Paul Sarbanes

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. I wanted to ask the Senator from Pennsylvania, if he is here tomorrow with his chart, will that fellow who puts the numbers up be here with him in order to make this demonstration work? I am just curious. Unfortunately, he left the floor once he got the number up. And I just wanted to know, if you are here tomorrow and you have to put a number up, will that fellow come back so we can catch another glimpse of him, the one who puts the next number up.

Mr. SARBANES. I am glad to hear there is concern about his wife and kids, because I listened to this diatribe about the President, when we needed to talk about a very serious matter affecting the rank and file of the Federal employees. So I am glad to see there is some sensitivity.

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, because there have been general statements about the budget tonight in addition to the statement about the [[Page S7112]] amendment that is pending before us, I just want to underscore this point. The budget resolution that is before us takes $175 billion, which the CBO has put out there as a pot to be available at the end, and commits it for tax cuts. Now the amendments that have been offered today on Medicare and on education have said rather than committing that money to tax cuts, you should make a less draconian cut in Medicare and education. You should not come down with such heavy force on our senior citizens or on our young people seeking an education, and that, as a matter of national priorities, we should place ahead of a tax cut, which in the House- passed legislation is overwhelmingly committed to the very wealthy, the people at the very top of the income scale, overwhelmingly so committed. These amendments, in effect, are saying that instead of a tax cut that has that impact, we should make less draconian cuts in Medicare and in education. As a matter of national priorities, educating the next generation and preparing them for the 21st century and assuring that our young people's capacities are developed to the fullest extent possible should put that ahead of taking this pot of money and committing it to tax cuts.

Mr. SARBANES. I thank the Chair.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, I rise to give my strong support to the pending amendment which would restore $40 billion to education. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the Republican budget resolution which is currently before the Senate would eliminate 33 percent of the Federal investment in education by the year 2002. In my view, such action is penny-wise and pound-foolish and I would strongly urge my colleagues to join me in opposing such proposals which serve to reduce our Nation's investment in education programs. Every nation puts a premium on education in order to develop the skills and talents of their people in order to deal with a modern, complex economic society. That is true whether the country is governed as a democracy or governed as a dictatorship or somewhere in between-- they are all concerned with enhancing or somewhere in between--they are all concerned with enhancing the skills of their people in the workplace. That obviously is one of the purposes about which we must be concerned in terms of education, particularly as we confront an increasingly competitive world economy. Those who are now seeking to draw back from the American commitment to education through the cuts included in this budget resolution at the same time that they assert the necessity for America to compete more successfully in the world's economy are asserting a basic contradiction. Our success as a competitor in the world's economy rests upon educating our future generations. We cannot as a nation afford to shortchange programs which have proven effective in ensuring a brighter future for our children. This was recognized in the last Congress when we were able to enact a series of important initiatives to expand the amount and the quality of education investment in America. These initiatives, which I strongly supported, included the School-to-Work Opportunities Act, the Head Start Amendments of 1994, the Goals 2000: Educate America Act, the National and Community Service Trust Act, and the Improving America's Schools Act. Despite these efforts to expand educational opportunities during the last Congress, the Republican budget proposal would dramatically decrease educational opportunity in order to finance tax cuts for the wealthy and to meet arbitrary deficit reduction targets. In my view, it makes little sense to cut investments in programs which give people the skills to function in a modern, complex society. It makes even less sense to do so in a document which is supposed to be a budget for our Nation's future. Mr. President, education is fundamental to what the American dream is all about--providing our children a path by which they can improve themselves and develop their full potential. The budget resolution we have before us today is a retreat from the American dream. It would deny hundreds of thousands of disadvantaged children from receiving needed services by freezing spending for the Title I program and deny Head Start services to as many as 350,000 to 550,000 preschoolers over the next 7 years. These children, who come from our poorest communities, need such services in order to achieve their potential and reach the same high standards as their peers. The Republican budget resolution we have before us today would also renege on our historical commitment to access to higher education by cutting Federal aid to college students by $30 billion over the next 7 years. Personal debt for students with subsidized loans would be increased by 20 to 48 percent by eliminating the in-school interest subsidy. Pell Grants for individual students would be reduced by 40 percent by the year 2002 or terminated altogether for over one million students per year. Mr. President, education in this country has always provided an essential ladder of opportunity for our people. In this Nation, which believes that a person's merit and talent should take them as far as they can go, the path to achieve this is to move up and onward through education. Many of us here today have experienced this and are where we are today because of this ladder of opportunity. It seems ironic, at best, that many of those who have used those ladders of opportunity to advance themselves are now trying to knock the ladder down through these budget cuts so those coming after them do not have the same opportunities. I strongly support the pending amendment to restore funding for critical education programs in the FY96 budget resolution and would urge my colleagues to join me in ensuring that education remains a top priority for our Nation.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, I rise today to express my concerns about proposals in the House of Representatives that would abolish the National Endowment for the Arts. Support for the arts and humanities is the hallmark of a civilized society and since our nation's founding, the arts have held a respected place in our country. The National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities were created 30 years ago with the passage of the National Foundation on the Arts and Humanities Act of 1965. This act was conceived fundamentally to maintain intellectual freedom and preserve American culture for future generations. Since its inception, the National Endowment for the Arts and Humanities have become the principal funding organizations for many of our national museums, historical sights, and cultural institutions. While we are currently facing a time of serious budgetary constraints, it is important for us to remember how small our investment in the arts really is. If you look at other civilized countries, they do far more from the public treasury in helping support the arts and humanities than we do in this country. Currently, the United States spends 64 cents per American per year, the equivalent of 2 postage stamps. In light of the tremendous return on investment in the arts and humanities, proposals to terminate funding for the Endowments seem shortsighted. Federal support for the arts and humanities constitutes only five to ten percent of the total funding for the arts in this nation. This small investment functions as a catalyst to draw into the arts very significant amounts of money from the state and local levels as well as from private sources. A grant from the NEA or NEH gives a tremendous boost to organizations such as symphonies and museums by assisting them in fundraising efforts in their own communities. Organizations all across the State of Maryland--from Baltimore's Museum of Art to Hagerstown's Maryland Symphony Orchestra--have all been able to use their NEA grant awards to leverage much-needed funding from their own communities. In fact, $1 endowment attracts $11 for the arts from States and local governments, regional and local art agencies, foundations and corporations, and businesses and individuals. All of these contributions recognize the tremendous return on an investment in the arts. The arts have [[Page S6946]] brought increased economic development to communities across the Nation's revitalizing inner cities, stimulating revenue and creating jobs. Nationally, the nonprofit arts industry generates an estimated $37 billion in economic activity and employs 1.3 million Americans. The arts attract tourist dollars, encourage business development, spur urban renewal, and improve the overall quality of life in our cities and towns. Endowment grants also support important education and public programs. In my own State of Maryland, NEH grants are assisting Essex Community College in developing its curriculum and training faculty members to teach it; aiding in the preservation of historic Maryland newspapers such as the Log Cabin Advocate and the Independent Farmer; and funding museum exhibits such as the one on enlisted airmen in World War II at the Airmen Memorial Museum in Suitland, Maryland. Endowment grants enrich the lives of all Americans by bringing diverse aspects of our cultural heritage right into our own communities. Among the most important beneficiaries of the arts are the children of this Nation. Exposure to the arts motivates children-- stimulating their imaginations and increasing their confidence. For young people especially, a whole new world opens up to them when they enter a museum. The House proposals terminating funding for the arts would effectively slam the door to that new world. In my view, it is imperative that we keep that door open for Americans of all ages.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, I yield 10 minutes to the Senator from Arkansas, Senator Pryor.

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, I will take just a couple of minutes, I say to my distinguished colleague from New York. First of all, I want to underscore the positive and constructive way in which the chairman of the Banking Committee and members of his staff interacted with us in trying to address the question of working out a resolution that we would bring to the floor of the Senate. Obviously, it is not an easy thing to do, and Members of the Senate have were able to, in the end, work out a rational approach to this inquiry and investigation, which I indicated in a sense had been committed to last year. Obviously, you always have to work out carefully the scope questions, which has been done in this resolution, because the scope could be infinite, in a sense, if you leave it to people's imagination. So there were candidates for scope that I think went beyond the horizon, and they are not included. But we have tried to, in effect, put a focus here. In fact, some of the questions the distinguished Senator from New York just raised, that he felt emerged out of the previous hearings-- and he made reference to last year's minority statement in the report-- have in fact been spelled out here as matters that could be looked into under this resolution. There were other candidates, of course, that were not included. We have tried to be rational here. We have tried to be reasonable. The matters specified herein have been the outcome of that process. Second, I want to say the resolution has been put together in a way that presumes that the two sides will work together cooperatively in carrying out the inquiry, that the staffs will interact in that fashion, that material will be generally available and so on. We are trying to get an inquiry here in which everyone is joined in trying to find out what the facts are. A lot of questions are raised, and will be looked into. If you did not raise questions, you would not have an inquiry, so I recognize that. But our job, I think, is to probe the factual matter behind those issues. I was interested that my colleague earlier used the word ``allegations,'' and that is what it is until you actually get the facts that sustain it. And that is the process we are going to engage in. Some things, you know, when you finally examine them, turn out to be fairly innocent. At least I think. We had this point about Captain Hume, who did not appear when he was supposed to be a witness. Well, what happened--obviously there was a slip-up, but I think that is what it was, a slip-up. Captain Hume was deposed. He had over 300 pages of deposition testimony. Apparently at his deposition he said he was about to take a--go on a vacation. After that the hearing date was set. Everyone sort of assumed that Captain Hume could be brought back in for the hearing. A subpoena, I do not think, was issued for him.

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, I yield such time as he may consume to the minority leader.

Mr. SARBANES. I do not think it was issued for him so he did not, as it were, ignore a subpoena. And he went on a hunting and fishing trip and could not be located, is what happened. In the end, I think it was judged that given we had 300 pages worth of deposition it was not worth having another hearing simply to bring Captain Hume in. I mean it is a small matter, but I only mention it to show that sometimes when you really examine the facts you discover that something that looked amiss at first has a very simple, plausible, and reasonable explanation for it. We expect, as I understand it, now to move forward with this. I know that the chairman and his staff will be talking with our staff to begin to plan the first set of hearings which I think will probably be in the next month or so, and then we can proceed from there as we schedule other matters which have been stipulated here in the resolution as being within the scope of the inquiry which this special committee will now undertake. But I do again want to underscore the, I think, responsible way in which the chairman and members of the staff have worked with us in order to try to frame a resolution which we could bring to the floor of the Senate today which I think carries forward the legitimate requirements imposed upon us in terms of carrying out an investigation without straying beyond what most people regard as reasonable bounds. Mr. President, with that, I made my statement. I see the distinguished Senator from Arkansas, and I would like to yield time to him. Mr. President, how much time is remaining?

Mr. SARBANES. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Mr. THURMOND addressed the Chair.

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, I am prepared to yield back time.

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, I yield 2 minutes to the Senator from Arkansas.

Mr. SARBANES. I ask unanimous consent to put in a quorum call and that the time be equally charged to both sides.

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, I yield 4 minutes to the Senator from Arkansas.

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, may I ask what the time situation is?

Mr. SARBANES. Madam President, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished Senator from Connecticut.

Mr. SARBANES. I yield whatever time the Senator requires.

Mr. SARBANES. What is the time situation, Mr. President?

Mr. SARBANES. I thank the Chair. Madam President, it is not my intention to use the entire hour. I hope at some point both sides might be able to yield back time and proceed to final consideration of the resolution. Let me say at the outset that the resolution we are considering today, which authorizes a special committee to be administered by the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, is really a carrying out of resolutions that were adopted last year by this body. I think it is important to consider this resolution in the context of those resolutions--actions taken by the Senate last year. On March 17, 1994, a little over a year ago, the Senate adopted a resolution by a vote of 98-0 expressing the sense of the Senate that hearings should be held on all matters relating to Madison, to Whitewater, and to Capital Management. Then, to carry out that resolution, at least in part, on June 21 of last year, [[Page S6773]] the Senate agreed to Senate Resolution 229, which authorized hearings to be held into certain areas. Those hearings were done last summer. We had 6 days of public hearings. We had extensive analysis of documents that were provided to the inquiry committee in order to enable it to carry out its responsibilities. Now, one of the things that was authorized to be looked into by the June 21 resolution was the handling of the Foster documents. That was later deferred, in response to a request from the independent counsel who contacted the committee and indicated that, given the nature of his inquiry, it would be preferable if the Committee did not go ahead with that hearing. Accordingly, we held off. Now the distinguished chairman has indicated that it would be the first item which will be considered in the hearings that will now take place under the resolution we are considering here today. So this resolution is in effect a continuation of our earlier work. It authorizes the completion of work specified in last year's resolution, as well as matters developed during and arising out of the hearings that were held last summer, and also a number of matters my colleague has enumerated that carry forth on the sense-of-the-Senate commitment last year to investigate all matters pertaining to Madison. I want to go through some other aspects of this resolution, just to lay them out on the record. The chairman of the Banking Committee, Senator D'Amato, has gone through a number of matters that have been provided for in this resolution to be examined by the special committee. The special committee, administered by the Banking Committee, shall consist of all of the members of the Banking Committee plus two members added from the Judiciary Committee. The chairman and ranking members of the Committee on the Judiciary, or their designees, will join with the members of the Banking Committee to constitute the special committee which will be administered by the Banking Committee. So it is essentially--or primarily, let me say--a Banking Committee activity, since most of the areas to be examined clearly fall under the jurisdiction of the Banking Committee. But we did add from the Judiciary Committee last year. A member came on in order to help carry out the inquiry. And there are some matters that are contained in the resolution, to be examined that, it could well be argued, are under the jurisdiction of the Judiciary Committee. So, to bring that together, we are bringing on two members from the Judiciary Committee, the chairman and ranking member or their designees. They will be designating someone else to handle this responsibility if they choose to do so, and I do not know at this point what Chairman Hatch and ranking member Biden intend to do in that regard. But obviously we will abide by their decision. We have also provided in the resolution which is now before us, and which shortly will be adopted, for rules and procedures of this committee which essentially will be the rules and procedures of the Senate, the Standing Rules of the Senate, and the rules of procedure of the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. That is, in effect, the rules framework, procedural framework within which we will operate. There are in the resolution sections that cover aspects of the process that the special committee will follow; these are matters it was deemed important that we spell out in the resolution how they were going to be dealt with. Those involve questions of subpoena powers, questions of how the hearings will be conducted--important questions about immunity. I want to underscore that because that is a matter we have had to address before. We provide that to grant a witness immunity--I want to read this section because it is an important matter. The special committee has the power: ``To grant a witness immunity under section 6002 and 6005'' of title 18, United States Code, ``provided that the independent counsel has not informed the special committee in writing that immunizing the witness would interfere with the ability of the independent counsel successfully to prosecute criminal violations.'' We also provide for staffing of the committee. There is power to appoint special committee staff including consultants, assistance from the Senate legal counsel, assistance from the Comptroller General. There is a provision whereby the committee can draw on other Government agencies, Government personnel, and on other congressional staff. And we hope, through a combination of all of these sources, that we will have an adequate staff to carry out a proper inquiry and investigation. There is also, of course, special provision for the protection of confidential information, since we will be interacting with the independent counsel and others and we think it is important to have such provisions. Finally, the money asked for in this resolution, just under $1 million, $950,000, is to cover the salaries and other expenses of the special committee carrying out this inquiry, beginning on the date of the adoption of this resolution--I assume today--and ending February 29, 1996. If it is judged that additional money is needed, that the inquiry needs to go forward and additional money is required in order to fund it, the special committee will recommend that. Of course there will have to be a further vote for the providing of additional moneys to the special committee. Mr. President, let me just make a couple of further, more general observations. I have very quickly gone through the resolution and I think most of it is straightforward. I think Members of the Senate upon reviewing it will conclude that is the case. Many of the provisions are what one might call boilerplate for such an inquiry, and track previous provisions that have been used in various Senate resolutions establishing committees to carry out inquiries or investigations of the sort that is being authorized here. I listened to the chairman with great interest and I was particularly encouraged by his very strong statement of the need to conduct impartial, balanced and thorough hearings, which is exactly what I think needs to be done. There are a lot of allegations that are swirling around and there are a lot of questions that are being raised. We see them from time to time raised in the press and in the media. And, of course, one could sit around all day long and conjure up one question after another. It is not difficult, it is very easy. It is not difficult just simply to say, ``Well, suppose this happened or suppose that happened; or if this or if that.'' Of course, one of the purposes of these hearings is to get a good, tough-minded examination of these various allegations to see if there is anything to them. It needs to be appreciated, that it is very easy to make the allegations. Whether the allegations are in fact substantiated by the facts is a tougher question to determine, and that does require an impartial, balanced and thorough hearing. In fact, the President himself has said the best way to address these matters is to look at the facts candidly, and that is what I very much hope and expect that this committee will be able to do. I do think last summer we conducted hearings that were perceived by all as being thorough and fair and impartial. We went at it, in effect, to find out what the facts were, to ascertain the truth. I think we pressed that issue in a resolute manner, and I would expect the special committee will do so in the case that is--in the instance that is before us. These hearings will make an effort to get the facts out fully and impartially. We anticipate that the administration will cooperate with this effort. They certainly have indicated that is what they intend to do. Last year they made every document available that was requested, as I recall. I think I am correct in that statement. Now the time has come to move forward, to begin our hearings, to begin, in effect, to examine these various questions and allegations and ascertain with respect to each of them whether there is any factual grounding behind them or whether they simply raise questions that people can ask. And that, of course, is the purpose of the inquiry which we will be undertaking here with this provision of $950,000 to carry out this investigation in the period between now and February 29. The resolution provides that the special committee shall make every reasonable effort to complete, study, and hearings authorized by section 1. This resolution does provide the basis for carrying out a full and proper, impartial, and balanced hearing. I think our challenge now is to move ahead in carrying out our responsibilities in the special committee. It is a heavy burden to add to the responsibilities that Members already have but is one that obviously we are charged with responding to. As I said, we adopted resolutions last year addressing this matter. This, in effect, carries forward on those resolutions. It is a continuation, in effect, of that work. But I hope that if we apply ourselves to it over the coming months, we will be able to work through all of these matters and, in effect, bring this issue to closure in the sense that the Members of the Senate and the American people know that the various questions have been raised and thoroughly examined, that it has been done with a great deal of balance and fairness and impartiality, and that these are what the facts are as a consequence of that investigation and inquiry. Madam President, I yield the floor. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum. Will time be equally charged?

Mr. SARBANES. There is an hour now remaining on this side?

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Pending?

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, what is the parliamentary situation?

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, today begins what I anticipate will be a productive and useful week for the more than 2,200 delegates here in Washington for the fourth White House Conference on Aging. I commend President Clinton for convening the first White House Conference on Aging since 1981, and want to take this opportunity to welcome all of the participants in this important policy conference, especially those from my own State of Maryland. In the spirit of the first White House Conference on Aging established by President Kennedy in 1961, this week's generations of Americans and seek to increase public awareness of the interdependence of generations and the essential contributions of older people. It will also facilitate the development of public policy recommendations to maintain and improve the well-being of the aging. Mr. President, this is an important and full agenda and I applaud all who are participating in this timely Conference. Senior citizens today comprise more than 12 percent of the country's population and by the year 2000, that number is expected to surpass 16 percent. Maryland seniors comprise 15.6 percent of the State's population, a figure expected to increase to just over 16.2 percent by the year 2000. This demographic transformation poses significant challenges and opportunities and the White House Conference on Aging provides an excellent framework through which the participants may address these issues. The considerable participation and interest in the White House Conference on Aging clearly illustrates what I have always believed and experienced--older Americans want to contribute. They want to work, to volunteer, and to participate in improving their communities and their Nation. It is critical, in my view, that we recognize and utilize the valuable insight, experience and wisdom that senior citizens bring to all aspects of life. Mr. President, I have always believed strongly in the potential of this significant and growing population to contribute to the development and implementation of policies that affect all Americans and I expect that the coming days will confirm my belief. I want to again commend all of the delegates from across the country and wish them well as they participate in the fourth White House Conference on Aging.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, I rise to join my colleagues in commemorating one of this century's most tragic events. Today marks the 80th anniversary of the Armenian genocide of 1915-23, recognized by some as the first genocide of this century when 1\1/2\ million Armenian men, women, and children lost their lives as a result of the brutal massacres and wholesale deportations conducted by the Turkish Ottoman rulers. Mr. President, on this day 80 years ago began one of the great martyrdoms of modern history, a systematic and methodical campaign to exterminate an innocent people. An entire nation was uprooted from its homeland scattering thousands of survivors around the world. Thus this human tragedy, having left few families unaffected, and its anniversary have special meaning to Armenians everywhere. The 1915 genocide represented the culmination of decades, and the development of an insidious pattern, of persecution against the Armenian community living in the Ottoman Empire. During the period 1894-96 and again in 1909, thousands of Armenians lost their lives at the hands of their ruthless persecutors. On April 24, 1915, Armenian intellectual, religious, and political leaders, were rounded up by Ottoman authorities, taken to remote parts of Anatolia and murdered. At least 250,000 Armenians serving in the Ottoman Army were expelled and forced into labor battalions where executions and starvation were common. Men, women, and children were deported from their villages and obliged to march for weeks in the Syrian Desert where a majority of them perished. There was no shortage of contemporaneous newspaper accounts in the United States of the Ottoman Turkish atrocities--a simple review of headlines appearing in the New York Times in mid-1915 yields the following: ``Wholesale Massacres of Armenians by Turks,'' ``Tales of Armenian Horrors Confirmed,'' ``800,000 Armenians Counted Destroyed,'' ``Thousands Protest Armenian Murders.'' In fact, through a congressionally chartered organization called Near East Relief, Americans contributed $113 million in humanitarian assistance from 1915 to 1930 to help the surivors. In addition, 132,000 Armenian orphans were adopted in this country. Perhaps America's most notable observer of the Armenian genocide was its distinguished ambassador to Turkey at the time, Henry Morgenthau, who published an article in the Red Cross magazine in 1918 describing the wide-scale and deliberate orchestration of Ottoman atrocities against the Armenian people as ``the Greatest Horror in History.'' Morgenthau has also written the following about the Armenian genocide in this now famous passage: Whatever crimes the most perverted instincts of the human mind can devise, and whatever refinements of persecutions and injustice the most debased imagination can conceive, became the daily misfortunes of this devoted people. I am confident that the whole history of the human race contains no such horrible episode as this. The great massacres and persecutions of the past seem almost insignificant when compared to the sufferings of the Armenian race in 1915. The killing of the Armenian people was accompanied by the systematic destruction of churches, schools, libraries, treasures of art and of history, in an attempt to eliminate all traces of a noble civilization some three thousand years old. Indeed, Morgenthau and other diplomats who witnessed and reported in great detail the enormous devastation of the Armenian community by the Ottomans would be astonished to learn today that the abundant evidence they collected, much of which is held in our own National Archives, and the testimony of survivors who are still with us, continue to be challenged without a trace of contrition. Despite the irrefutability of the documentation and testimony, including extensive accounts from survivors, witnesses, and historians, there are those who refuse to come to grips with the past, blame the victims, and deride reconciliation. Remembrance and understanding, however, are universal imperatives essential to all decent people an decent committed to the proposition that their experience has meaning for all of us--it must not remain the special province of the survivors. In other words, to ignore or forget the past is to remain its captive, and coming to terms with the past is an indispensable part of building for the future. Elie Wiesel, speaking at a Holocaust memorial service here in the Congress during the early 1980's, expressed eloquently the importance of recognizing the Armenian genocide when he said: Before the planning of the final solution, Hitler asked, ``Who remembers the Armenians?'' He was right. No one remembered them, as no one remembered the Jews. Rejected by everyone, they felt expelled from history. From the darkness of this experience, Armenians have risen to demonstrate great courage and strength in their pursuit of human dignity and freedom. After enduring years of struggle under Soviet rule the Armenians gained independence at last. They now face the effects of a devastating earthquake in 1988, an inhumane economic blockade which continues to hamper the delivery of needed humanitarian assistance, and the hostile forces arrayed against them in their volatile area of the world. Perhaps the Armenian-American community is one of the best examples of this indomitable human spirit of the Armenian people. The contribution of the Armenian community to the cultural, social, economic, and political life of America is a source of great strength and vitality in our Nation. Americans of Armenian origin have kept alive, and not let tragedy shatter, the rich faith and traditions of Armenian civilization. Mr. President, in keeping with our country's highest principles and ideals, we pause and pay tribute today to the survivors and the victims who perished in the midst of a deliberate attempt to rid the world of the entire nation. As we recall the events that began on the night of April 24, 1915, we are reminded yet again of the fundamental importance of freedom and respect for human rights, and of the terrible consequences of their abuse. I ask unanimous consent that a recent column appearing in the New York Times entitled ``For Old Armenians, April is the Cruelest Memory'' be printed in the Record at this point.