonsocket Yacht Club. In the ensuing months, a general consensus developed that it was possible to craft legislation to curb the abuse of expatriation without violating our international legal obligations. Which is precisely what this bill does. We were determined, and we now bring to the floor, Mr. President, a measure which addresses the problem--and which will raise $1.7 billion over 10 years. Although not many people expatriate, their tax liabilities are significant. So this provision will raise $1.7 billion. The Finance Committee has a record, we hope, of being vigilant about abuses but also concerned and careful about rights. So, Mr. President, I would like to thank again the chairman for this work. We have done it well. We are going to have to be careful in conference about the provisions on Puerto Rico. We have major provisions we have decided to end after 60 years, the provisions under section 936 of the Internal Revenue Code, but I think we are doing so in a way that is acceptable to the elected officials in Puerto Rico and all in all is a good job. It took us 2 years to get it right, and we bring it before you with pride and confidence that it will be enacted--whatever else happens in the course of the day. Mr. ROTH addressed the Chair.

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, I have the great pleasure of yielding 8 minutes to the distinguished Senator from Illinois, a scholar and a friend.

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, I am happy to yield 8 minutes to the junior Senator from Massachusetts.

Mr. MOYNIHAN. I thank the Senator from California.

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, I yield 8 minutes to the distinguished Senator from California.

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, I congratulate the Senator from Texas for a very careful exposition. I think this is perhaps the first time he has been on the floor as a member of the Committee on Finance. As many academic theories go, there are problems sometimes with reality. This Senator from New York at age 12 was a paperboy. He had learned if at 9 o'clock at night you bought 10 copies of the Daily News and 5 copies of the Daily Mirror at 96th Street and Broadway and then sold them in places of entertainment along Amsterdam Avenue, if you bought them for 2 cents and you sold them for 5, you had a profit of 150 percent capital that very day. I knew all of this by the age of 13. Somehow by age 16 I had forgotten it entirely. And here I am, looking for Social Security. That is why I insist Social Security will be there. Thanking the Senator, I have the honor to yield 8 minutes to the distinguished Senator from Minnesota.

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, I take that remark with great encouragement. I think the chairman is right. When the chairman is right, he will figure how to do what is right. I thank him very much.

Mr. MOYNIHAN

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

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.