Larry Pressler

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, as we bring the 104th Congress to a close, I want to provide an update on our progress to enact ocean shipping reform legislation. Last October, I introduced S. 1356, a companion bill to H.R. 2149. I did so to begin Senate discussion of this important reform proposal. In November, I chaired a Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation hearing on the bill. The hearing revealed numerous issues affecting all segments of the liner ocean shipping industry that required further consideration. On July 18, 1996, I placed a proposed amendment to S. 1356 in the Record for public review and comment. After several additional meetings with affected segments of the ocean shipping industry, we have made further progress in crafting acceptable legislation. Today I will ask to have printed in the Record a revised version of that amendment to S. 1356. While there are a few issues requiring additional work, we have made substantial progress toward producing a bill that will gain broad support within the affected industries and the Congress. I am pleased to be joined by Senators Gorton, Lott, Hutchison, Snowe, Inouye, Exon, and Breaux as cosponsors in this amendment. This bipartisan approach demonstrates just how serious we are about achieving meaningful reform. We have run out of time in the 104th Congress to complete this effort. However, I intend to introduce ocean shipping reform legislation early in the 105th Congress. With the support of my fellow Commerce Committee members and other Senators, we can pass ocean shipping reform legislation next year. Mr. President, 95 percent of U.S. foreign commerce is transported via ocean shipping. Approximately half of this amount is shipped in bulk form, oil, grain, chemicals, and so forth, on an unregulated vessel charter basis. The remainder is shipped by container on liner vessels, regularly scheduled service under the Shipping Act of 1984, as regulated by the Federal Maritime Commission [FMC]. As the international liner shipping trade has evolved since 1984, many industry segments have requested changes in the Shipping Act of 1984 to keep pace with this evolution. My amendment, the International Ocean Shipping Act of 1996, would improve the Shipping Act of 1984 in several key areas. First, it would eliminate the filing of common carrier tariffs with the Federal Government. Instead of requiring Government approval, tariffs would become effective upon publication through private systems. My amendment also would increase tariff rate flexibility by easing restrictions on tariff rate changes and independent action by conference carriers. Second, it would allow for greater flexibility in service contracting by shippers and ocean common carriers. The amendment would allow individual ocean common carriers and shippers to negotiate confidential service contracts. Finally, responsibility for enforcing U.S. ocean shipping laws would be shifted to the Surface Transportation Board, which would be renamed the Intermodal Transportation Board. The Federal Maritime Commission would be terminated at the end of fiscal year 1998. A single independent agency would then administer domestic surface, rail, and water transportation and international ocean transportation regulations. The Government would catch up to the carriers and shippers, who are already thinking intermodally. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that my proposed amendment to S. 1356 be printed in the Record at the end of my statement. THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. (See exhibit 1).

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. I can assure my colleagues that the Commerce Committee will closely follow actions taken by the Commission in areas such as satellite licensing to ensure that the intent of Congress is carried out. Congress must ensure that the FCC's actions are complementary, not contrary, to the forces of the free market and open competition. Mr. SHELBY: I thank the chairman of the Commerce Committee for all the work he has undertaken to ensure the American people have access to services which are developed in a free and open marketplace, and I thank the chairman of the Appropriations Committee for permitting our discussion of this most important and timely issue. whitefish point lighthouse land conveyance

Mr. PRESSLER. The Senator is correct. This provision, which originated in the other body, was agreed to on a bipartisan basis. Section 257 directs the Commission to develop meaningful opportunities for small businesses to participate in the ownership and provision of telecommunications services. This language applies to all Commission activities in the area of telecommunications. It does not make exception for activities such as the application of financial qualification standards.

Mr. PRESSLER. The Senator is correct. The primary thrust of the historic act was to ensure increased competition in the telecommunications industry by scaling back regulations and allowing free market forces to operate in this area. The Senator is also correct in noting that section 257 of the act specifically directs the Commission to identify and dismantle impediments to small business ownership and provision of telecommunications services.

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. I want to thank my dear friend and colleague from Pennsylvania for all his hard work and dedication on the Appropriations Committee. I appreciate very much the information he has provided. I also commend the Senator for his work to ensure adequate funding levels for substance abuse programs. I am pleased Congress intends to provide the funding necessary for Flowering Tree to continue fighting alcoholism and securing a brighter future for mothers and their children. Given this information, I hope Secretary Shalala and her department will do the right thing and continue to support the Flowering Tree program in Pine Ridge, SD. joblinks

Mr. PRESSLER. Would the Senator from Pennsylvania agree the Appropriations Committee's proposed funding level should provide HHS with the funding necessary to continue supporting Flowering Tree?

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, as the Senate prepares to debate fiscal year 1997 funding levels for the Department of Health and Human Services [HHS], I would like to take a moment to discuss my concerns regarding a pending decision of the Department of Health and Human Services that would affect an important program in South Dakota. This decision deserves the Senate's attention. The program affected is called Flowering Tree. It is a nationally recognized alcoholism treatment program that has been operating on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in my home State of South Dakota. This alcohol treatment program was backed by a 5-year Federal grant. It is only one of four substance abuse treatment programs nationally that allows Native American women to continue caring for their children while they receive treatment. The Flowering Tree program at Pine Ridge serves the second largest Indian reservation in the United States. On a reservation with 87 percent unemployment, widespread poverty and substance abuse, Flowering Tree has been a vital component of the Pine Ridge community. In spite of Flowering Tree's success in combating generational alcohol abuse, it was brought to my attention that HHS intends to pull federal funding from Flowering Tree, which would force the program to close its doors. The program is funded through the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration [SAMHSA]. The loss of Federal support for the Flowering Tree program would be very harmful to those participating in it. Flowering Tree keeps families together and helps to build a better future for both mothers and their children by treating alcohol abuse. The program is working. If Flowering Tree is forced to close, many of the children assisted by the facility could lose their families and be referred for adoption, foster care or group homes. To say this would be unfortunate is a gross understatement. The breakup of families, combined with the loss of a program that offers a real way out of substance addiction, would be a devastating double- punch for the mothers currently participating or waiting to participate in the program. I am troubled by the Department of Health and Human Services plan to terminate assistance to Flowering Tree. The pending decision apparently is based on anticipated fiscal year 1997 funding levels. The Senate soon will consider a bill that would significantly increase funding for substance abuse treatment programs. Flowering Tree's funding request for fiscal year 1997 is only $688,913. I have written a letter to the Secretary of Health and Human Services, Donna Shalala, urging her to reverse the Department's decision. Last week, I received an initial response from David Mactas, Director of the Center for Substance Abuse Treatment. Mr. Mactas explained the rationale for the Department's decision to terminate funding for Flowering Tree. However, this week, my staff learned from staff at HHS that the decision to terminate funding was put on hold, pending the outcome of the bill that could fund this program. Mr. President, I see on the floor my colleague from Pennsylvania, the distinguished Chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, Senator Specter. I know my friend is working hard on the fiscal year 1997 spending bill that funds substance abuse programs. I hope my colleague had the opportunity to hear my earlier comments and I would yield to him for any comments he may wish to make.

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, I yield the floor. Several Senators addressed the Chair.

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, it is critically important we finish the Federal aviation reauthorization legislation before the Senate adjourns. This legislation is vital to air service in my home State of South Dakota. For example, in my State of South Dakota, the FAA bill we are struggling to bring to closure doubles the size of the Essential Air Service Program to $50 million. This is particularly important to Brookings, Mitchell, and Yankton, SD. The Essential Air Service Program provides the only air service link these communities have to the national air service network. The FAA legislation also will make more Airport Improvement Program [AIP] funds available to small airports for safety-related repairs and improvements. For instance, under this legislation, the Sioux Falls Airport will receive an annual increase in AIP funds of at least $227,000. The Rapid City Airport will receive an annual increase of at least $170,000. The same is true for the Aberdeen Regional Airport and the Pierre Regional Airport which each will receive an increase in AIP funds of at least $100,000. AIP funds are the only source of money for safety-related repairs at these airports and that is one key reason why this legislation is so important to air service in my State. In addition, the FAA legislation addresses a widely held concern in my home State that air fares to small cities are too expensive. The bill directs the Secretary of Transportation to study why city air fares are so exorbitant and recommend what measures can be taken to make air travel to small cities more affordable. The FAA legislation contains many very important aviation safety measures. One such measure will ensure the flight service station in our capital city of Pierre will remain open. Constituents traveling to and from Pierre were very concerned that closing the flight service station would compromise safety at the Pierre Regional Airport. I am very pleased the provision I added to this legislation addresses this concern. Mr. President, there is a continuing struggle over one provision in this vitally important aviation safety and security legislation which is preventing it from being considered by the Senate. I commend the leadership on both sides of the aisle for trying to bring the FAA bill to closure. We cannot leave this city without finishing the FAA bill. It is one of the most important pieces of legislation in this Congress. The air service provisions in this legislation also make it one of the most important pieces of economic development legislation for South Dakota of this or any Congress. Mr. President, as chairman of the conference on H.R. 3539, The Federal Aviation Authorization Act of 1996, I again rise to urge my colleagues to permit the Senate to proceed to consideration of the conference report for this critically important legislation. H.R. 3539 is a bipartisan, omnibus aviation bill which reauthorizes the Airport Improvement Program [AIP], reforms the Federal Aviation Administration, improves aviation safety and security, and provides long overdue assistance to the families of victims of aviation disasters. Mr. President, it is absolutely imperative that the Senate approves this conference report before we adjourn and that the President signs the report. Friday, the House met its responsibility to the American traveling public by passing this legislation. If the Senate fails to approve this excellent legislation which represents another significant legislative accomplishment for this body, we will have failed to meet our responsibility to the American traveling public. For example, if we do not approve this report, airports across the country will not receive Federal funding which is vital for safety-related repairs and other improvements. If we fail to pass this report, the Senate will have neglected our responsibility to ensure the United States maintains the safest and most secure aviation system in the world. For example, the conference report implements many of the aviation security recommendations made by the White House Commission on Aviation Safety and Security earlier this month. Mr. President, there are dozens of important provisions in this legislation, but I would like to focus my remarks on four main areas. First, aviation safety. Air transportation in this country is safe. Indeed, it remains the safest form of travel. However, we can and we must do more. This legislation facilitates the replacement of outdated air traffic control equipment. It puts in place a mechanism to evaluate FAA's long-term funding which is critically important at a time in which enplanements continue to increase yet Federal budget constraints limit the ability of the FAA to respond to the increased needs of our aviation system. Additionally, this legislation eliminates the FAA's dual mandate. It ensures the FAA finally focuses solely on aviation safety. A second area I want to highlight is aviation security. This conference report contains numerous provisions designed to improve security at our Nation's airlines and airports. The measure before us today incorporates many of the recommendations of the White House Commission on Aviation Safety and Security of which I am a member. In fact, this legislation provides statutory authority requested by the President to implement several of the Commission's recommendations. Passage of this bill will improve aviation security by: Speeding deployment of the latest explosive detection devices; enhancing passenger screening processes; requiring criminal history record checks on screeners; requiring regular joint threat assessments; and encouraging other innovative procedures to improve overall aviation security such as automated passenger profiling. The third area I wish to highlight is how this legislation will help small community air service and small airports. The legislation before us today reauthorizes the Essential Air Service program at the level of $50 million. This program is vital to States such as South Dakota. By adjusting the formula for Airport Improvement Program [AIP] funds, we would now ensure that all airports receive virtually all their entitlement funds in addition to being eligible for discretionary funds. This is great news for small airports which in recent years have received far less than their full and fair share of these funds. Also, the legislation directs the Secretary of Transportation to conduct a comprehensive study on rural air service and fares. For too long, small communities have been forced to endure higher fares as a result of inadequate competition. The Department of Transportation will now look into this issue as a result of this conference report. This follows on the important work that I instructed the General Accounting Office to initiate last year. Mr. President, the final area I wish to highlight is the compassionate measures this legislation would put in place for the families of victims of aviation disasters. Last week, I chaired a hearing of the Commerce Committee in which the families of victims of five aviation tragedies courageously told the committee of their harrowing experiences. I promised those witnesses, as well as other families of victims in the room, that Congress finally would act this year to put in place measures to improve the treatment families receive, protect their privacy in a time of grief, ensure they receive timely and accurate information, and address a number of other concerns they eloquently voiced to the committee. The family advocacy and assistance provisions in this conference report are supported by these families and I hope the Senate will help me keep my promise to families who already have suffered enough. I hope we do not disappoint them. Mr. President, despite all the vitally important aviation safety and security provisions in this legislation, I understand some members are troubled by one provision. I refer to the amendment the ranking member of the Commerce Committee, Senator Hollings, offered in conference to correct a technical error in the Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act of 1995. The Hollings amendment, which I strongly support, is not the partisan provision some have claimed it to be. All five Senate conferees--Senator McCain, Senator Stevens, Senator Hollings, Senator Ford, and I--voted in favor of that amendment because, despite all the rhetoric, it is simply a technical correction which fairness dictates the Congress make. I would like to briefly discuss the rhetoric that has clouded the Hollings amendment issue and, regrettably, has transformed the Hollings amendment into an issue which some now feel is more important than enhancing aviation safety and security. When the House debated the conference report, I heard a number of Members make blanket statements that the Hollings amendment is not truly a technical correction. Those same Members claimed their statements were based on their purported knowledge of the Senate's intent when it considered and overwhelmingly passed the ICC Termination Act. With all due respect to those Members of the House, I authorized the ICC Termination Act and can unequivocally say they are dead wrong. The Hollings amendment is nothing more than a technical correction. In the ICC legislation, the Senate never intended to strip Federal Express or any person of rights without the benefit of a hearing, debate, or even discussion. Now, fairness dictates we correct that inadvertent error. That is precisely what the Hollings amendment does. It is exactly why I supported it in conference. It is why I continue to strongly support it. Today's debate should be about this truly historic piece of aviation legislation which reflects the outstanding work Congress does when it proceeds on a bipartisan basis. Unfortunately, I fear the debate regrettably will focus on the Hollings amendment which is contained in just 5 lines of a 189-page bill. All too often, Congress is criticized for losing sight of the big picture. Today, if this debate proceeds as I fear it may, the Senate will reinforce that perception. Some members of the American public watching this debate from the gallery of a C-SPAN will understandably ask themselves ``has the Senate lost sight of the goal of ensuring the safety and security of air travel in the United States?'' Others will ask themselves ``has the Senate forgotten the importance of safety-related repairs and other improvements of our Nation's airports?'' And the family members of aviation disaster victims will correctly ask ``why has the Senate failed to listen to our pleas to put in place measures to improve the treatment of families of future aviation disaster victims?'' And, Mr. President, each and every one of these questions will be perfectly valid. I would hate to be in the position of having to answer them. We owe it to the American public to preempt these questions by resisting the invitation to lose sight of the bigger picture. Today, we are trying to pass a historic aviation safety and security bill. Let's move beyond 5 lines in a 189-page bill. Let's get the job done for the American public. I urge that the Senate immediately take up for consideration the conference report to accompany H.R. 3539. Mr. President, earlier today I wrote the Vice President of the United States urging him to support swift and final passage of the conference report accompanying H.R. 3539. In that letter, I reminded the Vice President that two of the most important aviation security recommendations made by the White House Commission on Aviation Safety and Security--deployment of explosive detection devices at our Nation's airports and criminal background checks for baggage screeners--cannot be implemented without the statutory authorization to do so provided in this legislation. These important recommendations to enhance the security of air travel in the United States cannot wait until we reconvene next year. We must pass those two provisions before we adjourn. We must pass this legislation before we adjourn. I ask unanimous consent to have that letter printed in the Record.

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, I want to commend the Senators from Kentucky and Arizona for their great efforts and to say I will certainly stay here as long as it takes to pass this bill. This bill is critical to pass. In my little State of South Dakota, for example, we have all the essential airport funding, we have the Federal Aviation flight service, and small States that have small airports depend on the airport trust fund. This will be a disaster to air safety across the United States. It will be a disaster to everything we have been talking about since the major air crashes that have occurred, if we cannot pass this bill. I am privileged to chair the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee. Our committee, on a bipartisan basis, on a motion from our ranking member, agreed to this amendment. It was a bipartisan effort. We must pass this bill. We have worked it out in our committee. It was a long-fought, hard-fought bill, and we must pass it. I yield the floor.

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, I rise to support adoption of the Coast Guard Conference Report for fiscal years 1996 and 1997. Mr. President, the Coast Guard has broad ranging responsibilities-- from enforcing America's maritime laws to ensuring the safety of recreational boaters. Mr. President, like other Federal agencies, the Coast Guard faces the challenge of continuing to provide better government at less cost. It is clear the American taxpayers are demanding a smaller, more accountable Federal Government. At the same time, the demand for certain government services, including those provided by the Coast Guard, continues to be great. The Commandant of the Coast Guard, Admiral Robert E. Kramek, recently announced his National Plan for Streamlining the Coast Guard, which will save, on a cumulative basis, nearly one billion dollars by the year 2005 and make available over one billion dollars in property for other uses. Despite cuts of this magnitude, the Coast Guard will continue to perform all its current missions. I am pleased the Coast Guard is making a serious effort to improve it's efficiency while maintaining its effectiveness. Mr. President, the conference report before us authorizes appropriations for the Coast Guard for fiscal years 1996 and 1997 and authorizes several management improvements requested by the Coast Guard. Many Members on both sides of the aisle have expressed interest in this bill and we have addressed their requests as best we could. The conference report has broad bipartisan support. Mr. President, I believe the Coast Guard is up to the challenge of maintaining its status as the world's premier maritime organization despite intense budget pressure. It is my belief this authorization bill provides the Coast Guard with the support it needs to meet that challenge. Mr. President, let me take this opportunity to thank the very capable Senator Stevens, who is chairman of our Oceans and Fisheries Subcommittee, for his leadership in developing the original bill. I would like to recognize Senator Hollings, the ranking Democratic member on the full committee for his bipartisanship throughout this process. Mr. President, I would also like to thank Congressman Shuster, chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee and chairman of our Coast Guard Conference. He and his staff have worked long and hard in completing our work on this authorization. Mr. President, finally I thank my colleagues for their contributions and support and I urge the adoption of the conference report for S. 1004.

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, as chairman of the conference on H.R. 3539, the Federal Aviation Authorization Act of l996, I rise to urge my colleagues to permit the Senate to immediately proceed to consideration of the conference report for this critically important legislation. H.R. 3539 is a bipartisan, omnibus aviation bill which reauthorizes the Airport Improvement Program [AIP], reforms the Federal Aviation Administration, improves aviation safety and security, and provides long overdue assistance to the families of victims of aviation disasters. Mr. President, it is absolutely imperative that the Senate approves this conference report before we adjourn and that the President signs the report. Yesterday, the House met its responsibility to the American traveling public by passing this legislation. If the Senate fails to approve this excellent legislation which represents another significant legislative accomplishment for this body, we will have failed to meet our responsibility to the American traveling public. For example, if we do not approve this report, airports across the country will not receive Federal funding which is vital for safety-related repairs and other improvements. If we fail to pass this report, the Senate will have neglected our responsibility to ensure the United States maintains the safest and most secure aviation system in the world. For example, the conference report implements many of the aviation security recommendations made by the White House Commission on Aviation Safety and Security earlier this month. Mr. President, there are dozens of important provisions in this legislation, but I would like to focus my remarks on four main areas. First, aviation security. Air transportation in this country is safe. Indeed, it remains the safest form of travel. However, we can and we must do more. This legislation facilitates the replacement of outdated air traffic control equipment. It puts in place a mechanism to evaluate FAA's long-term funding which is critically important at a time in which enplanements continue to increase yet Federal budget constraints limit the ability of the FAA to respond to the increased needs of our aviation system. Additionally, this legislation eliminates the FAA's dual mandate. It ensures the FAA finally focuses solely on aviation safety. A second area I want to highlight is aviation security. This conference report contains numerous provisions designed to improve security at our Nation's airlines and airports. The measure before us today incorporates many of the recommendations of the White House Commission on Aviation Safety and Security of which I am a member. In fact, this legislation provides statutory authority requested by the President to implement several of the Commission's recommendations. Passage of this bill will improve aviation security by: speeding deployment of the latest explosive detection devices; enhancing passenger screening processes; requiring criminal history record checks on screeners; requiring regular joint threat assessments; and encouraging other innovative procedures to improve overall aviation security such as automated passenger profiling. The third area I wish to highlight is how this legislation will help small community air service and small airports. The legislation before us today reauthorizes the Essential Air Service Program at the level of $50 million. This program is vital to States such as South Dakota. By adjusting the formula for AIP funds, we would now ensure that all airports receive virtually all their entitlement funds in addition to being eligible for discretionary funds. This is great news for small airports which in recent years have received far less than their full and fair share of these funds. Also, the legislation directs the Secretary of Transportation to conduct a comprehensive study on rural air service and fares. For too long, small communities have been forced to endure higher fares as a result of inadequate competition. The Department of Transportation will now look into this issue as a result of this conference report. This follows on the important work that I instructed the General Accounting Office to initiate last year. Mr. President, the final area I wish to highlight is the compassionate measures this legislation would put in place for the families of victims of aviation disasters. Last week, I chaired a hearing of the Commerce Committee in which the families of victims of five aviation tragedies courageously told the committee of their harrowing experiences. I promised those witnesses, as well as other families of victims in the room, that Congress finally would act this year to put in place measures to improve the treatment families receive, protect their privacy in a time of grief, ensure they receive timely and accurate information, and address a number of other concerns they eloquently voiced to the committee. The family advocacy and assistance provisions in this conference report are supported by these families and I hope the Senate will help me keep my promise to families who already have suffered enough. I hope we do not disappoint them. Mr. President, despite all the vitally important aviation safety and security provisions in this legislation, I understand a very small group of Senators are concerned about one provision in the legislation which makes a technical correction affecting Federal Express. I refer to the amendment the ranking member of the Commerce Committee, Senator Hollings, offered in conference to correct a technical error in the Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act of 1995. It is time we reach an agreement on this issue. The Hollings amendment, which I strongly support, is not the partisan provision these Senators believe it to be. All five Senate conferees-- Senator McCain, Senator Stevens, Senator Hollings, Senator Ford and I-- voted in favor of that amendment because, despite all the rhetoric, it is simply a technical correction which fairness dictates the Congress make. I would like to briefly discuss the rhetoric that has clouded the Hollings amendment issue and, regrettably, has transformed the Hollings amendment into an issue which some now feel is more important than enhancing aviation safety and security. When the House debated the conference report, I heard a number of Members make blanket statements that the Hollings amendment is not truly a technical correction. Those same Members claimed their statements were based on their purported knowledge of the Senate's intent when it considered and overwhelmingly passed the ICC Termination Act. With all due respect to those Members of the House, I authored the ICC Termination Act and can unequivocally say they are dead wrong. The Hollings amendment is nothing more than a technical correction. Let me explain. Prior to the Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act of 1995, the Railway Labor Act had jurisdiction over carriers including express companies. A conforming amendment in the ICC Termination Act inadvertently dropped express companies from the scope of the Railway Labor Act. As the author of the ICC Termination Act, I can say unequivocally that the Senate never intended to strip Federal Express or any person of rights without the benefit of a hearing, debate, or even discussion. Section 10501 of the ICC Termination Act makes that point crystal clear. Section 10501 states ``[t]he enactment of the ICC Termination Act of 1995 shall neither expand nor contract coverage of employees or employers by the Railway Labor Act.'' Mr. President, fairness dictates we correct that inadvertent technical error. That is precisely what the Hollings amendment does. It is exactly why I supported it in conference. It is why I continue to strongly support it. Contrary to what some Senators have claimed, it is my understanding the Hollings amendment will not create any new labor protections which Federal Express did not have prior to enactment of the technical error in the ICC Termination Act. Nor will it broaden labor protections Federal Express previously had. The amendment is precisely what it purports to be, a technical correction. The conference report should be on the floor for consideration and we should be debating a truly historic piece of aviation legislation which reflects the outstanding work Congress does when it proceeds on a bipartisan basis. Unfortunately, instead of discharging our duty to the American traveling public, the Senate is bogged down in procedural maneuvers by a small group of Senators to prevent the conference report accompanying H.R. 3539 from being considered by the Senate. Why? We cannot consider this vital legislation because a small group of Senators does not support the Hollings amendment which is contained in just 5 lines of a 189-page bill. All too often, Congress is criticized for losing sight of the big picture. Today, regrettably, the Senate is reinforcing that perception. Some members of the American public watching these proceedings either from the gallery or on C-SPAN will understandably ask themselves ``has the Senate lost sight of the goal of ensuring the safety and security of air travel in the United States?'' Others will ask themselves ``has the Senate forgotten the importance of safety-related repairs and other improvements at our Nation's airports?'' And the family members of aviation disaster victims will correctly ask ``why has the Senate failed to listen to our pleas to put in place measures to improve the treatment of families of future aviation disaster victims?" And, Mr. President, each and every one of these questions is perfectly valid. If we fail to pass this conference report before we adjourn, I would hate to be in the position of having to answer them. We owe it to the American public to preempt these questions by resisting the invitation to lose sight of the bigger picture. Today, we are trying to pass an historic aviation safety and security bill. Let us get the job done for the American public. I urge that the Senate immediately take up for consideration the conference report to accompany H.R. 3539. Let me add that I pledge to join whatever efforts the Senator from Alaska, who is in the chair, or others take to ensure this conference report passes before we adjourn. This legislation is yet another example of the excellent bipartisan cooperation of the Commerce Committee. The Hollings amendment enjoys the bipartisan support of all of the Senate conferees. In that bipartisan spirit, I urge Senators from both sides of the aisle to join our effort to pass the FAA conference report.

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, I want to join the tribute to Al Simpson, the Senator from Wyoming. I came here with him and there is almost nobody I admire more than Al Simpson. I enjoyed that speech very much. I wish I could be in your class at Harvard. I think that would be fun. But stay within the subject matter.

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, I commend the majority leader and others on the difficulty in bringing the Congress to a close and concluding all ongoing negotiations. I am very proud of the efforts that are being made on the Federal Aviation Administration authorization bill to get that vitally important legislation before the Senate for consideration. I am also very proud of the efforts to bring the Coast Guard bill to closure as well as efforts to agree to a continuing resolution. With so many constituent interests represented by Congress, sometimes it is quite difficult to reach consensus on legislation. I think this point is not well understood across the country. We have a vast country, and I know that Congress is much criticized for acting slowly or sometimes failing to act. On the other hand, what is the alternative to resolving disputes with such a huge country, with so many Members of Congress, so many citizens, so many different interests? All those come to a head, so-to-speak, at the close of a Congress, and it requires great compromise. It has been my pleasure to chair the House-Senate conference committee working on the critically important Federal Aviation authorization bill. The conference report accompanying that bill is ready for immediate consideration by this body. Unfortunately, several of my colleagues have objected to consideration of the conference report because they oppose a single section of that bill, an bipartisan amendment offered by the distinguished Senator from South Carolina, Senator Hollings, in conference. Every Senate conferee voted in favor of the Hollings amendment which makes a technical correction to the Railway Labor Act. An excellent bill is being held up over a difference of opinion relating to 5 lines in a 189 pages aviation safety and security bill. Mr. President, we cannot adjourn without passing the conference report to the Federal Aviation authorization bill. The House approved the conference report yesterday. If we do not approve the conference report, the Senate will have failed to meet its responsibility to the traveling public. Airports across the country will not receive much needed Airport Improvement Program [AIP] funds for safety-related repairs and other necessary improvements. Two years of tireless efforts to reach a compromise on FAA reform provisions will be lost. Vitally important aviation safety and security provisions will not be put in place. Family members of future aviation disaster victims would be denied the thoughtful, comprehensive protections this legislation would provide to them. Provisions to revitalize air service to small communities will not go into effect. It short, inaction by the Senate on this conference report would be a very serious mistake for which this body would be roundly criticized. Let me also comment a little bit on agriculture, because I know that at this time of the year, the payments regarding the Freedom to Farm Act are going out to some farmers. That was a controversial bill that was worked out in this Chamber. Let me say that I am proud to have been a part of the leadership team and proud to have voted for freedom to farm. But we need to expand our agricultural markets abroad. We have done that for our commodities, and under NAFTA and GATT, we have exported more agricultural products than ever in our history. There has been some dispute on transshipment of cattle, in terms of Mexico and Canada, under NAFTA. We hope that those issues are resolved and NAFTA is better enforced. Mr. President, I might also say that, in terms of our agriculture future, Alan Greenspan has said that one of the greatest agricultural farm bills is a balanced budget. I hope that we can continue to expand our agricultural exports, especially as they regard commodity prices. I yield the floor. I note the absence of a quorum.

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, this month marks the 10th anniversary of the Dakota, Minnesota, and Eastern [DME] Railroad. The DME is South Dakota's only statewide railroad and operates more than 1,100 miles. I offer my heartfelt congratulations to the DME. I particularly commend the many dedicated workers and officials who have worked to make DME such a successful rail service provider. All associated with DME should be proud. I recall back in 1983 when I first became involved in a lengthy battle to preserve critical rail service slated for abandonment. The Chicago and NorthWestern was planning to abandon 167-miles connecting Ft. Pierre and Rapid City. That fight ultimately lead to establishment of the DME. At first, many were skeptical about DME's prospect for success. Those same skeptics are believers today. DME's annual revenue and freight tonnage have doubled during the past 10 years. So has its number of employees. And, more than $90 million has been invested in main line infrastructure improvements during that same period. I am proud to have played a role both in DME's creation and its successes. I have enjoyed working closely with rail shippers and DME to advance this critical transportation service. I remain committed to doing all I can to promote adequate and effective rail service for our State. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that an article by Roger Larson and an editorial printed in the Huron Daily Plainsman detailing the DME odyssey be printed in the Record.

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, I am pleased to bring to the Senate S. 1311, the National Physical Fitness and Sports Foundation Establishment Act. S. 1311, would create a charitable, not-for-profit foundation to actively raise private funds to support the activities of the President's Council on Physical Fitness, President's Council. In the past, the President's Council has relied on Federal appropriations to support its activities. Future appropriations for the President's Council are unlikely as we strive to balance the Federal budget. The Foundation created by this bill would raise private funds to sustain the President's Council on Physical Fitness. To facilitate fund-raising, the Foundation is permitted to offer the use of the seal of the President's Council for promotional purposes in exchange for sponsorship funds. The bill does not authorize the expenditure of Federal funds. The goals of the President's Council are identified in Executive Order 12345. The primary goal is to foster programs that encourage people of all ages to participate regularly in sports and physical activities. Perhaps the Council's most well known activity is the President's Challenge Physical Fitness Awards Program which is administered by teachers and youth programs in every State. We should act to preserve the President's Council. Its activities are particularly important because our Nation's children are becoming increasingly less physically fit even as we learn that physical fitness in one's youth is important to living a healthy life during adulthood. Senators Campbell and Bradley introduced this bill in October 1995. The Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation unanimously ordered the bill reported on June 6, 1996. I have an amendment that makes certain technical modifications to the bill. I urge my colleagues to support this worthy legislation.

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, for the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, I also report favorably four nomination lists in the Coast Guard, which were printed in full in the Congressional Records on July 29, and September 3, 1996, and ask unanimous consent, to save the expense of reprinting on the Executive Calendar, that these nominations lie at the Secretary's desk for the information of Senators.

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. Madam President, this morning we had excellent testimony in the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee from a number of witnesses who represented the families of airplane crashes. I believe we had five or six unfortunate airplane crashes. We also had other representatives of next of kin there at the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee. It was a very moving hearing. I want to commend the witnesses who appeared. I also want to say that it is time we act in terms of designating the National Transportation Safety Board as the responsible agency in terms of what happens after an airplane crash. We hope there are no airplane crashes. That would be an ideal situation. Whether it is a small crash or a big crash, inevitably in human history there will probably be some. We want the next of kin to be taken care of and notified in a sensitive and organized way. This is not entirely the fault of the airlines, as was pointed out in the balance of the testimony we received. In the past, the rules have not been clear as to who is in charge. Some of the manifest problems in the past have arisen because of different practices. Sometimes passengers will get off a plane at the very last minute, even after having checked in. In fairness to the airlines, there has been some uncertainty. Now we have an opportunity to set up a system, working with the Gore Commission, and I am pleased to be designated to be a liaison to the Gore Commission, plus the FAA bill that is before the Senate. This afternoon at 3:30 I believe the conferees on the FAA bill will be meeting, and part of that will be to be sure the National Transportation Safety Board is designated as the agency with the responsibility and the proper equipment, funding and personnel to deal with families and next of kin, and to work with our airports and our airlines in times of emergencies. Let me commend the National Transportation Safety Board, because under the leadership of Jim Hall, I believe they have been doing an excellent job with their responsibilities. I am glad they are willing to assume this additional responsibility of being the lead agency, of taking the lead, in terms of dealing with families and next of kin and notification and counseling and so forth in times of an airplane crash. Let me also say a word about some of our smaller airports and some of our smaller airplanes. We want to be sure they are safe for the flying public. Many of our people do not live at a hub airport. A hub airport is a central airport such as New York, Minneapolis, or Denver. Over half of the airline passengers in this country originate at small airports, on smaller planes. We certainly want to make them safe and reassure the flying public of their safety. However, we cannot get into a real expensive situation. We have to find some of the new devices, see they are brought in line and manufactured in large numbers, so we can find reasonable ways to achieve air safety. This afternoon, as the Federal aviation authorization bill moves forward and comes to the Senate floor, I hope we all keep in mind the fine testimony we heard this morning from those fine witnesses. I want to help them. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. PRESSLER

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

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be allowed to meet during the Tuesday, September 24, 1996 session of the Senate for the purpose of conducing a hearing on S. 1860, the Auto Choice Reform Act.

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, today I would like to pay tribute to Dean Schofield from Pierre, SD. Dean is retiring this month after serving 35 years with the South Dakota Department of Transportation. Dean's tireless dedication to our State has been exemplary. Dean's career began at the Department in 1961. His career steadily advanced over the years, from an assistant engineer to deputy secretary of the Department, the position he held when he announced his retirement. Mr. President, during my 22 years in Congress, I have often relied on Dean's insight and suggestions as I've worked to promote South Dakota's transportation system. Indeed, Dean has always kept me and my staff aware of South Dakota's transportation priorities. For example, I recall last year when Dean testified before a Surface Transportation and Merchant Marine Subcommittee hearing on rail service. Dean has also lent his expertise on highway and air service issues. His knowledge and contributions have been invaluable. I congratulate Dean upon his retirement and offer my good wishes to both he and his wife, Delcie. Dean leaves behind big shoes to fill. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent a copy of an executive proclamation by the Governor of the State of South Dakota honoring Dean be printed in the Record immediately following my remarks.

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, David Pryor is a good friend of mine. Over the years, I have had the privilege of getting to know David and his wife Barbara quite well. I have attended several events he has sponsored in Texarkana, AR, to raise needed funds for charitable organizations. I even have traveled to Little Rock to speak at colleges. Mr. President, David Pryor is a legendary figure in this body and I have followed his career with great interest and admiration. I recall that he first began his public service in Washington as a Congressional page. Some time later he returned to Washington when he was elected to serve as a United States Congressman. In fact, for a while we served together in the House of Representatives. Aside from this association, I also have had the privilege of working closely with him on the Senate Finance Committee and the Senate Committee on Aging. As many of my colleagues know, David Pryor is one of the President's best and closest friends. This friendship has enabled him to go directly to the President on critical matters confronting the Senate. That is an unusual and serious responsibility for a Senator to have, and David Pryor has acted commendably. Mr. President, I personally will miss David Pryor's friendship. But, I also will miss his intelligence and counsel tremendously.

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for a comment? If I may, I agree with the Senator from Nebraska. This standard we've set in this bill for the issuance of pipeline safety standards is unique to the Pipeline Safety Office. That's why we have the support for this legislation of the Department of Transportation and the regulated industry. The Department of Transportation says it can live with this standard, and that's why we are able to include it in this bill.

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. Madam President, I objected regarding the Pipeline Safety Act, which I am trying very hard to pass. I will not object if the Senator desires to discuss issues unrelated.

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