Larry Pressler

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, if there be no further business to come before the Senate, I now ask that the Senate stand in recess under the previous order.

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. I thank my friend from Nebraska. I regret he is leaving this Chamber. I have previously said a few kind words about him, both here and in the press. But I thank him very much for his great service here in this body. Mr. President, I urge the adoption of this amendment. THE PRESIDING OFFICER. If there be no further debate, the question is on agreeing to the amendment.

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

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

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, on behalf of myself, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Simpson, and others, I send an amendment to the desk that has been approved on both sides and that the chairman of the Interior appropriations subcommittee has approved, and I ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, I would like to say a few words about Dan Glickman. I have known him since 1974, when we came to the U.S. House of Representatives together. I have known him and his wife. We have traveled to different events together over the years. We have voted together in the House of Representatives. We have served together on a number of caucuses. I had observed his work over the years. I certainly shall be voting with a great deal of pride for Dan Glickman for Secretary of Agriculture. I am especially interested in the international aspects of agriculture. I believe in the next few years what we do in international agricultural trade will be just as important to farm prices as some of our domestic programs. The business of the Secretary of Agriculture is the business of food for the business of selling our products abroad, but also using food in foreign policy situations. The Secretary of Agriculture can be a driving force for what happens in farm prices and for the entire agricultural industry in our country in the next few years. The Secretary of Agriculture also is a very important force domestically because it is his Department that sets the standards for food--what people are supposed to eat. The Food Stamp Program also is administered by the Department of Agriculture to provide food assistance for the poor. These are just some of a whole array of domestic issues handled by the Secretary of Agriculture. The Department of Agriculture is a vast, huge agency. I first became acquainted with it when I was a young 4H member growing up on a farm near Humboldt, SD. There is a great deal of controversy about what the Department should do about reorganizing, and making it more efficient. I hope Dan Glickman will heed the call of the American people for less Government and more action, so to speak, in terms of the bureaucracy. It seems every time we cut spending around here we are told it is going to cut children's programs or food stamps or it is going to close a local office in one of our States. We never hear anything about shutting down any of the bureaucracy here in Washington, DC. We need to have a more efficient Department of Agriculture. I am hoping Dan Glickman will do just that. I am prepared to help him and I wish him well. Mr. President, I note the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, I would like to yield back all the time on both sides regarding the nomination of Mr. Glickman. And I am playing the role of both leader and Democratic leader at the same time, I am told.

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now return to executive session to the nomination of Secretary Glickman.

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. I would inquire of the Chair if H.R. 849 has arrived from the House of Representatives?

Mr. PRESSLER. Therefore, I will ask for its first reading.

Mr. PRESSLER. I now ask for its second reading. I object.

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. Madam President, I join in the tribute to my good friend and colleague. I recall visiting his home in Tuscumbia, AL, and his lovely wife, Mike, receiving us there. I recall serving on the Commerce Committee and the Judiciary Committee with him over the years, and I believe we have been on a trip or two with some of these delegations. So I congratulate him on great service to the United States. It has been a pleasure to serve with you. I think you are an example to all of us of what a good U.S. Senator is. I wish you all my best.

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. I ask unanimous consent when the Senate completes its business today, it stand in recess until the hour of 9:20 a.m. on Thursday, March 30, 1995; that following the prayer the Journal of proceedings be deemed approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and the Senate then proceed to a period of morning business not to extend beyond the hour of 10:15 a.m., with Members recognized to speak for up to 5 minutes each, with the following exceptions: Mr. Coverdell, 10 minutes; Mr. Campbell, 10 minutes; Mr. Thomas, 5 minutes; Mr. Cohen, 10 minutes; Mr. Kerrey, 15 minutes.

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. I ask unanimous consent that following the confirmation of Mr. Glickman and resuming legislative session, the Senate then resume consideration of H.R. 1158, and the democratic leader be recognized to offer an amendment.

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate return to legislative session, to the bill, for purposes of my offering an amendment that has been agreed to on both sides regarding grazing permits for cattle in certain parts of the United States.

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, last Saturday the people of Greece celebrated 172 years of Greek independence from the Ottoman Empire. The Greek emancipation from the reins of tyranny brings to mind our own ancestors' struggle for freedom. Greece and the United States share a common struggle rooted in a common philosophy of liberty and self- governance put forth by the ancient Greeks. Thomas Jefferson looked to the ancient Greeks when he made the case for representative democracy. Jefferson once said, `` * * * to the ancient Greeks * * * we are all indebted for the light which led ourselves out of Gothic darkness.'' The Declaration of Independence closely mirrors the ideals of ancient Greek philosophers. Greek Independence Day not only commemorates Greece's victory over oppression, but also celebrates deeply rooted philosophical symmetry-- one honed by great statesmen from Aristotle to Thomas Jefferson. America's relationship with the Greeks came full circle when, on the eve of their revolution for independence, the Greek commander in chief, Petros Mavomichalis implored Americans for assistance: Having formed the resolution to live or die for freedom, we are drawn toward you by a just sympathy since it is in your land that liberty has fixed her abode, and by you that she is prized as by our fathers. Hence, honoring her name, we invoke yours at the same time, trusting that in imitating you, we shall imitate our ancestors and be thought worthy of them if we succeed in resembling you . . . it is for you, citizens of America, to crown this glory. Cognizant of the familiar ideals upon which the United States was founded, Greeks emigrated to the United States en masse during the early 1900's. Thus, generations of Greek-Americans have been able to contribute to the reaffirmation of their ancestors' political philosophies. Greek immigrants emulated their ancestors' drive for knowledge. By 1970, Greek-Americans already topped other ethnic groups in median educational achievement. Combined with this intellectual drive, Greeks brought with them a diligent work ethic. Greek Independence Day also gives us an opportunity to pay special tribute to the industrious traditions of Greek-Americans and their outstanding contribution to our society. I take this opportunity to wish all Greeks, whether they be in Greece or my home State of South Dakota, the very best during this 172d year of Greek independence.

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, let me begin by emphasizing the fundamental reason why we are here today--to extend the 25 percent tax deduction for health insurance costs of self-employed Americans. This is one of the most important items Congress will consider this year. We must put the needs of self-employed Americans--small business men and women, farmers and ranchers--at the forefront of our agenda. Passing the 25 percent deduction on a permanent basis is a step in that direction. By doing so, these hard-working individuals can make their business plans knowing they can depend on this reasonable deduction. Without the deduction, self-employed individuals will see their taxes increase and their ability to afford health insurance decrease. That is unfair, and must not happen. Frankly, Mr. President, the legislation we are considering today is a modest deduction, particularly when compared to the corporate deduction of 100 percent, but it is nonetheless critical. It is critical to the 48,000 small business men and women, farmers and ranchers in South Dakota, as well as the millions of other self-employed people across this country. As a member of the Finance Committee I supported the legislation before the Senate today. It retroactively reinstates the 25 percent deduction for last year. More importantly, it permanently increases the deduction to 30 percent for 1995 and thereafter. This legislation is a first step toward bringing self-employed individuals onto equal footing with corporations, which are allowed to deduct 100 percent of their health insurance costs. We have already done a great disservice to our family farmers by not passing this legislation prior to the March 1 filing deadline for their Federal tax returns. It is my hope that we will not do the same for all the other self-employed individuals by missing the April 17 deadline, thereby creating a paperwork avalanche of amended returns. Approximately 67,200 South Dakotans are either self-employed or are employed by the self-employed. These men and women represent almost 20 percent of South Dakota's total workforce--many of them are farmers and ranchers. This tax deduction makes insurance more affordable for them and their families. Immediate passage of this bill should be a top priority for the Senate. I know that most of my colleagues agree that this is a bill of critical importance. However, as we all know, controversy surrounds the offset. This is unfortunate because it threatens the timely passage of the 25 percent provision. I support the offset so that we can get this legislation permanently placed in law and also expand it to 30 percent. The FCC tax certificates program--the program we terminate to pay for this legislation--is no longer justifiable. When the choice is between giving multibillion dollar corporations a tax break or giving small businesses, farmers and ranchers relief for health insurance coverage, the choice is clear: I side with the hard- working small business people, and farmers and ranchers--not large corporations. I encourage my colleagues to recognize the core issue here today and to vote to retroactively reinstate the 25 percent deduction for 1994 and to permanently extend the deduction at the 30 percent level thereafter. We must do this for the sake of our farmers, ranchers, small business people, and the families and employees who rely upon them. I urge my colleagues to vote for H.R. 831 as approved by the Finance Committee, and urge our colleagues in the House to approve it as well.

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, for the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, I also report favorably five nomination lists in the Coast Guard, which were printed in full in the Congressional Records of January 6, February 3 and 16, 1995, 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. Mr. President, now is the time of the year American's are preparing their fields for planting of this year's crops. Planting season can be unpredictable for farmers. Once the season begins there is the inevitable uncooperative weather conditions of rain, snow, hail or early spring frosts. Farmers must move quickly and put in long hours. The demand for farm supplies escalates during planting season. The last regulations that interfere with planting operations. The Department of Transportation has issued hours-of-service regulations that could interrupt or stop planting. These regulations are highly impractical, burdensome and costly for farmers and farm suppliers. Simply put, the regulations would require farmers to take three days off--at the peak work time of the year--after working up to 15 hours a day for 4 days straight. I might add these regulations would cause severe problems for farmers at harvest time, as well. The solution to this dilemma is simple. The Department of Transportation should waive the hours of service requirements for agricultural purposes during harvest and planting seasons. This issue is not new. Last year, 34 Senators, including myself, wrote to Transportation Secretary Pena urging a waiver from hours-of- service requirements for agricultural purposes during planting and harvest seasons. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a copy of that letter appear in the Record. Mr. President, I want to extend my deepest appreciation to the efforts of our colleague, Senator Exon, on this effort. He has been a leader in the effort to waive agriculture from the hours-of-service regulations. Senator Exon led Senate efforts last year to pass legislation to provide this agricultural exemption. However, an agricultural exemption has never cleared the Congress. I have worked with Senator Exon closely on this matter. I have let him know that I would introduce this bill today. I have worked with my House and Senate farm State colleagues for regulatory relief for farmers and farm suppliers. Department of Transportation regulations are unfair to farmers and farm suppliers. An agricultural exemption did not clear Congress last year. What did clear the House last year was watered down and reduced to yet another mandated regulatory hurdle for farmers. That is the situation facing farmers today. Farmers and farm suppliers want to obey the law and rules on hours- of-service. However, the rules do not make sense. Because of what I view as a bureaucratic entanglement brought about the Department of Transportation, I am introducing this bill today. Legislative action is needed so that American agriculture can have a sensible rule in place for the 1995 planting and harvest seasons.

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, I rise to announce my cosponsorship of a joint resolution to amend the U.S. Constitution to allow Congress and the States to prohibit the desecration of the American flag. Having served two tours in the Vietnam war as a second lieutenant in the Army, our flag has a deep personal meaning for me. I experience a feeling of pride when I see the Stars and Stripes flying in front of a military base, on top of the U.S. Capitol Building here in Washington, or in a small town parade in South Dakota. I feel sick to my stomach when I think of its desecration by my fellow Americans. The American flag is a dramatic living symbol of the principles for which this great country stands--liberty, due process, justice for all. Our flag is an emblem of the ideals which set our Nation apart from all others. When someone willfully desecrates the flag, he or she is committing a malicious act of violence that incites those Americans who have dedicated their lives to uphold the values we cherish. It tramples the honor of millions of soldiers--men and women--who served, fought, and died to preserve the values which the flag represents. It strikes at the honor of the untold number of civilians who have worked in industries behind the lines to support our military forces. Mr. President, in Johnson versus Texas (1989), the Supreme Court ruled that desecrating the flag is free speech protected by the first amendment. In response, Congress overwhelmingly passed the Flag Protection Act of 1989. However, the following year, in United States versus Eichmann (1990), the Court struck down this statute as an impermissible infringement on the first amendment. I disagree with the Supreme Court's rulings. I believe it is entirely appropriate for Congress to enact legislation to protect from desecration the primary symbol of our great Nation. However, unless the Johnson and Eichmann decisions are overturned by a subsequent Court, it is clear that only a constitutional amendment will ensure the validity of any State or Federal statute banning flag desecration. Opponents of our effort to protect the flag argue that free speech is among the most sacred rights enjoyed by Americans. They believe that this amendment limits their right to freedom of speech. I certainly agree with the need to vigilantly guard the first amendment. No other society on this planet is more tolerant of different viewpoints and opinions than America. But flag desecration is more than just speech. It is among those acts of public behavior so offensive and harmful that they fall outside of the protections of the first amendment. For example, one of the famous limits of free speech is that one cannot shout ``fire!'' in a crowded move theater. Malicious and defamatory speech, such as slander and libel, also are not protected by the first amendment. Obscenity does not enjoy the protection of the first amendment. We do not permit people to freely deface a synagogue or church buildings in the name of free speech. Likewise, physical desecration of the flag through burning, trampling, or any other method is not free speech protected by our Constitution. It is offensive conduct that does not deserve protection by the first amendment. I am therefore proud to join with my colleagues in supporting a constitutional amendment to protect the American flag. Since the Johnson ruling, 43 States have passed resolutions calling on Congress to pass a flag desecration amendment for consideration by the States. Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to carry out the clear will of the American people by supporting this resolution.

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize one of South Dakota's dedicated educators, Max Hawk of Yankton. For the past 38 years, Hawk has been a teacher and a coach, serving in Scotland for 8 years and Yankton for the remaining 30. While admired and respected as a committed teacher, he is best known in South Dakota for his exemplary skill as a football coach. Hawk earned 284 career gridiron victories, making him second on South Dakota's all-time list. His teams have earned eight State titles, including the Class 11AA title this past fall, and 20 conference titles. In all those years, his teams only had one losing season. Hawk is not only respected by his students and players, but also by his peers nationwide. He has been awarded many honors, including being inducted into the South Dakota High School Coaches Association Hall of Fame in 1979 and being named National High School Football Coach of the Year in 1986. When Max Hawk retires this spring, South Dakota will be losing a great asset. However, his legacy of excellence will live on for years to come. I join with the citizens and students of Yankton and South Dakota who honor Max Hawk for his devotion to his profession, his community, and his State. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to place an article about Mr. Hawk from the Sioux Falls Argus Leader in the Record at this point.

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, I wish to print in the Record a possible proposal for a checklist approach to the telecommunications bill. I invite comments for improving it from my colleagues. There have been many suggestions, and I hope my colleagues will consider these suggestions. I ask unanimous consent that the checklist approach be printed in the Record at this point.

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, I am pleased to be an original cosponsor of this important legislation. Our existing product liability system is a disaster. It is inefficient and unfair. The Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation has long recognized these problems and has reported favorably a reform bill in six previous Congresses. The Product Liability Fairness Act of 1995 is a balanced bill that will make substantial progress in addressing the many problems with our current system. This bill is good for consumers, good for businesses-- especially small businesses--and good for those legitimately injured by faulty products. I thank Senator Gorton and Senator Rockefeller for their excellent work in preparing this bill. Their solid working relationship on this issue is indicative of the bipartisan support for these essential reforms. Mr. President, I have long been a supporter of product liability reform and will make every effort to advance the reform effort.

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, I join my colleague, Senator Daschle, in efforts to find a solution for the Morrell retirees' who have lost their health benefits. Nearly 1,200 Morrell retirees living in South Dakota have had their health insurance benefits terminated. Many retirees cannot purchase a private health insurance plan. Under the terms of their retirement contract with John Morrell & Co., health insurance benefits were provided to all retirees. But like so many retirees, they have found the ground rules changed. John Morrell & Co. has terminated their health benefits. This decision has caused great hardship for many South Dakota citizens. Benefits, which they were promised and which they earned, have been terminated. I have taken steps to correct this problem. I have written to Mr. Carl Lindner, president of the Morrell parent company, Chiquita Brands. I asked that they reverse their earlier decision to terminate benefits. In addition I have drafted legislation, which I am garnering support for, which would reduce the health insurance deduction for corporations that terminate health insurance benefits of their retirees. Specifically, my proposal would limit a company to deduct just 25 percent of their health insurance costs--if they terminated the health benefits of their retirees. The union has appealed this decision and the matter next goes before the Supreme Court. I am working on an amicus brief and hope to file this on behalf of the retirees. I am prepared to assist in legislation, or take any needed steps, to find a solution. This will be very difficult. However, I am hopeful this can be resolved. I did want to rise on the Senate floor to say that I am very concerned about what has happened to those retirees who have lost their health insurance in a contract dispute which sprung out of a long and difficult labor dispute that has been going on near the meat packing plant of John Morrell & Co. in Sioux Falls, SD. So, Mr. President, I wish to announce that I am also prepared to join in a legislative effort to protect not only these retired workers, but other retired workers who believed that they had health care coverage into their retirement. We must make it clearer to people what these contracts contain. I think both unions and management have an obligation to be clearer and more careful about the rights of these elderly retirees in the medical area.