Olympia Snowe

Ms. SNOWE

Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Rules and Administration be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate to receive testimony from committee chairmen and ranking members on their committee funding resolutions for 1997 and 1998 on Tuesday, February 4, Wednesday, February 5, and Thursday, February 6, all at 9:30 a.m.

Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet on Tuesday, February 4, 1997, at 10 a.m. in open session, to receive testimony concerning the Army sexual harassment incidents at Aberdeen Proving Ground and sexual harassment policies within the Department of Defense.

Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Labor and Human Resources be authorized to meet for an Employment and Training Subcommittee hearing on Fair Labor Standards Act reform, during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, February 4, 1997, at 9:30 a.m.

Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the full Committee on Finance be permitted to meet to conduct a hearing on Tuesday, February 4, 1997, beginning at 10 a.m. in room 215-Dirksen.

Ms. SNOWE

Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I now yield 4 minutes to the Senator from Texas.

Ms. SNOWE

Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I introduce legislation designed to help America's small business. This legislation will assist small businesses by increasing the tax deduction for health care coverage, requiring an estimate of the cost of a bill on small businesses before Congress enacts the legislation, and creating an assistant U.S. Trade Representative for Small Business. Small business is the driving force behind our economy, and in order to create jobs--both in my home State of Maine and across the Nation-- we must encourage small businesses expansion. Businesses with fewer than 10 employees make up 77 percent of Maine's jobs, and nationally, small businesses employ 53 percent of the private work force. In 1995, small businesses created an estimated 75 percent of the 2.5 million new jobs. Small businesses truly are the backbone of our economy. Small businesses are the most successful tool we have for job creation. They provide about 67 percent of the initial job opportunities in this country, and are the original--and finest--job training program. Unfortunately, as much as small businesses help our own economy--and the Federal Government--by creating jobs and building economic growth, government often gets in the way. Instead of assisting small business, government too often frustrates small business efforts. Federal regulations create more than 1 billion hours of paperwork for small businesses each year, according to the Small Business Administration. Moreover, because of the size of some of the largest American corporations, U.S. commerce officials too often devote a disproportionate amount of time to the needs and jobs in corporate America rather than in small businesses. My legislation will address three problems facing our Nation's small businesses, and I hope it will both encourage small business expansion and fuel job creation. First, this legislation will allow self-employed small business men and women to fully deduct their health care costs for income tax purposes. This provision builds on legislation enacted during the 104th Congress, the Health Insurance Reform Act, which increased the health insurance deduction for the self-employed from 30 to 35 percent this year and will gradually increase it to 80 percent by the year 2006. My bill will allow the self-employed to deduct 100 percent of their insurance today. It will place small entrepreneurs on equal footing with larger companies by immediately increasing a provision in current law that limits deductions to 35 percent of the overall cost. At a time when America is facing challenges to its health care system, and the Federal Government is seeking remedies to the problem of uninsured citizens, this provision will help self-employed business people to afford health insurance without imposing a costly and unnecessary mandate. From inventors to startup businesses, self-employed workers make up an important and vibrant part of the small business sector--and too often they are forgotten in providing benefits and assistance. Indeed, 9 percent of uninsured workers in America are self-employed. By extending tax credits for health insurance to these small businesses, we will help to provide health care coverage to millions of Americans. My bill will also require a cost analysis of legislative proposals before new requirements are passed on to small businesses. Too often, Congress approves well-intended legislation that shift the costs of programs to small businesses. This proposal will ensure that these unintended consequences are not passed along to small businesses. According to the U.S. Small Business Administration, small business owners spend at least 1 billion hours a year filling out government paperwork, at an annual cost that exceeds $100 billion. Before we place yet another obstacle in the path of small business job creation, we should understand the costs our proposals will impose on small businesses. This bill will require the Director of the Congressional Budget Office to prepare for each committee an analysis of the costs to small businesses that would be incurred in carrying out provisions contained in new legislation. This cost analysis will include an estimate of costs incurred in carrying out the bill or resolution for a 4-year period, as well as an estimate of the portion of these costs that would be borne by small businesses. This provision will allow us to fully consider the impact of our actions on small businesses--and through careful planning, we will succeed in avoiding unintended costs. Finally, this legislation will direct the U.S. Trade Representative to establish a position of Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for Small Business. The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative is overburdened, and too often overlooks the needs of small business. The new Assistant U.S. Trade Representative will promote exports by small businesses and work to remove foreign impediments to these exports. Mr. President, I am convinced that this legislation will truly assist small businesses, resulting not only in additional entrepreneurial opportunities but also in new jobs. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation.

Ms. SNOWE

Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I introduce legislation designed to help America's small business. This legislation will assist small businesses by increasing the tax deduction for health care coverage, requiring an estimate of the cost of a bill on small businesses before Congress enacts the legislation, and creating an assistant U.S. Trade Representative for Small Business. Small business is the driving force behind our economy, and in order to create jobs--both in my home State of Maine and across the Nation-- we must encourage small businesses expansion. Businesses with fewer than 10 employees make up 77 percent of Maine's jobs, and nationally, small businesses employ 53 percent of the private work force. In 1995, small businesses created an estimated 75 percent of the 2.5 million new jobs. Small businesses truly are the backbone of our economy. Small businesses are the most successful tool we have for job creation. They provide about 67 percent of the initial job opportunities in this country, and are the original--and finest--job training program. Unfortunately, as much as small businesses help our own economy--and the Federal Government--by creating jobs and building economic growth, government often gets in the way. Instead of assisting small business, government too often frustrates small business efforts. Federal regulations create more than 1 billion hours of paperwork for small businesses each year, according to the Small Business Administration. Moreover, because of the size of some of the largest American corporations, U.S. commerce officials too often devote a disproportionate amount of time to the needs and jobs in corporate America rather than in small businesses. My legislation will address three problems facing our Nation's small businesses, and I hope it will both encourage small business expansion and fuel job creation. First, this legislation will allow self-employed small business men and women to fully deduct their health care costs for income tax purposes. This provision builds on legislation enacted during the 104th Congress, the Health Insurance Reform Act, which increased the health insurance deduction for the self-employed from 30 to 35 percent this year and will gradually increase it to 80 percent by the year 2006. My bill will allow the self-employed to deduct 100 percent of their insurance today. It will place small entrepreneurs on equal footing with larger companies by immediately increasing a provision in current law that limits deductions to 35 percent of the overall cost. At a time when America is facing challenges to its health care system, and the Federal Government is seeking remedies to the problem of uninsured citizens, this provision will help self-employed business people to afford health insurance without imposing a costly and unnecessary mandate. From inventors to startup businesses, self-employed workers make up an important and vibrant part of the small business sector--and too often they are forgotten in providing benefits and assistance. Indeed, 9 percent of uninsured workers in America are self-employed. By extending tax credits for health insurance to these small businesses, we will help to provide health care coverage to millions of Americans. My bill will also require a cost analysis of legislative proposals before new requirements are passed on to small businesses. Too often, Congress approves well-intended legislation that shift the costs of programs to small businesses. This proposal will ensure that these unintended consequences are not passed along to small businesses. According to the U.S. Small Business Administration, small business owners spend at least 1 billion hours a year filling out government paperwork, at an annual cost that exceeds $100 billion. Before we place yet another obstacle in the path of small business job creation, we should understand the costs our proposals will impose on small businesses. This bill will require the Director of the Congressional Budget Office to prepare for each committee an analysis of the costs to small businesses that would be incurred in carrying out provisions contained in new legislation. This cost analysis will include an estimate of costs incurred in carrying out the bill or resolution for a 4-year period, as well as an estimate of the portion of these costs that would be borne by small businesses. This provision will allow us to fully consider the impact of our actions on small businesses--and through careful planning, we will succeed in avoiding unintended costs. Finally, this legislation will direct the U.S. Trade Representative to establish a position of Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for Small Business. The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative is overburdened, and too often overlooks the needs of small business. The new Assistant U.S. Trade Representative will promote exports by small businesses and work to remove foreign impediments to these exports. Mr. President, I am convinced that this legislation will truly assist small businesses, resulting not only in additional entrepreneurial opportunities but also in new jobs. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation.

Ms. SNOWE

Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleague from New York, Senator D'Amato, along with Senators Feinstein and Hollings, in introducing the Women's Health and Cancer Rights Act of 1997. This bill provides key protections to women facing breast cancer, and to all Americans confronting a possible diagnosis of cancer. Breast cancer is currently one of the major public health crises facing this Nation. In 1997, 180,000 new cases of breast cancer will be diagnosed in this country, and more than 44,000 women will die from the disease. Breast cancer is the most common form of cancer and the second leading cause of cancer deaths among American women. In my home State of Maine, 900 to 1,000 women will be diagnosed with breast cancer this year. Consider for a moment what it must be like to face a cancer diagnosis. Then imagine what a woman with breast cancer goes through when she loses a breast to this disease. A mastectomy patient may endure great pain resulting from the surgery, and has a large wound with drainage tubes which must be properly cared for. She must also face the emotional pain of losing part or all of a breast, and may struggle with her fear of cancer and what lies ahead. Then try to imagine if she is released from the hospital within hours of surgery. That is what some health plans are doing today. Yes--some health care plans have issued guidelines requiring mastectomies to be performed on an outpatient basis. The New York Times recently reported that approximately 7 to 8 percent of all mastectomies are performed on an outpatient basis. Doctors may feel pressured by their health care plan to release patients before it is medically appropriate, as health care plans push doctors harder and harder to cut costs. Women who are released from the hospital too early following a mastectomy, lumpectomy, or lymph node dissection do not have time to recover from the surgery in a supervised setting, or have an adequate opportunity to learn how to properly care for their wound, much less begin to deal with their emotional and physical pain. And some problems or complications from the surgery may not arise within the first hours following the surgery. The Women's Health and Cancer Rights Act of 1997 will help ensure that women with breast cancer obtain medically appropriate care. This bill says that women who undergo a mastectomy, lumpectomy, or lymph node dissection can stay in the hospital as long as a doctor deems medically appropriate, in consultation with the patient. The bill does not mandate how long a patient should stay in the hospital, or prescribe an arbitrary time period. Instead, it encourages the highest standard of medical care by allowing a doctor to exercise his best medical judgment in determining how long a patient should remain in the hospital. The bill contains strong protections for doctors to ensure that they are not penalized by insurance companies for prescribing a given length of stay. The procedures could still be performed on an outpatient basis if deemed medically appropriate by the doctor, and agreed to by the patient. Second, the bill requires insurance companies to cover breast reconstruction following cancer surgery, as well as reconstructive surgery to make breasts symmetrical following cancer surgery. I am extremely pleased that this provision is based on the law in my own State of Maine. Currently, insurance companies treat reconstructive surgery following breast cancer differently than other types of reconstructive surgery. In fact, a recent survey found that 43 percent of the respondents had been denied coverage for follow-up reconstructive symmetry procedures. The availability of reconstructive surgery is important not only for those women who believe it is necessary to return their lives to normal following cancer surgery, but because studies show that the fear of losing a breast is a leading reason why women do not participate in early breast cancer detection programs. If women understand that breast reconstruction is widely available, more might participate in detection programs. Finally, this bill requires insurance companies to pay full coverage for secondary consultations whenever any cancer has been diagnosed by the patient's primary physician. It also requires a health plan to cover a second opinion even when the specialist finds the patient does not have cancer, and allows the patient to go outside an HMO for consultation by a specialist. This is designed to prevent all Americans from making inappropriate and uninformed decisions regarding medical treatment due to either a false-negative or a false-positive result. I urge all of my colleagues to join me in supporting and securing swift passage of the Women's Health and Cancer Rights Act of 1997.

Ms. SNOWE

Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I am very pleased today to submit a resolution expressing the sense of the Senate that the U.S. Postal Service should issue a series of postage stamps honoring young Americans for their extraordinary achievements. It is an unfortunate reality today that America's young people face more difficult challenges than ever before. The lure of gangs, drugs, alcohol, and sex increases the potential for irresponsible behavior and violence at ever earlier ages. On a daily basis, young people are exposed to a confusing array of messages and sometimes dubious role models. And even the best-intentioned working parents find it hard to spend the kind of quality time with their children that would help them sort through these pervasive influences. All too often, the media focuses on negative stories about America's young people. Yet, there are many examples of exceptional young Americans who have risen above these challenges to accomplish extraordinary things for their community and for their country. Samantha Smith, who lived in Manchester, ME, is a prime example. In 1982, at the age of 10, Samantha wrote a letter to Chairman Yuri Andropov of the Soviet Union urging peace at the height of the cold war. As a result, she was invited by the Soviet leader to visit his country the following year. Samantha's trip received worldwide attention, and the schoolgirl became widely recognized as a spokesperson for peace and international understanding. Tragically, Samantha's life was cut short in 1985 in a fatal plane crash when she was only 13. Other young Americans have demonstrated the same kind of initiative and vision which Samantha embodied. The youth of our country need to be aware of these positive role models from among their own age group. I am, therefore, introducing a sense-of-the-Senate resolution today calling upon the U.S. Postal Service to issue a series of stamps recognizing young Americans, starting with Samantha Smith, for the extraordinary contributions they have made.

Ms. SNOWE

Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I would like to join my colleagues on both sides of the aisle in supporting the confirmation of Ambassador Madeleine Albright to be our Nation's 63d Secretary of State. Many have commented on the historic nature of Ambassador Albright's nomination to be the first woman Secretary of State, the highest ranking of all Cabinet officers. But this would be just one more of a long history of ground-breaking roles in Madeleine Albright's distinguished career. For instance, over the past 4 years, she has been the only woman serving as a U.N. Ambassador on the Security Council. In the first Clinton administration, she was the only woman to serve in a national security capacity on the President's Cabinet. She was also the first woman to serve as the top foreign policy advisor to a Presidential candidate, a role she served in 1988 to Gov. Michael Dukakis. Ambassador Albright will bring a superb background to the job of Secretary of State. I would note that she began her rise in the foreign policy field as the top foreign affairs advisor to our former colleague, Senator Edmund Muskie when he was a senior member of the Foreign Relations Committee. Then after serving on the staff of the National Security Council in the Carter administration, she worked for over a decade as professor at Georgetown University and in various centers for public policy research. Since 1992, Madeleine Albright has served ably as the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations and has been a formal member of the President's Cabinet. This is a rare recognition granted to a U.N. Ambassador, and she was the first U.N. Ambassador to serve in this role since Ambassador Jeanne Kirkpatrick in the first Reagan administration. At the United Nations, Ambassador Albright became known and respected as a fierce defender of American interests and values. She took the administration's lead role 1 year ago in denouncing Cuba's unprovoked murder of two American pilots who were flying unarmed civilian aircraft over international waters near Cuba. She emphasized the importance of this outrageous act of cowardice by Fidel Castro's totalitarian government with characteristically direct language that helped focus the attention of the world. She also worked diligently--and successfully--in maintaining comprehensive economic sanctions on the repressive regime of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein. Despite the call by some nations of the world to lift those sanctions, she has succeeded in keeping them in place until the Government of Iraq ends its threats to its neighbors, shows greater respect for the human rights of its own people, and totally dismantles all weapons of mass production programs. These actions are called for not only in a series of Security Council resolutions enacted at the end of the 1991 gulf war, but also in obligations Iraq itself accepted in the cease fire agreement that ended that war. Most recently, Ambassador Albright insisted on the replacement of U.N. Secretary Gen. Boutros Boutros-Ghali because of his inadequate attention to necessary reform of the U.N. system. She refused to bow to pressure from other countries--on the first Security Council vote on this issue the United States was opposed 14 to 1--and insisted on the election of a new reform-minded Secretary General as a matter of principle. With the recent successful election of the new U.N. Secretary Gen. Kofi Annan, there now is an opportunity for revitalizing this important international institution and restoring a bipartisan consensus on the United Nations in the Congress and among the American people. As shown in just these few examples, Madeleine Albright is a strong advocate for U.S. foreign policy and is more than willing to take the tough and principled stands. It is my hope that she will help to restore American leadership and assertiveness in the international community. In addition to her strong qualifications for the job, Madeleine Albright also brings a compelling personal experience and family background to this job. The daughter of a Czech diplomat, her family came to the United States as refugees after World War II. In fact, in the preceding years, her family had twice fled the forces of totalitarianism: first escaping the advancing armies of Nazi Germany, and again the Iron Curtain's descent on her homeland of Czechoslovakia, a country that had previously had the most vibrant economy and democratic system in central Europe. During her confirmation hearing, Ambassador Albright discussed how her parents instilled in her a deep love for the United States and the ideals upon which our Nation was founded. Others have noted Ambassador Albright's strong views on such questions as human rights, democracy, and individual liberty. I have no doubt that her family's experiences have contributed to her evident devotion to these very American ideals. If confirmed by the Senate, Ambassador Albright will become Secretary Albright and will move to a larger stage for the conduct of American foreign policy. Under the Clinton administration, the United States has been searching for a more unified vision and greater consistency in our Nation's foreign policy with the end of the cold war. A number of challenges will immediately confront her, and I hope and expect that she will be able to rise to these challenges. For example, the international community is watching the rising world power of China, but for 4 years the Clinton administration has had difficulty maintaining a consistent foreign policy in relation to this increasingly important country. Tension between the important bilateral interests of human rights, trade, national security, and nonproliferation has too often led to confusion and vacillation in our Nation's policies. It is my hope that Madeleine Albright will rectify this weakness by bringing her temperament of toughness and consistency, combined with her strong grounding in long-term strategic thinking. Another challenge awaits U.S. policy in the critically important region of the Middle East. There is no doubt that recent negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority have been difficult, though thankfully last week's agreement over the redeployment of Israeli forces in Hebron shows that the peace process remains intact. But over the next 2 years, the negotiations will become even more important and vastly more challenging. It is in this period that negotiations over a final status for the Palestinian entity are supposed to be reached, and the Palestinians' challenge against Israeli sovereignty over Jerusalem must be resolved. Ambassador Albright has long been acknowledged as a very strong friend of Israel. But she also has developed a very constructive working relationship with the Palestinian authority. In the world of international diplomacy, it is worth noting that two of the earliest congratulations she received for her nomination came from Israeli Foreign Minister David Levy and Palestinian Liberation Organization Chairman Yassir Arafat. Mr. President, I have had the honor and the privilege to become personally acquainted with Ambassador Albright over the past 4 years from my position on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee during the 104th Congress, and as a senior member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee during the 103d Congress. While we have occasionally disagreed on policy issues, I have always found Ambassador Albright to be a forceful, effective, and persuasive advocate of administration policies. She has a true skill for explaining the purpose behind American foreign policy, and I am certain that she will use that skill to advance U.S. interests throughout the world. I would like to again express my support for confirming Ambassador Madeleine Albright to be the 63d Secretary of State. I urge my colleagues to join with me in approving her nomination for this highest of all confirmable executive branch posts.

Ms. SNOWE

Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I thank the chairman of the Armed Services Committee for yielding me this time this afternoon. Mr. President, today the Senate will have the opportunity to vote on the confirmation of America's next Secretary of Defense. This is, of course, a position of tremendous importance and responsibility--particularly as we look toward a new millennium and the national security challenges that it will present. These challenges will be many: restructuring our forces, modernizing our defense, reconciling our defense needs with the realities of our budget, our ongoing interests in the Mideast and Bosnia, and the potential for other conflicts yet unknown. And as always, the world will be looking to us--the greatest democracy on Earth--for strong and just leadership. So the individual who will hold this office must be of the highest moral and intellectual fiber. This is why I am pleased and honored to rise today in strong support of the nomination of William S. Cohen to be our next Secretary of Defense. While there are now Senators in this Chamber who have never served with Bill, I feel confident in saying that every one of them is nonetheless familiar with his contributions to this institution. And yet, as we approach the time when we will confirm Bill Cohen as Secretary of Defense, I feel compelled to share with you my thoughts about Bill as a person, as a Senator, and as a leader. It seemed just yesterday that I stood on this very floor to pay tribute and respect to a friend and colleague who was bidding farewell to the institution he had served so well for 18 years. I talked about Bill Cohen the man, and how he helped perpetuate the Senate's claim as the greatest deliberative body on Earth. And I talked about how he made Maine and the Nation proud. Little did I know--but little am I surprised--that I would soon stand before you speaking of how the country has lost a Senator but soon will gain an outstanding Secretary of Defense. It has been said that the world is divided into those who want to become someone, and those who want to accomplish something. The irony is that in setting out to accomplish something, Bill Cohen has also become someone--someone we admire, someone we respect, and someone who can be entrusted with one of the toughest and most demanding jobs in the world. Like the historic Maine lighthouses that dot Maine's coastline, Bill's record has been a beacon of light. His vision and resolve stood fast against the buffeting winds of political change. In a volatile and stormy climate, Bill Cohen and his rich experience in public service helped guide us to calmer waters. But while skillful in getting things done, politics is not what moves Bill. Principles and ideas are what Bill Cohen is really about. That's why Bill became the standard-bearer for modern Maine politics from his first days in public service. Born and raised in Bangor, where his parents ran a bakery, he graduated from Bowdoin College and from Boston University Law School 3 years later. After practicing law in Bangor for several years, Bill was elected to the Bangor City Council in 1969 and then served as mayor of Bangor. It was clear early on that he would have a distinguished career in public service. In 1972, he was elected to the House from Maine's Second Congressional District and faced the toughest challenge of his fledgling tenure in Congress. In the stormy sea of the Watergate scandal, while America was suffering a crisis of confidence, Bill Cohen charted a course straight through the heart of the storm as a member of the House Judiciary Committee, which was considering Articles of Impeachment against a President of the United States. A freshman, Bill was already a man of conscience and courage--someone who was willing to make the tough calls and risk his political future for the sake of truth and America's honor. And these values ultimately launched him here--to the U.S. Senate. Back in our home State of Maine, people believe the ultimate measure of a person is how close they remain to their principles precisely when it is most difficult to do so. It is a tradition that Margaret Chase Smith and Edmund Muskie followed in their personal and political lives and consistent with the ideals of Maine. Bill Cohen followed in their footsteps. Throughout Bill's career, Maine and America have come to know that they can count on Bill to approach issues with thoughtfulness and reason. And Senators on both sides of the aisle developed a tremendous respect for the virtues Bill brought to this body because, above all, Bill Cohen voted his mind and his conscience. And that is what Americans want in their leaders. He has the intellect, the integrity, and the strength to know the right thing to do and the right way to do it. And he is a leader who believes in his solemn responsibility not simply to echo conventional wisdom but to seriously deliberate on the issues of the day. This is the kind of person we need at the helm of the most powerful defense force in world history. We need someone with a firm grasp of history and a solid vision for the future, someone with both experience and a track record that engenders unflagging trust. Mr. President, Bill Cohen is such a person. The defense of our Nation is one of the most sacred responsibilities of the Federal Government. ``Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness'' is a meaningless concept unless we have the desire and the ability to defend those rights against those who would subvert them. We entrust the person who oversees our Armed Forces with nothing less than the defense of the Constitution and the greatest democracy the world has ever known. That is a tall order, but it is without reservation that I will put my full faith and trust in Bill Cohen to be that person. As we all know, Bill is a respected and expert voice on intelligence and national security issues. As chairman of the Armed Services Subcommittee on Seapower and chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, he played a leadership role in defense policy at a critical time in our Nation's history, through some of the most trying days of the cold war and the challenging moments thereafter. Bill authored the nuclear arms build-down proposal which became the United States position in negotiations with the Soviet Union. He forged a bipartisan compromise on an antiballistic-missile policy, and his unwavering commitment to a strong national defense helped lay the groundwork for the fall of the Soviet empire and the end to the cold war. Closer to home, Bill was instrumental in bringing about significant reforms of the Defense Department, including reorganizing the Pentagon and the Joint Chiefs of Staff to be more effective and prepared for combat situations and streamlining acquisition policies to ensure cost efficiency. His legislation also created a special operations antiterrorism unit designed to counter this growing scourge. While serving on the Armed Services Committee, Bill was visionary in reshaping our military forces to be responsive to the post-cold-war threats that we face globally as well as sizing and equipping forces to carry out our national security policy. Bill has also been a leader in shaping our policy and forces to meet the future challenges we will face in the 21st century. Bill Cohen also put forward a detailed proposal for reorienting our defense structure in the nineties in a way that would reduce the burden on the Federal budget and recognize changes in the threats facing the United States. It called for sacrificing conventional forces and programs primarily designed to defeat Soviet aggression in Europe in favor of those, such as power projection forces and sealift, that will be needed to meet the variety of challenges the United States is likely to face in our changed global arena. It is precisely this kind of responsible, visionary leadership that will be required for the next Secretary of Defense, so I can think of no finer nominee than Bill Cohen to lead and prepare the Department of Defense for this coming century. I commend President Clinton for his bold and wise and thoughtful selection of Bill Cohen to be our next Secretary of Defense, and I am thankful that Bill Cohen has decided to continue his commitment to public service. Bill Cohen brings to the Pentagon not just a sense of bipartisanship. He also brings to the Cabinet expertise in working with Congress. And I expect we are going to be hearing a lot from Bill because he is familiar with this end of Pennsylvania Avenue. He knows that to be an effective Secretary of Defense one must have a strong and trustworthy relationship with the U.S. Congress. Mr. President, my fellow colleagues, the world today is much different than the world of even 10 years ago. The Berlin wall has now been relegated to its rightful place--our museums. The Soviet Union is no more. And young Americans no longer go to sleep fearing that morning may never come. But let us make no mistake. The world is still a volatile and dangerous place, and that is why we need a person of Bill Cohen's caliber standing watch, willing to fight, willing to stand up for his principles, willing to take the time to do what he believes is right. These are some of the qualities that Bill Cohen will bring to the Pentagon, and so I urge you to join with me in proudly casting your vote to confirm President Clinton's nomination of William S. Cohen to be the next Secretary of Defense for the United States of America. Thank you. I yield the floor.

Ms. SNOWE

Ms. SNOWE. Those amendments were approved by an overwhelming majority in the House who felt that, without the changes, the OECD Agreement failed to provide an effective mechanism for disciplining foreign shipbuilding subsidy practices. I should add that a number of Members in this body who have examined the agreement also share this view. The base agreement, coupled with the many loopholes and special concessions granted to foreign governments, would continue to place U.S. shipbuilders at a tremendous competitive disadvantage. For this reason, the largest U.S. shipbuilders, representing over 90 percent of all workers in the Nation's major shipbuilding base, opposed implementation of the agreement even though they were the primary advocates of an effective discipline on foreign government subsidy and dumping practices in the first place.

Ms. SNOWE. In 1993, 4 years after international negotiations had failed to produce an agreement to end foreign subsidies, Congress and President Clinton revived and amended a modest ship loan guarantee program called Title XI. The purpose of this program was to help U.S. shipbuilders recapture commercial market share in the face of dramatic cuts in the Navy's shipbuilding plan and continued foreign government subsidies in the commercial market.

Ms. SNOWE. In 1996, when the administration sought congressional approval of the OECD Shipbuilding Agreement, the Department of Defense submitted a Navy shipbuilding budget request for the fewest numbers of ships in more than 60 years. While the Navy's Fiscal Year 1997 Future Years Defense Plan called for an average of only 5 ships per year, the Navy anticipates that it will need to procure 10 to 12 ships per year beginning in the year 2002, if it is to maintain a 346-ship fleet. The challenge for our Nation and the Navy is to sustain the critical core shipbuilding industrial base during this alltime low in Navy shipbuilding and still have the capability to meet future Navy building needs. Facing these circumstances, in 1989 the U.S. shipbuilding industry sought an international agreement to end foreign government shipbuilding subsidies. The industry believed then, as it does now, that it was essential to end foreign government participation in the commercial shipbuilding market if it was to have a fighting chance to make the transition to building both commercial and Navy ships, and thus survive this historic low in Navy shipbuilding.

Ms. SNOWE. During the negotiations, Germany granted $4 billion in shipyard modernization subsidies to the former East German shipyards. South Korea approved close to a $1 billion bailout of its largest shipbuilder Daewoo. Other European countries continued to grant billions in subsidies to their shipbuilding industries to fill their order books.

Ms. SNOWE. These concerns and the agreement's negative implications for the U.S. Navy shipbuilding industrial base were ignored by the negotiators of this agreement. U.S. shipbuilders were also dismayed that they were granted no transition period in contrast to what was granted to the foreign governments. The successful, but modest, Title XI loan guarantee program would be rendered ineffective immediately upon the agreement's entry into force and the domestic trade of the United States, as governed by the Jones Act, was placed in severe jeopardy by our negotiators. In an effort to correct these weaknesses and flaws, the House of Representatives amended the implementing legislation (H.R. 2754) to address the major national security concerns of the agreement.

Ms. SNOWE. U.S. ownership, manning, and construction of vessels serving the Jones Act trade has provided the Department of Defense with a pool of trained mariners, vessels, and the industrial capability to respond in time to national defense emergencies. For example, the very shipyards that build and repair Jones Act vessels were called upon to activate military reserve ships during Operation Desert Storm/Desert Shield, and it was the trained mariners who operate Jones Act vessels in peacetime who were called upon to crew these military ships once activated. The Jones Act contributes to the maintenance of this skilled work force and defense industrial capability. Because of the importance of the Jones Act to our national security, the House adopted an amendment specifically prohibiting the imposition of trade countermeasures against U.S. shipbuilders and other exporters for Jones Act ship construction. This amendment is essential to our Nation's defense readiness.

Ms. SNOWE. Many of DOD's reserve and auxiliary ships are commercially built, owned, and operated, and they are chartered to DOD under long- term lease agreements. The U.S. Navy intends to continue this approach to acquiring these needed assets in the future. Furthermore, it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to completely separate a ship's defense features from its commercial features. Therefore, the implementing legislation needs to contain the definition and exemption for these types of ships or the United States will be subjected to an international trade panel's interpretation of what is, or is not, a military vessel or a defense feature.

Ms. SNOWE. Title XI provides for a government guarantee of commercial loans for the construction of ships in the United States for U.S. and export customers. Up to 87.5 percent of the 25-year loan is guaranteed under the program. Upon entry into force of the OECD Shipbuilding Agreement, however, the terms of title XI would be immediately changed to guarantee only up to 80 percent of a commercial loan over a 12-year period. According to U.S. shipbuilders, the current orders for construction of large oceangoing commercial ships would not have been consummated under these terms and conditions.

Ms. SNOWE. The House bill would place the U.S. on an equal par with foreign signatories time-wise. It would allow title XI to continue at its present terms and conditions during the 3-year transition period in which foreign signatories were granted very generous subsidy concessions. Furthermore, major U.S. shipbuilders desperately need this extension to the program if they are to complete their transition back to building commercial ships. If this transition is unsuccessful, the Navy's core shipbuilding base will not be sustained to meet its future requirements.

Ms. SNOWE

Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I am extremely pleased that one of the first resolutions introduced in the 105th Congress by the Republican leadership will significantly increase biomedical research funding at NIH. I truly believe that this is a momentous occasion which will reap enormous benefits for all Americans. Building on this, I rise to introduce legislation which authorizes increased funding for breast cancer research. Over the past six years, Congress has demonstrated an increased commitment to the fight against breast cancer. Back in 1991, less than $100 million dollars was spent on breast cancer research. Since then, Congress has steadily increased this allocation. These increases have stimulated new and exciting research that has begun to unravel the mysteries of this devastating disease and is moving us closer to a cure. Today, we must send a message through our authorization level to scientists and research policy makers that we are committed to continued funding for this important research. This increase in funding is necessary because breast cancer has reached crisis levels in America. In 1997, it is estimated that 180,200 new cases of breast cancer will be diagnosed in this country, and 43,900 women will die from this disease. Breast cancer is the most common form of cancer and the second leading cause of cancer deaths among American women. Today, over 2.6 million American women are living with this disease. In my home state of Maine, it is the most commonly- diagnosed cancer among women, representing more than 30 percent of all new cancers in Maine women. In addition to these enormous human costs, breast cancer also exacts a heavy financial toll--over $6 billion of our health care dollars are spent on breast cancer annually. Today, however, there is cause for hope. Recent scientific progress made in the fight to conquer breast cancer is encouraging. Researchers have isolated the genes responsible for inherited breast cancer, and are beginning to understand the mechanism of the cancer cell itself. It is imperative that we capitalize upon these advances by continuing to support the scientists investigating this disease and their innovative research. For this reason, my bill increases the FY98 funding authorization level for breast cancer research to $590 million. This level represents the funding level scientists believe is necessary to make progress against this disease. This increased funding will contribute substantially toward solving the mysteries surrounding breast cancer. Our continued investment will save countless lives and health care dollars, and prevent undue suffering in millions of American women and families. On behalf of the 2.6 million women living with breast cancer, I urge my colleagues to support this important bill.

Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a package of six bills designed to improve the health of countless women across America. By introducing these bills during the opening days of the 105th Congress, I hope to convey that women's health is one of my top legislative priorities for this Congress, and that I will do everything I can to ensure that it is a priority for the 105th Congress as well. For too many years, women's health care needs were ignored or poorly understood, and women were systematically excluded from important health research. One famous medical study on breast cancer examined hundreds of men. Another federally-funded study examined the ability of aspirin to prevent heart attacks in 20,000 medical doctors, all of whom were men, despite the fact that heart disease is the leading cause of death among women. Today, members of Congress and the American public understand the importance of ensuring that both genders benefit equally from medical research and health care services. Unfortunately, equity does not yet exist in health care, and we have a long way to go. Knowledge about appropriate courses of treatment for women lags far behind that for men for many diseases. For years, research into diseases that predominantly affect women, such as breast cancer, went grossly underfunded. And many women do not have access to reproductive and other vital health services. Throughout my tenure in the House and Senate, I have worked hard to expose and eliminate this health care gender gap and improve women's access to affordable, quality health services. As co-chairs of the Congressional Caucus for Women's Issues (CCWI), Representative Pat Schroeder and I, along with Representative Henry Waxman, called for a GAO investigation into the inclusion of women and minorities in medical research at the National Institutes of Health. This study documented the widespread exclusion of women from medical research, and spurred the Caucus to introduce the first Women's Health Equity Act (WHEA) in 1990. This comprehensive legislation provided Congress with its first broad, forward looking health agenda designed to redress the historical inequities that face women in medical research, prevention and services. Since the initial introduction of WHEA, we have made important strides on behalf of women's health. Legislation from that first package became law in June 1993, mandating the inclusion of women and minorities in clinical trials at NIH. We secured dramatic funding increases for research into breast cancer, osteoporosis, and cervical cancer, and my legislation established the Office of Research on Women's Health at NIH. And last year the Mothers' and Newborns' Health Protection Act, which I cosponsored, became law. This Act will end the practice of ``drive-thru deliveries'', where hospitals discharge mothers and their newborns too soon after delivery. Despite these achievements, women remain at a stark and singular disadvantage in our health care system and in health research. Equality in women's health remains a goal, not a completed task. Legislators must build on the gains that we have made on behalf of women's health to take the next crucial steps toward achieving equity. I believe that the package of bills which I am introducing today provides this framework for progress. Several of the bills I am introducing today target one of the major public health crises facing this nation--breast cancer. This year alone, 180,000 new cases of breast cancer will be diagnosed in this country, and more than 44,000 women will die from the disease. Breast cancer is the most common form of cancer and the second leading cause of cancer deaths among American women. Our first priority in the fight against breast cancer must be to maintain and strengthen our commitment to discovering new treatments for this deadly disease. As the Federal Government continues to fund breast cancer research, we also must ensure that funding goes to those projects which victims of breast cancer believe are important and meaningful to them in their fight against this disease. Over the past three years, the Department of Defense has included lay breast cancer advocates in breast cancer research decision making. The involvement of these breast cancer advocates has helped foster new and innovative breast cancer research funding designs and research projects. While maintaining the highest level of quality assurance through peer review, breast cancer advocates have helped to ensure that all breast cancer research reflects the experiences and wisdom of the individuals who have lived with the disease. In addition, breast cancer advocates provide a vital educational link between the scientific and lay communities. The first bill I am introducing today, which I am introducing with my colleague from Vermont, Senator Leahy, urges the National Institutes of Health to follow the DOD's lead. This bill, the Consumer Involvement in Breast Cancer Research Act, urges NIH to include breast cancer advocates in breast cancer research decision making, and to report on progress that the Institute is making next year. But funding new research alone is not enough--we must ensure that people who are suffering from deadly diseases such as breast cancer have access to information about the latest, most-innovative therapies which are frequently available only through experimental drug trials. At a breast cancer hearing which I sponsored last year with my colleagues, Senators Connie Mack and Dianne Feinstein, we heard testimony from breast cancer advocates on the difficulty patients and physicians face in learning about ongoing clinical trials. The second bill I introduce today addresses this knowledge gap, by establishing a data bank of information on clinical trials and experimental treatments for all serious or life-threatening illnesses. This ``one-stop shopping information service'' will include a registry of all privately and publicly funded clinical trials, and will contain information describing the purpose of the trial, eligibility criteria for participating in the trial, as well as the location of the trial. The database will also contain information on the results of completed clinical trials, enabling patients to make fully informed decisions about medical treatments. The bill would allow people with a serious or life-threatening illness, or the doctor of a family member, to call a toll-free number to access this critical information so they could locate a clinical trial near them that may offer hope by extending their lives or alleviating their suffering. I am pleased that my colleague from California, Senator Feinstein, is joining me in introducing this important bill. Providing people with information about clinical trials is only the first step in increasing access to experimental treatments--we must also ensure that they have adequate insurance coverage to cover costs associated with clinical trials. While pharmaceutical companies typically cover the costs of the experimental treatment, insurance companies are expected to cover the costs of non-experimental services. Yet many insurance companies deny coverage for these non-experimental services when a patient is enrolled in an experimental trial. As a result, many patients who could benefit from these potentially life-saving investigational treatments do not have access to them because their insurance will not cover these associated costs. Denying reimbursement for these services also impedes the ability of scientists to conduct important research, by reducing the number of patients who are eligible to participate in clinical trials. The third bill I am introducing today, the Improved Patient Access to Clinical Studies Act of 1997, addresses this problem. This bill would prohibit insurance companies from denying coverage for services provided to individuals participating in clinical trials, if those services would otherwise be covered by the plan. This bill would also prevent health plans from discriminating against enrollees who choose to participate in clinical trials. Another form of discrimination in health insurance we see today is based on genetic information. This is a particular concern to women who inherit or may have inherited a mutated form of the breast cancer gene [BRCA1 or BRCA2]. Women who inherit either of these mutated genes have an 85 percent risk of developing breast cancer in their lifetime, and a 50 percent chance of developing ovarian cancer. Although there is no known treatment to ensure that women who carry the mutated gene do not develop breast cancer, genetic testing makes it possible for carriers of these mutated genes to take extra precautions in order to detect cancer at its earliest stages--precautions such as mammograms and self- examinations. The tremendous promise of genetic testing, however, is significantly threatened when insurance companies use the results of genetic testing to deny or limit coverage to consumers on the basis of genetic information. Yet this practice is relatively common today. In fact, a recent survey of individuals with a known genetic condition in the family revealed that 22 percent had been denied health insurance coverage because of genetic information. In addition to the potentially devastating consequences of being denied health insurance on the basis of genetic information, the fear of discrimination has equally harmful consequences for consumers and for scientific research. For example, many women who might take extra precautions if they knew they had the breast cancer gene may not seek testing because they fear losing their health insurance. Patients may be unwilling to disclose information about their genetic status to their physicians out of fear, hindering treatment or preventive efforts. And people may be unwilling to participate in potentially ground breaking research because they do not want to reveal information about their genetic status. The Kassebaum/Kennedy Health Care Reform Act took the first step in protecting Americans in group health plans from genetic discrimination by preventing discrimination in health insurance based on a pre-exiting genetic condition. My bill, the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination in Health Insurance Act of 1997, takes the next crucial steps to prohibit genetic discrimination. My bill prevents insurers from charging higher premiums based on genetic information, prohibits insurers from requiring or requesting a genetic test as a condition of coverage, requires informed written consent before an insurance company can disclose genetic information to a third party, and extends these important protections to Medigap. While there is much that we still do not know in the fight against breast cancer, we do know that mammograms are currently the most effective weapon we have in the fight against breast cancer. Yet experts still disagree about the effectiveness of mammograms for women in their forties. In fact, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) in 1993 reversed its position on the effectiveness of mammograms for women in their forties, producing widespread confusion in women and their doctors. To assure that American women have clear guidance from their government on when to have a mammogram, I am reintroducing my bill, the Breast Cancer Screening Act of 1997, directing NCI to reissue its guidelines recommending mammograms for women in this age group. This legislation is particularly crucial in light of recent studies that show a reduced death rate for women in their forties who seek mammograms. In fact, one Swedish study of 150,000 women conducted in 1996 showed a 25 percent lower death rate for women who obtained mammograms beginning in their forties. Finally, the sixth bill I am introducing is the Women's Health Office Act of 1997. This bill creates or codifies offices of women's health at various federal agencies, including the Office of the Assistant Secretary at HHS, the Centers for Disease Control, the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, the Health Resources and Services Administration and the Food and Drug Administration. This bill provides for short and long-range goals and coordination of all activities that related to disease prevention, health promotion, delivery of health services and scientific research concerning women. The bill also creates a clearinghouse for information on women's health. By statutorily creating Offices of Women's Health, the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Women's Health will be able to better monitor various Public Health Service agencies and advise them on scientific, legal, ethical and policy issues. Agencies would establish a Coordinating Committee on Women's Health to identify and prioritize which women's health projects should be conducted. This will also provide a mechanism for coordination within and across these agencies, and with the private sector. But most importantly, this bill will ensure the presence of enduring offices dedicated to addressing the ongoing needs and gaps in research policy, programs, and education and training in women'shealth. Improving the health of American women requires a far greater understanding of women's health needs and conditions, and ongoing evaluation in the areas of research, education, prevention, treatment and the delivery of services. I believe that passage of these important bills will help ensure that women's health will never again be a missing page in America's medical textbook.

Ms. SNOWE

Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I want to express my support for the conference report before the Senate which will help improve the safety and security of air travel in this country. I wish to commend Senator Pressler, Chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee and Senator McCain, Chairman of the Aviation Subcommittee for their diligent work in bringing this bill to completion prior to the adjournment of the 104th Congress. In the past 5 months, the Federal Aviation Administration [FAA] has come under intense scrutiny. After ValuJet flight 592 was swallowed by the silt and tall grass of the Everglades in May, the issue of FAA's ability to ensure the safety of the traveling public was brought into question. On July 17, the explosion of TWA flight 800 minutes after leaving New York's Kennedy Airport heightened public concern over not only the safety of our airplanes but the security of our airports as well. This conference report cannot answer all of the questions surrounding these two devastating tragedies, but it does give the FAA the guidance and many of the tools it needs to regain the public's trust. And it reaffirms the commitment of the Congress to end that status quo at the agency. First and foremost this bill will once and for all eliminate the question of the FAA's mission. On June 18, the Secretary of Transportation, Federico Pena, called on Congress to ``* * *change the FAA charter to give it a single primary mission: safety and only safety.'' By removing the ``dual and dueling missions'' of safety and air carrier promotion, both the FAA and the public will know that safety is the sole mission of the agency. I introduced S. 1960 earlier this year with Chairman Pressler to carry out the Secretary's request, and the Senate-passed version of this bill included provisions I authored that established a process for elimination of the mandate. I am pleased that the conference report will lay this issue to rest, once and for all by allowing the FAA to focus solely and deliberately on assuring the safety of air travel. Another important aspect of this bill addresses an area that has been tragically overlooked--the needs of the families of crash victims. The loss of a loved one in any accident is devastating. But this loss should not be compounded by the careless treatment of their family, and we have all heard heartbreaking stories of family members who learned of the death of their loved one from CNN because the airline could not or would not verify that they were on the plane. I believe that we can and must change the way families of plane crashes are treated. This bill will take some very important steps--such as requiring airlines to have a disaster plan in place, putting the National Transportation Safety Board [NTSB] in charge of overseeing family advocacy and requiring that airlines have adequate toll-free phone lines available for families in order to ensure they can get through when emergencies occur. We still need to do more, but these provisions are a necessary first step. Regardless of the outcome of the investigation into the causes of the crash of TWA flight 800, the fact that it could have been downed by a bomb shocked us all. The conference report returns our attention to the need to address the serious issue of security at our airports. Again, it is only a first step, and the 105th Congress will be tasked with following through on the guidelines we have laid down in this bill, as there is much that needs to be done and many questions the FAA still has to answer about why we do not have one explosive detection device ready for installation at our airports--despite the provisions of the 1990 Aviation Security Improvement Act which required their installation by 1993. Mr. President, I hope my colleagues will join me in supporting passage of the FAA reauthorization conference report.

Ms. SNOWE

Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute and bid a reluctant farewell to an outstanding leader, friend, colleague, and mentor--and an individual who has been a tremendous credit to this institution and to his home State--the senior Senator from Maine, Bill Cohen. The U.S. Senate is often referred to as the greatest deliberative body on earth, a reflection on the stature of its most outstanding individuals throughout our history. These leaders have all faced different challenges in different ages, but share the traits that bind men and women to greatness: courage, integrity, and a thoughtful approach to the issues of the day. They are people for whom public service is a calling, not a career; and a solemn trust not ever to be broken. Senator Bill Cohen is one of these people. Bill Cohen grew up in Bangor, ME, and would forever be instilled with the solid, common-sense, honest characteristics that are the hallmark of any good Mainer. From humble but hard-working roots, Bill Cohen would learn the values that have made him a great legislator, and a great leader. Mainers are a proud and independent people, who believe in thinking for themselves but also in helping each other. They understand that there are no free rides--no endless summers. For every action there is a consequence, and with every right comes a responsibility. People are expected to make the most of the opportunities they have, but also to make certain those opportunities exist for others. They insist that a person keep their promises and be true to their word. And they believe the ultimate measure of any man or woman is how close they remain to their principles precisely when it is most difficult to do so. It is against this backdrop that Bill Cohen started his political life, and he has carried these ideals with him throughout his tenure in the public arena. He entered politics knowing that he would have to make difficult decisions and willing to make them--but not knowing what or when. As it turned out, his moment would come very quickly. It became clear early on that Bill Cohen would follow in the tradition of great Maine leaders like Margaret Chase Smith and Edmund Muskie. Indeed, from his earliest days in Congress, Representative Cohen distinguished himself as an island of reason in a stormy sea of scandal. While America was suffering a crisis of confidence, Bill Cohen charted a course straight through the heart of the storm as a member of the House Judiciary Committee considering Articles of Impeachment against a President. Although just a freshman in the House, Bill was already a man of conscience and courage--someone who was willing to make the tough calls and risk his political future for the sake of truth and America's honor. One of our distinguished colleagues, Senator Robert Byrd, once said ``What we really need is a constitutional amendment that says, `There shall be some spine in our national leaders' ''. I think Senator Byrd might agree that if we had more Bill Cohen's, we might not need such a measure. Maine and America have come to know that they can count on Bill Cohen to approach issues with thoughtfulness and reason, and I think that Senators on both sides of the aisle have a tremendous respect for his intellect and integrity. I think that is what Americans want in their leaders. Bill Cohen not only listens to his constituents, but has the capacity to put the day's problems and events into historical perspective. He has the intellect, the integrity, and the strength to know the right thing to do--and the right way to do it. Bill Cohen does not rise and fall with the political tide, but at the same time he is very much aware of the issues and concerns swirling across America as well as the world. In much the spirit of lighthouse- keepers of Maine's past, Bill Cohen has always stood strong in the face of the often turbulent seas of politics, ever watchful and every ready to guide us in the right direction. He has been a leader who believes it is his solemn responsibility not simply to echo public sentiment, but to deliberate upon the issues of the day and to add his own voice to the debate. In fact, in 1992 he admonished that ``Those of us in Congress must be willing to tell the American people what they need to know, not just what they want to hear.'' Otherwise, as he said just Friday in his eloquent farewell speech, ``You don't need me; you just need a computer. * * * It is that kind of powerful eloquence that has been such a persuasive voice for reason in this body. As we well know, Mr. President, Bill Cohen knows just the right thing to say for almost any occasion, and certainly has a gift for the language. Of course, it's not unusual people in our line of work to sprinkle their speeches with pithy little quotes from some famous writer. But let's be honest--most of these are usually stumbled upon by some clever speech writer leafing through ``Bartlett's Famous Quotations.'' I mean, when was the last time you were actually gazing wistfully out the window, thinking, ``You know, right now I'm reminded of that line in `The Iliad'* * *.'' Except for Bill. He really is sitting there, thinking about the cost of some arcane weapons system relative to gross national product and how it all reminds him of that line in ``The Iliad.'' How many of us use timeless poetry and literature to inform our views? Even more remarkably, how many of us use our own poetry and writings? That is why those of us in this Chamber are well aware that Bill is about more than rollcall votes and unanimous-consent agreements. He is about the thoughtfulness and beauty of poetry; he is about contemplating our place in history; and he is about taking the time to really think about the world around us. He knows that what is really important--what is really lasting and worthy of our attention--is not something that can be gleaned from a briefing book. It must come from, as Plato might have said, the examined life. For Senator Cohen, the examined life is the only life worth living, and this philosophy is reflected in his public service. Indeed, one might say that when it comes to values like honesty, integrity, and fairness, Bill Cohen helped write the book. In the Senate, Senator Cohen has been there to defend the defenseless. He has been a compassionate pragmatist who believes, as I do, that we can balance the budget and still have room for humanity. As Woodrow Wilson once said, ``The firm basis of government is justice not pity,'' and in that spirit Bill Cohen believes that we should help give people a hand up, not a hand out. And with boundless optimism and in the best Republican tradition, he believes in the power and potential of the individual. Bill said it best in a speech he gave on the Senate floor: ``Is there anything more un-American than to deny a human being the chance to be the best he or she can be? Indeed, there is a common thread that runs through Bill Cohen's career in government. In 1963, Martin Luther King, Jr., wrote, ``Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.'' It is upon that fundamental principal that Senator Cohen has based his work, and the yardstick against which he measures our quality of life--and Government--in America. In a passionate speech he gave in the wake of the 1992 Los Angeles riots, Bill was typically eloquent and straightforward when he said: ``If we expect people to be guided by the rule of law and the hand of justice, then justice must be done. * * * We who hold positions of honor and responsibility as lawmakers have an absolute duty to see to it that laws we pass are carried out with fairness and with complete impartiality.'' Senator Cohen has been a tireless champion for justice, whether for seniors, minorities, women, and even the U.S. Government. In fact, especially the U.S. Government. Bill believes in the system--and he does not take lightly to that system being tarnished by corruption, waste, or special privileges. He was there to champion lobbying reform; he was there to ensure that criminal wrongdoing by public servants would not be tolerated; and he was there to strengthen the code of ethics for all who are entrusted with the public good. Bill has also long been a respected and expert voice on intelligence and defense issues. As chairman of the Armed Services Subcommittee on Seapower and as former chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Bill's leadership role at a key time in history laid the groundwork for many of the successes we enjoy today--from keeping communism at bay, to helping bring about the end of the cold war. Throughout it all, the political battles, the tough votes, the late- night sessions, Bill Cohen never forgot where he came from. Since 1969, when he was first elected to public office as the mayor of Bangor, ME people have put their trust in Bill Cohen. He has never failed that trust. He has never failed to honor us with his service and he has never failed to make us all proud to call him Senator. I have certainly been proud to call him Senator, even senior Senator, but I feel even more privileged to be able to call him my friend. Bill set the standard in modern Maine politics for all of us to follow. Indeed, if we ever had any hope of being successful, we had to follow it. And his advice and wise guidance over the years has been invaluable to me. I will forever appreciate the kindness he has shown. He has been a colleague, a mentor, and an inspiration, and I will miss him. Mr. President, as Senator Cohen is about to embark on an exciting and fulfilling new journey, I wish him nothing but the best. But know this: This institution, his State, and this country, will miss him dearly because he has been, as an editorial once said, ``as close to the ideal definition of a public servant as one can get.''

Ms. SNOWE

Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I also would like to add my sentiments about the number of individuals who are departing the Senate on both sides of the aisle, all of whom have contributed greatly to this country and to their States and brought us great honor, all of whom have reflected the ideals the American people rightfully expect from their elected officials. I know it is going to be a great loss to this institution, to lose the kind of individuals who have represented what, I think, is the best of what is in America, and the best of what their States have represented. I wish them all well. I am certainly sorry to see them all go. But I want to say they have certainly served their State and their country with honor. Mr. President, I yield the floor. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.