Arlen Specter

Mr. SPECTER

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, this funding is very important so that the processing of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty may go forward. This treaty is an important component of nuclear arms control and nonproliferation policy. On behalf of the United States, President Clinton signed the treaty on September 24, 1996, the day it was open for signature, and thereafter transmitted it to the Senate on September 22, 1997, for advice and consent or ratification. The treaty has been signed by 149 nations, ratified by 15. The treaty will enter into force after 44 states specified in the treaty have ratified it. The initial signatories to the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty established a preparatory commission to carry out the necessary preparations for implementation of the treaty as its entry into force. The preparatory commission will ensure that a verification regime is established that can meet the treaty's requirements. The need for this treaty came into very, very sharp focus earlier this year when on May 12 of 1998 we had the detonation of nuclear devices--actually it was on May 11--by India and two more on May 13. Then Pakistan responded with five tests on May 28 and one on May 30. The issues posed by India and Pakistan engaging in nuclear tests is one of overwhelming importance to the feuding which has been going on between those two countries for years and the possibility of nuclear war being initiated as a result of those two nations now having publicly announced their nuclear powers, having tested nuclear devices. I saw firsthand the issues relating to these two countries when Senator Hank Brown and I visited both India and Pakistan back in August of 1995. On August 28, 1995, Senator Brown and I sent the following letter to President Clinton: Dear Mr. President: I think it important to call to your personal attention the substance of meetings which Senator Hank Brown and I have had in the last two days with Indian Prime Minister Rao and Pakistan Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto. Prime Minister Rao stated that he would be very interested in negotiations which would lead to the elimination of any nuclear weapons on his subcontinent within ten or fifteen years including renouncing first use of such weapons. His interest in such negotiations with Pakistan would cover bilateral talks or a regional conference which would include the United States, China and Russia in addition to India and Pakistan. When we mentioned this conversation to Prime Minister Bhutto this morning-- That is on August 28-- She expressed great interest in such negotiations. When we told her of our conversation with Prime Minister Rao, she asked if we could get him to put that in writing. When we asked Prime Minister Bhutto when she had last talked to Prime Minister Rao, she said that she had no conversations with him during her tenure as Prime Minister. Prime Minister Bhutto did say that she had initiated a contact through an intermediary but that was terminated when a new controversy arose between Pakistan and India. From our conversations with Prime Minister Rao and Prime Minister Bhutto, it is my sense that both would be very receptive to discussions initiated and brokered by the United States as to nuclear weapons and also delivery missile systems. I am dictating this letter to you by telephone from Damascus so that you will have it at the earliest moment. I am also telefaxing a copy of this letter to Secretary of State Warren Christopher. After sending that letter to President Clinton, I have had an opportunity to discuss the issue with President Clinton on a number of occasions, and the President has stated an interest in trying to work with both India and Pakistan. Of course, the President has communicated with both India and Pakistan, at least following their nuclear detonations. But that is a matter which I think might profitably involve substantial activity by the United States. But the succession of events have followed so that in May of this year, the time had arisen for India to make a public disclosure, a public test, and then it was followed immediately by Pakistan. It is a matter where those in India might well question the intensity of interest of the United States in the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty when the United States is not a party to the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that this letter of August 28, 1995, be printed in the Record at the conclusion of my remarks.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I later wrote to the President on May 12 of 1998 enclosing a copy of that letter of August 28, 1995, urging him to move on the matter. I ask unanimous consent that a copy of this letter of May 12, 1998, be printed in the Record at the conclusion of my remarks.

Mr. SPECTER

Mr. SPECTER. I appreciate that very much.

Mr. SPECTER. My question, I say to Senator Nickles, relates to the consequences of a resignation. I commend you for the statement which you have just made. I have joined others in the call for an independent counsel. And, in fact, when questioning Attorney General Reno on July 15 of this year--2 weeks ago on Wednesday--I asked her about specific cases and had an extensive chart which showed the justification for an independent counsel. Then, because of the limitation of time, I mentioned only two cases, one where a memorandum had come from the Democratic National Committee to the White House identifying five people who were identified as being good for $100,000 each. The President initialed it. The Democratic National Committee called for a coffee. It was held in the Oval Office. Within a few days thereafter, four of the five contributed $100,000-- specific and credible evidence. And the Attorney General responded she would get back to me, which I said surprised me because it was a well- known matter. The second matter that I called to her attention--of only two because of the limitation of time--involved John Huang, where the photograph appeared and Carl Jackson, formerly of the NSC, National Security Staff, commented that Huang, in the presence of the President in the White House had said ``Elections are expensive, and we expect people to contribute.'' I have pressed for a mandamus act which I will not discuss now. I have on prior occasions. The question that I have for my distinguished colleague from Oklahoma--and I thank my colleague from West Virginia--is, What will be accomplished with a resignation? Is there any expectation that the President will appoint somebody who will be tougher on the campaign irregularities in which he is so deeply involved, at least by allegation? Wouldn't the better course be to move on the legal front, recognizing that it is a very tough case, candidly, an uphill fight--a long shot, in common parlance--contrasted with the resignation where we are going to have a lengthy delay before a nomination is made-- confirmation hearings--familiarity would be a matter of months--before a substitute attorney general would be in a position to respond to this issue about appointment of an independent counsel?

Mr. SPECTER. Will my distinguished colleague----

Mr. SPECTER. For a question--I know the distinguished Senator from West Virginia is waiting. I will be just a moment or two.

Mr. SPECTER

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I come before the Senate today to recognize the 15-year anniversary of a unique partnership between labor and management in the glass container manufacturing industry. This highly successful program in the glass container industry is called the ``Industry Union Glass Container Promotion Program'' or Nickel Solution. This effort is a fine example of workers and employers joining together during a time of change and transition in America's oldest industry. Since the 1700s, the men and women who make glass containers have demonstrated a steadfast commitment to produce the best in glass packaging. The Nickel Solution is one shining example of that dedication. The State of Pennsylvania is home to six glass container manufacturing plants--more than any other state except California. These facilities mean good paying jobs for approximately 3,000 Pennsylvanians and are major employers in Brockway, Clarion, Connellsville, Crenshaw, Glenshaw and Port Allegany, Pennsylvania. The Nickel Solution was based originally on voluntary contributions of a nickel per hour of pay from glass container industry employees to support a national fund to promote glass packaging and safeguard jobs. In turn, employers matched the contributions, setting the stage for joint cooperation and promotion. Through glass plant public relations committees, staffed by employee volunteers, the glass container industry's interests are well monitored and protected. Employees educate communities about glass recycling, conduct ``buy in glass'' promotions, and act as the front line for local, regional, and state advocacy. The Nickel Solution has enabled both labor and management to accomplish their goals of relative stability and secure employment for thousands of people in some 60 plants in 24 states throughout the country. The Nickel Solution is simple and works, proving its value time and again. The Nickel Solution has enabled the glass container industry to march forward to a brighter future. Mr. President, the U.S. Department of Labor has recognized this program as a ``model for the 21st century.'' In addition, Labor Secretary Herman has recognized this anniversary in the form of a letter congratulating the men and women of the U.S. glass container industry. I ask unanimous consent that the Secretary's letter be printed in the Record and I salute the great success of the Nickel Solution and the workers and management of the glass container industry.

Mr. SPECTER

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I have sought recognition to recognize the Air Force Office of Special Investigations on its 50th anniversary, August 1, 1998. The Office of Special Investigation was created in 1948 at the suggestion of the 80th Congress. Then Secretary of the Air Force Stuart Symington consolidated and centralized the investigative services of the United States Air Force to create an organization that would conduct independent and objective criminal investigations. Since 1948, the Office of Special Investigations has evolved into an organization that not only conducts criminal and fraud investigations, but investigates and thwarts terrorism and espionage, pursues military fugitives, and maintains the security of the Air Force's computer systems. The Office of Special Investigations has truly adapted to fulfill the needs of the United States Air Force in the 21st Century. At present, 2,000 men and women serve in the Office of Special Investigations. In more than 150 offices across the United States and in a dozen offices overseas, these men and women perform the investigative work of the United States Air Force wherever and whenever they are needed. I am proud to be among the 11,000 alumni of the Office of Special Investigations. I served as a lieutenant in the OSI from 1951 through 1953 and was assigned to the Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Delaware District. My experience allowed me to serve my country, hone my investigative skills, and better prepare me for a career in the law and in government. It gives me great pleasure, Mr. President, to stand before you and salute the Office of Special Investigations on the occasion of its 50th anniversary. Its legacy of service, integrity, and excellence continues today. A better motto could not have been chosen to commemorate OSI's 50th anniversary: ``Preserving Our Legacy, Protecting our Future.''

Mr. SPECTER

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I have sought recognition to introduce legislation to authorize the addition of the Paoli Battlefield site in Malvern, Pennsylvania to Valley Forge National Historical Park. The Paoli Massacre was an important chapter in the British campaign to capture Philadelphia in 1777. More than 50 American soldiers lost their lives when the British attacked and bayoneted General ``Mad'' Anthony Wayne's forces at Paoli Battlefield. Accordingly, this land needs to be preserved as an important part of Pennsylvania's history and our nation's history. Congressman Curt Weldon has introduced this legislation in the House of Representatives and we are working together with the local community toward enactment of this bill prior to adjournment. The issue is quite simple. The Paoli Battlefield is an unprotected Revolutionary War site that is privately owned by the Malvern Preparatory School. The School intends to sell the land in order to strengthen its endowment, but officials agreed to give the community a chance to purchase the land for historical preservation purposes. Thus, the Paoli Battlefield will become open to residential or commercial development if $2.5 million is not raised by next year to purchase the land. Our bill envisions a combination of public and private financing to purchase the battlefield and link it to the protected lands known as Valley Forge National Historical Park. Specifically, the bill authorizes a purchase price of $2.5 million with not less than $1 million in nonfederal funds. Too many important historical sites, especially Revolutionary War battlefields, have already been lost to residential and commercial development. The citizens of Malvern, through the Paoli Battlefield Preservation Fund, have already raised in excess of $1 million to acquire the site. Thus, if the expected $2.5 million price is maintained, adding the Paoli Battlefield to Valley Forge National Historical Park would cost the federal government no more than $1.5 million. The bill also authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to enter into a cooperative agreement with the Borough of Malvern, which has agreed to manage the 45-acre site in perpetuity, thereby ensuring that Valley Forge will not have to expend additional federal resources for Park operations on the Paoli Battlefield. Mr. President, this Congress has made a commitment to protecting battlefield sites. I have been pleased to support these efforts as well as the effort to obtain funding in the FY99 Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations bill to conduct the Revolutionary War and War of 1812 Historic Preservation Study. Paoli Battlefield played an important role in the Revolutionary War, and I therefore urge my colleagues to support this effort to protect an important piece of American history. Simply put, in a $1.7 trillion federal budget, I believe that we should be able to find a maximum of $1.5 million in federal funds to preserve a rich part of our history.

Mr. SPECTER

Mr. SPECTER. I thank my colleague. When the distinguished Senator from Iowa points out that the vote was 99-0, is the Senator aware that when we sought the transfer, that it was turned down 57-41?

Mr. SPECTER. An amendment on which the Senator from Iowa joined this Senator from Pennsylvania.

Mr. SPECTER. I believe the Senator from Iowa raises a valid point on having the same scoring for the Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education as for the Department of Defense. I am optimistic that in working with the distinguished chairman of the Budget Committee there are ways that we can resolve these differences on policy grounds. The Senator from Iowa and I have worked very closely for many years now, when the Senator from Iowa was chairman and I was ranking--in reverse. We will move ahead with our markup in the subcommittee on September 1, the day after we get back. The chairman has agreed to have the markup on September 3 to bring this complex bill to the floor at an early date. I have taken the preliminary step in a very small meeting with Secretary Shalala of Health and Human Services and Secretary Riley of Education and Secretary Herman of Labor, to try to ascertain their real priorities so that we can try to move this bill ahead and get it passed. I think the Senator from Iowa is performing a real service in highlighting the necessity for similar scoring so we can have additional funds. I think we will get there. I thank my colleague for his yielding and for his cooperation this year and through the years.

Mr. SPECTER. Will the Senator yield for a question?

Mr. SPECTER

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I am very pleased to join my colleagues Senator Byrd and Senator Rockefeller who have worked so carefully in crafting this legislation, the Persian Gulf War Veterans Act of 1998. Thus, I am pleased to be an original co-sponsor on this bill. This is a major piece of legislation on behalf of a very important group of veterans. For too long, many Gulf War veterans unsuccessfully have sought promised assistance from our government for the troubling and unexplained health problems they have suffered since they returned home from the Gulf War conflict seven years ago. This bill will fill important gaps in the current health care services and compensation benefits actually being provided to these veterans. It will advance efforts to determine what happened to these veterans during their deployment that may have affected their current health. It also provides a mechanism for an independent scientific entity--the National Academy of Sciences--to identify on a scientific basis linkages between toxic substances to which Gulf War veterans were exposed during their deployment and the illnesses that many now suffer, and for the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to issue regulations based on the NAS's findings creating presumptions of service connection for health care and benefits purposes for Gulf War veterans. This bill is the latest in a series of laws we have passed in recognition of the deep debt we owe those brave men and women who answered their country's call and put their lives on the line on behalf of us all during the Gulf War. Although that war ended quickly with relatively few immediate casualties, the long term impact of that deployment--which had as a daily reality the very real threat that Iraq would use chemical or biological weapons--was immense and unanticipated. The casualties now are those Gulf War veterans who, several years after the war, have a variety of symptoms and illnesses that fall into no set pattern but for which they still cannot get effective help from our government. This is, unfortunately, particularly true at the Department of Veterans Affairs, which has as its mission the care for and compensation of veterans who fall ill as a result of their military service, and is why this bill focuses on directing the VA to take steps to remedy the situation that many Gulf War veterans find themselves in. It is clear that many Gulf War veterans are suffering from very real physical problems, many of which are still-evolving and the cause of which remains unclear. Effective treatments in many cases have yet to be identified, and even where treatment could be helpful it is not yet uniformly provided to all Gulf War veterans who seek it. And, individuals who develop health problems after their service in the Gulf continue to encounter significant problems in obtaining adequate and timely compensation benefits. It is true that the Department of Veterans Affairs has instituted programs and made efforts to treat Gulf War veterans. But clearly, the current realization of those efforts is not worthy of what these veterans--who have been identified as a high priority group by VA itself--deserve. As I travel through my home state of Pennsylvania, I hear over and over again the heartbreaking stories of ill Gulf War veterans and their families, who are understandably frightened about their future health prospects and are frustrated by their attempts to get timely and effective health care assistance and compensation benefits. This bill should help remove some of the barriers to obtaining these services from the VA. It should also help shift to the government the burden that in the past has too often fallen on the veteran to demonstrate that he or she is ill and why. It does this by establishing a structured means for seeking potential positive associations between troop exposures to one or more environmental hazards in the Gulf region and the unexplained illnesses that many now face every day. It compels VA to not just treat these ill veterans in isolation and on an ad hoc basis but to monitor their health status over time, and requires more research and outreach programs to make sure every potentially useful area of research into treatment as well as causation is pursued, and that Gulf War veterans know how to obtain the VA's services that are provided on their behalf. It also enhances VA's authority to implement the program for examinations of the spouses and children of these veterans under a program that we established some years ago but that VA has utterly failed to implement in a truly effective way. This is another opportunity for us to learn from the past and not repeat the delays or mistakes that were made in helping the veterans of previous conflicts who have suffered long term, adverse health consequences as a result of their military service. America's Gulf War veterans deserve no less.

Mr. SPECTER

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I introduce noncontroversial legislation which is essential to the ability of the Delaware River Port Authority to raise funds in the bond markets. Specifically, this bill clarifies that the 1987 law which repealed the thirty-year limit on bridge toll collection set by the General Bridge Act of 1946 also applies to the Delaware River Port Authority's bridges in Southeastern Pennsylvania and Southern New Jersey. It is arguable that this legislation is not necessary and that a court would construe the 1987 law in the Port Authority's favor. However, to assure certainty for the financial markets and entities considering purchasing bonds issued by the Port Authority, I believe it is worthwhile for Congress to adopt legislation making this technical clarification. By way of background, for many years, federal regulations governed the collection of tolls on bridges throughout the nation. Then, in the 1987 highway bill, congress repealed section 506 of the 1946 General Bridge Act which imposed a 30-year time limit on the collection of tolls. The bridges owned and operated by the Delaware River Port Authority, however, are governed by a 1952 public law by which Congress ratified the Pennsylvania-New Jersey compact establishing the Port Authority. Section 3 of that public law provided that the Port Authority's bridges were expressly exempt from the 30-year limit of the General Bridge Act and were instead subject to a 50-year limit on the collection of tolls. A strong case could be made that any existing statutory limit on the Port Authority was implicitly repealed by the 1987 highway bill because the limit in the 1952 compact legislation was drafted as an exception to a law that is no longer in effect (i.e., Section 506 of the General Bridge Act of 1946). However, since the 1952 Port Authority provision has not been technically repealed, I am proposing legislation to correct this oversight. The legislative history of the Section 3 of the Port Authority compact legislation also suggests that the 50-year toll-collection limit should no longer apply. Instead of having a lesser restriction than the 30-year limit, as was intended by Congress, if the 50-year limit were enforced, the Port Authority would be subject to a more stringent limitation on toll collection than all other American bridges. Accordingly, I believe that my legislation is consistent with the intent behind the 1987 highway law to deregulate the collection of tolls nationwide. The Port Authority is authorized to pledge its revenue, including that from tolls, to secure debts. To obtain financing for future economic development and to preserve the bridges it owns and operates, the Port Authority must have a guaranteed revenue stream. Although a court very likely would rule that the fifty-year limit on toll collection was implicitly repealed by the Highway Act of 1987, without direct legislation to that effect, the Port Authority's bond counsel suggests it will be unable to borrow in the financial markets. The importance of ensuring this borrowing ability is reflected in the Port Authority's essential role in the economic development of Southeastern Pennsylvania and Southern New Jersey. The Port Authority owns and operates the Benjamin Franklin, Betsy Ross, Commodore Barry, and Walt Whitman bridges as well as the mass transit PATCO High Speed Line. The Port Authority is involved in port unification through another of its subsidiaries, the Port of Philadelphia and Camden. Finally, the Port Authority has been instrumental in regional development and the commercial revitalization of the Philadelphia- Camden waterfront. Its programs include the addition of public attractions at Penns Landing and the Camden Aquarium as well as low- interest loans to expand Philadelphia's American Street Enterprise Zone. Given the importance of revitalizing the Delaware River region, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. SPECTER

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I introduce noncontroversial legislation which is essential to the ability of the Delaware River Port Authority to raise funds in the bond markets. Specifically, this bill clarifies that the 1987 law which repealed the thirty-year limit on bridge toll collection set by the General Bridge Act of 1946 also applies to the Delaware River Port Authority's bridges in Southeastern Pennsylvania and Southern New Jersey. It is arguable that this legislation is not necessary and that a court would construe the 1987 law in the Port Authority's favor. However, to assure certainty for the financial markets and entities considering purchasing bonds issued by the Port Authority, I believe it is worthwhile for Congress to adopt legislation making this technical clarification. By way of background, for many years, federal regulations governed the collection of tolls on bridges throughout the nation. Then, in the 1987 highway bill, congress repealed section 506 of the 1946 General Bridge Act which imposed a 30-year time limit on the collection of tolls. The bridges owned and operated by the Delaware River Port Authority, however, are governed by a 1952 public law by which Congress ratified the Pennsylvania-New Jersey compact establishing the Port Authority. Section 3 of that public law provided that the Port Authority's bridges were expressly exempt from the 30-year limit of the General Bridge Act and were instead subject to a 50-year limit on the collection of tolls. A strong case could be made that any existing statutory limit on the Port Authority was implicitly repealed by the 1987 highway bill because the limit in the 1952 compact legislation was drafted as an exception to a law that is no longer in effect (i.e., Section 506 of the General Bridge Act of 1946). However, since the 1952 Port Authority provision has not been technically repealed, I am proposing legislation to correct this oversight. The legislative history of the Section 3 of the Port Authority compact legislation also suggests that the 50-year toll-collection limit should no longer apply. Instead of having a lesser restriction than the 30-year limit, as was intended by Congress, if the 50-year limit were enforced, the Port Authority would be subject to a more stringent limitation on toll collection than all other American bridges. Accordingly, I believe that my legislation is consistent with the intent behind the 1987 highway law to deregulate the collection of tolls nationwide. The Port Authority is authorized to pledge its revenue, including that from tolls, to secure debts. To obtain financing for future economic development and to preserve the bridges it owns and operates, the Port Authority must have a guaranteed revenue stream. Although a court very likely would rule that the fifty-year limit on toll collection was implicitly repealed by the Highway Act of 1987, without direct legislation to that effect, the Port Authority's bond counsel suggests it will be unable to borrow in the financial markets. The importance of ensuring this borrowing ability is reflected in the Port Authority's essential role in the economic development of Southeastern Pennsylvania and Southern New Jersey. The Port Authority owns and operates the Benjamin Franklin, Betsy Ross, Commodore Barry, and Walt Whitman bridges as well as the mass transit PATCO High Speed Line. The Port Authority is involved in port unification through another of its subsidiaries, the Port of Philadelphia and Camden. Finally, the Port Authority has been instrumental in regional development and the commercial revitalization of the Philadelphia- Camden waterfront. Its programs include the addition of public attractions at Penns Landing and the Camden Aquarium as well as low- interest loans to expand Philadelphia's American Street Enterprise Zone. Given the importance of revitalizing the Delaware River region, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. SPECTER

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I have sought recognition to comment on the Senate Appropriations Committee's decision to provide funding to reopen the Erie National Weather Service office at least in part starting this Fall. Congressman English and I were in Erie in April for meetings with local officials and residents on this important issue and our appropriations success is a direct result of that visit. During that visit, I once again heard the troubling litany of severe weather incidents in Erie, which include blizzards and tornadoes which went unreported and put thousands of residents at risk. I am pleased that Chairman Gregg was able to fulfill part of my request regarding the National Weather Service's activities in the Erie area and wanted to confirm with him that it is our understanding that pursuant to the language in this bill, the agency will undertake mitigation activities which will include having Weather Service personnel in the Erie office 7 days a week, 24 hours a day, for 6 months beginning October 1, 1998. I will continue to focus with Congressman English and Senator Santorum on our goal of reopening the Erie office permanently and ensuring that the office is equipped with the most advanced forecasting equipment available in the federal government. The six-month reopening of the office represents a good interim fix and I thank the Chairman for his help.

Mr. SPECTER

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I have sought recognition to comment on the inclusion in the bill of $4 million at my request for the deployment of an intelligent transportation system project across the Delaware River. I sought these funds at the request of the Delaware River Port Authority, which is implementing electronic toll and traffic management systems for the Ben Franklin, Walt Whitman, Commodore Barry, and Betsy Ross Bridges in the Pennsylvania-New Jersey-Delaware region, which are operated and maintained by the Authority and serve thousands of drivers each day, including substantial commercial traffic. I believe that it is critical that we do all that is possible to alleviate traffic congestion on these important river crossings, for the sake of improving the quality of life of area residents and others who drive on the bridges and to reduce air pollution in Philadelphia and its suburbs. I thank the Chairman for including funds for deployment of an ITS system over the Delaware River, which will benefit both Pennsylvania and New Jersey.

Mr. SPECTER

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I agree with the arguments made both by the Senator from Idaho and the Senator from Illinois that it is very useful to have a Federal crackdown on those who violate the law with guns. When I was district attorney in Philadelphia, I sought to have the Board of Judges impose a standard rule that there be at least some jail time for those who violate the law with guns, and was unsuccessful in that effort. One of the first pieces of legislation I introduced on coming to the Senate provided for the armed career criminal bill, which mandates a sentence of 15 years to life for a career criminal who has been found in possession of a firearm. I am pleased the legislation offered by the Senator from Idaho will encompass the City of Philadelphia on a Federal crackdown. Let me say, parenthetically, this is the first opportunity I have had to take the Senate floor. I thank my colleagues for the standing ovation which I received when I returned and thank them for the very many good wishes. I wish I had longer to talk about this issue. But I do believe the Federal jurisdiction, with the speedy trial rules and the tougher sentencing and the avoidance, at least in my experience, in the Philadelphia State courts of judge shopping and plea bargaining, will be a great boon to cracking down on those who violate the law with guns. Just a word or two about a couple of earlier votes. I supported the proposition to allow counsel into the grand jury room. That is sort of an onerous proceeding, where the prosecutor is present with the witness and up to 23 grand jurors. It is a little anomalous, given the right to counsel, that the witness must appear alone in the grand jury room, which is a closed Star Chamber proceeding, but I think the orderly administration of criminal justice will be served better if a witness' counsel is permitted to be present. An earlier vote, too, occurred on an effort by the Senator from Alabama, Senator Sessions, to allocate more funds to law enforcement as opposed to rehabilitation. I supported the motion to table Senator Sessions' amendment because I believe there ought to be more on the seamless web for rehabilitation.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I want to commend my colleagues, Chairman Gregg and Senator Hollings, for including in this legislation $5 million to cover initial costs of establishing a War Crimes Tribunal for prosecution of Saddam Hussein and other Iraqi government officials for crimes committed during the Gulf War and afterward. I sought these funds in a letter to Chairman Gregg dated April 24, 1998, because I believe it is critical that we have the prosecutorial infrastructure in place to deal with Iraqi war crimes. I also noted in my letter that every effort must be made to obtain contributions from our allies and other U.N. member countries for this vital effort. I look forward to working with my colleagues as this bill moves forward to ensure that these funds are retained in Conference.

Mr. SPECTER

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, today I join my colleagues, Senators Daniel Patrick Moynihan and Alfonso D'Amato, to introduce a bill that will keep high paying jobs in the domestic tailored wool apparel industry in America. This bill will suspend the duty on certain high quality wool fabrics used in American garment manufacturing. The duty rates on imported wool fabrics continued to be among the highest rates imposed on products in the U.S. tariff schedules. Because the duty on these fabrics exceeds the duty on imported garments by about 20 percent, the duty schedule penalizes those American companies which keep their production here in the U.S. A special ``finished product'' concession made in the Canada Free Trade Agreement (and later NAFTA) has greatly exacerbated the problem. The concession allows Canadian companies to use imported, duty-free wool fabric to manufacture men's suits, which are in turn shipped duty- free into the U.S. As a result, over the past decade Canadian shipments of suits into the U.S. have surged from nearly zero to approximately one and a half million units shipped annually. During the same time frame, production by the U.S. tailored clothing industry has dropped 40 percent and the number of employees has been cut in almost half, from 58,000 to 30,000 employees. In my home state of Pennsylvania, the high-end tailored men's clothing industry provides high paying jobs in the cities of Reading, Ashland, Easton, Shippensberg and Philadelphia, but since 1991, Pennsylvania has lost over 3000 jobs due to plant closings. This duty has a real, direct and substantial effect on American jobs. Suspension of the duty on these fabrics will level the playing field with foreign manufacturers and allow the U.S. industry to compete, saving American jobs. I therefore urge my colleagues to join me in supporting its adoption.

Mr. SPECTER

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, today I introduce legislation to authorize the Interior Department to enter into an agreement with the nonprofit Gateway Visitor Center Corporation for the construction and operation of the Gateway Visitor Center in Independence National Historical Park in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. This legislation is needed because the Visitor Center will provide some services which are beyond the scope of existing National Park Service statutory authority at the Park. As a result, I am advised that construction may not begin until this bill is enacted. I have worked with the National Park Service and the Gateway Visitor Center Corporation to develop this bill and note that similar legislation has been introduced in the House of Representatives by Congressmen Jon Fox and Robert Borski. The bill also has the strong support of Philadelphia Mayor Edward Rendell. The Gateway Visitor Center is part of the revitalization of Independence Mall and is critical to creating an outstanding visitor experience. It will serve as the gateway into the Park and will orient visitors as to the rich history of the National Historical Park, the city of Philadelphia, and the region as a whole. I was pleased to assist in obtaining funds in the TEA-21 Act for the road and infrastructure improvements necessary for the redevelopment of the Independence Mall and would note that the Senate FY99 Interior Appropriations bill also includes funding for this project. The legislation is necessary because, in addition to its role as the Park's primary visitor center, the Gateway Visitor Center will be permitted to charge fees, conduct events, and sell merchandise, tickets, and food to visitors to the Center. These activities will allow the Gateway Visitor Center to meet its park-wide, city-wide and regional missions while defraying the operating and management expenses of the Center. The Gateway Visitor Center holds enormous potential for Independence National Historical Park and the greater Philadelphia region as a whole, and I urge my colleague to support this legislation.

Mr. SPECTER

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, today I introduce legislation to authorize the Interior Department to enter into an agreement with the nonprofit Gateway Visitor Center Corporation for the construction and operation of the Gateway Visitor Center in Independence National Historical Park in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. This legislation is needed because the Visitor Center will provide some services which are beyond the scope of existing National Park Service statutory authority at the Park. As a result, I am advised that construction may not begin until this bill is enacted. I have worked with the National Park Service and the Gateway Visitor Center Corporation to develop this bill and note that similar legislation has been introduced in the House of Representatives by Congressmen Jon Fox and Robert Borski. The bill also has the strong support of Philadelphia Mayor Edward Rendell. The Gateway Visitor Center is part of the revitalization of Independence Mall and is critical to creating an outstanding visitor experience. It will serve as the gateway into the Park and will orient visitors as to the rich history of the National Historical Park, the city of Philadelphia, and the region as a whole. I was pleased to assist in obtaining funds in the TEA-21 Act for the road and infrastructure improvements necessary for the redevelopment of the Independence Mall and would note that the Senate FY99 Interior Appropriations bill also includes funding for this project. The legislation is necessary because, in addition to its role as the Park's primary visitor center, the Gateway Visitor Center will be permitted to charge fees, conduct events, and sell merchandise, tickets, and food to visitors to the Center. These activities will allow the Gateway Visitor Center to meet its park-wide, city-wide and regional missions while defraying the operating and management expenses of the Center. The Gateway Visitor Center holds enormous potential for Independence National Historical Park and the greater Philadelphia region as a whole, and I urge my colleague to support this legislation.

Mr. SPECTER

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I seek recognition today to thank the Managers for agreeing to accept my amendment on campus crime reporting, which is based on legislation (S. 2100) I introduced on May 20, 1998. As a lead sponsor of the Crime Awareness and Campus Security Act of 1990, I have been very concerned about what I perceive as the Department of Education's ineffective implementation of the Act's crime offense reporting requirements. On March 5, 1998, I held an oversight hearing on campus security issues as Chairman of the Senate Labor, Health, and Human Services and Education Appropriations Subcommittee. At that hearing, Assistant Secretary for postsecondary Education David Longanecker testified that the Department does not require colleges to report offenses occurring on sidewalks, streets and other public lands within what ordinarily would be considered a ``campus.'' He also testified that buildings which are owned by a college but used for commercial purposes (such as a leased food court) do not fall within the Department's interpretation of ``campus.'' I believe that the omission of such information violates the spirit of the law and is a disservice to parents and students because commercial property such as food shops and retail stores and streets thread through a campus and must be visited or traveled in the course of one's studies. I was further troubled to hear testimony at the hearing that the Department has not imposed civil penalties on any school for failure to comply with the Act. The best means of improving the implementation of the 1990 law is the enactment of the statutory clarifications included in my amendment, which redefines ``campus'' and requires the imposition of civil penalties where applicable. I am grateful that the Managers have agreed to name these provisions of law in honor of Jeanne Clery, the daughter of Howard and Connie Clery of King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, who was brutally raped and murdered at Lehigh University in 1986. After that tragic incident, the Clerys founded Security on Campus, Inc., a non-profit dedicated to improving safety on our nation's college campuses. The Clerys brought the campus crime reporting issue to my attention in 1989 and it is highly fitting that after so many years of being inspired by their work on this issue, Congress will recognize Jeanne Clery in this manner. I am hopeful that my amendment will be preserved in conference with the House and again thank my colleagues for their efforts on this issue.

Mr. SPECTER

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, as Chairman of the Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs, I introduce legislation today to grant a Cost-of-Living-Adjustment (COLA) increase, to take effect at the beginning of next year, to recipients of certain Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) benefits. Mr. President, this legislation is simple and straightforward. It would grant a COLA increase to recipients of various VA benefits--most notably, compensation benefits received by veterans with service- connected disabilities, and the Dependency and Indemnity Compensation or ``DIC'' benefits received by the survivors of veterans who died in service or died after service as a result of service-connected injuries or illnesses. The COLA to be awarded under this legislation would be, as in past years, the same COLA awarded to recipients of Social Security benefits. It is a matter of great importance that VA compensation checks keep pace with inflation. I know this from personal experience; in Depression days, all that kept the wolf from the door of the Specter household was a small veterans disability check. The Congress has not failed to grant cost-of-living adjustments in past years, and I know it will not fail now. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.