Ted Stevens

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. I thank the Chair for bringing the Department of Defense appropriations bill for fiscal year 2000 before the Senate. It is my privilege to once again bring this defense bill to the Members of the Senate in partnership with my distinguished colleague, the Senator from Hawaii. I hope all Senators were able to see or at least learn of the very distinguished memorial that was created to honor the 442nd, which was the most decorated unit of World War II; our colleague, Senator Inouye, was part of that unit. I am very pleased we are once again able to come before the Senate to pursue a matter of great concern to each of us, and that is the defense of our country. We have served together on this subcommittee now for more than 20 years, and we have been chairman or ranking member, depending upon the political tides of this country. I want the Senate to know that I could not have brought this bill to the Senate so early this year without the wisdom, experience, and judgment of my good friend from Hawaii. I also commend Senator Levin and Senator Warner of the authorization committee for their handling of the defense authorization bill. We have worked closely together with that committee to stay close to the budget and the policy determinations which were made in the armed services bill. Amendments which we will offer later today reflect adjustments made to that bill to make this appropriations bill fully compatible with the authorization process. As Senator Inouye and I reported to the committee when we considered this bill in the committee, and as reflected by the Armed Services Committee in their bill, the military has faced a difficult challenge in meeting critical readiness and quality-of-life needs while modernizing our total force for the 21st century. The armed services have sought to maintain that balance while undertaking contingency operations in the Balkans, southwest Asia, and the heightened alert on the Korean peninsula. Last month, the Congress, at our request, provided a second emergency supplemental bill for the fiscal year 1999 to meet some of those contingency requirements. For fiscal year 2000, our committee was presented a budget that reflected real progress compared to the original forecast for the upcoming fiscal year. More realistic estimates for the Bosnia operations and procurement and development of a national missile defense system established a better baseline for our national defense program. Initiatives by OMB did leave real holes in the budget for fiscal year 2000, with incremental funding for MILCON, the military construction bill, and a $1.65 billion unspecified rescission recommended by the Office of Management and Budget. The budget resolution adopted by Congress has provided adjustments for the defense function that offset some of those defense gaps. The $8.3 billion increase in the new defense budget authority enabled the committee to restore the military construction reduction and to offset the suggested rescission. In addition, needed increases were provided for defense functions of the Energy and Water and Transportation Subcommittees. Our bill reported by the Appropriations Committee is within the 302(B) allocation for the Defense Subcommittee. That is an allocation made pursuant to the budget resolution. As I noted at the outset, the bill before the Senate follows closely the Defense Department authorization bill that passed this Senate by a vote of 94-4. Our bill fully funds the authorized 4.8-percent pay raise for military personnel. This bill adds $598 million to the O&M accounts, the operation and maintenance accounts, and provides flexibility to accommodate a larger civilian pay raise, if that is authorized. The increase in O&M spending will also protect the readiness of our forces and the quality of life for military personnel and their families. This bill before the Senate does not include any funding for the war in Kosovo; no assumptions are made concerning either extension of the air war or a ground campaign or peacekeeping force. At this tense moment in the peace negotiations in Europe, I hope all Members of the Senate will be cognizant of these efforts in their comments and the amendments offered to this bill. We will probably have another supplemental yet for peacekeeping operations in Kosovo for fiscal year 2000. That additional funding will be essential to avoid reductions in readiness and modernization for the armed services next year, if there is a peacekeeping operation, which we all expect. To achieve the modernization goals by Secretary Cohen and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the recommendation increases procurement spending by $2.7 billion. Looking further out in the future to the next generation of weapons systems, the bill before the Senate recommends an increase of $2.1 billion in research and development. Funding for the defense health program continues to be the fastest growing component of our defense budget. The request for fiscal year 2000 grew by 7 percent compared to the appropriation of 1999. And the recommendation provides an increase of more than $1 billion for fiscal year 2000. Included in that defense health program is $300 million for medical research, with $175 million allocated to breast cancer research and $75 million allocated for prostate cancer research. One new initiative is the transfer of the responsibility for the soldiers, sailors, and airmen homes from the Labor, Health, and Human Services Subcommittee to our Defense Subcommittee. These facilities are more appropriately funded in conjunction with the Department of Defense, in our judgment. I hope the Senate will approve that recommendation. To reflect fact-of-life economic assumption changes since the budget was prepared last autumn, our bill makes a series of adjustments. These changes are based upon the Department of Defense authorization bill and revised Office of Management Budget estimates. These estimates and items include adjusted prior year inflation rates, fuel costs, foreign currency rates, and underexecution of civilian personnel allowances. All of those are adjustments that must be made to the bill. The bill also includes a general provision, section 8108, that reduces funding to reflect the amounts anticipated to carry over from the recently enacted Kosovo supplemental. Mr. President, $3.1 billion is reduced from this bill and was shifted to the Deficiencies Subcommittee of our Committee. Those funds will be reallocated to other subcommittees as we proceed with the remaining fiscal year 2000 bills. This adjustment holds the total defense funding for the fiscal year at roughly the level set in the budget resolution that was adopted by Congress earlier this year. The Appropriations Committee also reported S. 1186, the Department of Energy appropriations bill for fiscal year 2000. That bill contains nearly $12 billion in defense funding. Our committee will also report the military construction bill later this week. Again, let me thank Senator Inouye for his support and input in this bill and thank him again for his cooperation. I yield to the distinguished Senator from Hawaii for any statement he wishes to make.

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, on behalf of Senator Grassley, I send an amendment to the desk.

Mr. STEVENS. I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. STEVENS. I ask unanimous consent that the amendment be temporarily set aside.

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, we have no objection. How long does the Senator desire?

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. I ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be put in effect after I finish this statement. It will take about 5 minutes as in morning business.

Mr. STEVENS. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

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

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, a young Alaskan, a freshman in Colony High School in the Matanuska Valley town of Wasilla, wrote an opinion piece in the Anchorage Daily news this week which shows thoughtfulness and wisdom well beyond his 15 years. Travis Johnson sat down at his computer the day after the tragedy at Columbine High School, and wrote from the heart his feelings and his ideas on how to prevent further tragedies like Columbine. He showed the essay to his parents who were moved and impressed with their youngster's effort. His mother, a physician, and his dad, an insurance executive, grew up in Anchorage. While they are not hunters themselves, they have friends and family who are gun owners and who hunt. After Travis shared his essay with his English teacher, his dad suggested that he send it to the Anchorage Daily News. Travis refutes the ideas that guns and violence on television and in films are responsible for incidents like Columbine. Travis believes that parents must be more and more involved with their children. He asks the parents who read his opinion piece to ``talk to your kids, even though you may not want to, and your kids may act like they don't want to talk to you.'' And he tells teens to talk to their parents. Mr. President, Travis Johnson's observations and ideas are important insights into how to avoid further incidents like those in Colorado and Georgia, from a teen who understands how teens feel. I ask unanimous consent that his column from the May 25 Anchorage Daily News, titled ``Parents Are the Only Answer to Teens' Problems'' be printed in the Record.

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, today I send to the desk and introduce the Physical Education for Progress--or ``PEP''--Act. My bill would provide incentive grants for local school districts to develop minimum weekly requirements for physical education, and daily physical education if possible. Every student in our Nation's schools, from kindergarten through grade 12, should have the opportunity to participate in quality physical education. Children need to know that physical activity can help them feel good, be successful in school and work, and stay healthy. Engaging in sports activities provides lessons about teamwork and dealing with defeat. In my judgment, physical activity and sports are an important educational tool, and the lessons of sports may help resolve some of the problems that lead to violence in schools. Regular physical activity produces short-term health benefits and reduces long-term risks for chronic disease, disability and premature death. Despite the proven benefits of being physically active, more than 60 percent of American adults do not engage in levels of physical activity necessary to provide health benefits. More than a third of young people in our country aged 12 to 21 years do not regularly engage in vigorous physical activity, and the percentage of overweight young Americans has more than doubled in the past 30 years. Daily participation in high school physical education classes dropped from 42 percent in 1991 to 27 percent in 1997. Right now, only one state in our union--Illinois--currently requires daily physical education for grades K through 12. I think that is a staggering statistic. Only one State requires daily physical education for our children. The impact of our poor health habits is staggering: obesity-related diseases now cost the Nation more than $100 billion per year, and inactivity and poor diet cause more than 300,000 deaths per year in the United States. We know from the Centers for Disease Control and others that lifelong health-related habits, including physical activity and eating patterns, are often established in childhood. Because ingrained behaviors are difficult to change as people grow older, we need to reach out to young people early, before health-damaging behaviors are adopted. To me, schools provide an ideal opportunity to make an enormous, positive impact on the health of our Nation. The PEP Act, to me, is an important step toward improving the health of our Nation. The PEP Act would help schools get regular physical activity back into their programs. We can, and should, help our youth establish solid health habits at an early age. The incentive grants provided for by my bill could be used to provide physical education equipment and support to students, to enhance physical education curricula, and to train and educate physical education teachers. The future cost savings in health care for emphasizing the importance of physical activity to a long and healthy life, to me, are immense.

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, today I send to the desk and introduce the Physical Education for Progress--or ``PEP''--Act. My bill would provide incentive grants for local school districts to develop minimum weekly requirements for physical education, and daily physical education if possible. Every student in our Nation's schools, from kindergarten through grade 12, should have the opportunity to participate in quality physical education. Children need to know that physical activity can help them feel good, be successful in school and work, and stay healthy. Engaging in sports activities provides lessons about teamwork and dealing with defeat. In my judgment, physical activity and sports are an important educational tool, and the lessons of sports may help resolve some of the problems that lead to violence in schools. Regular physical activity produces short-term health benefits and reduces long-term risks for chronic disease, disability and premature death. Despite the proven benefits of being physically active, more than 60 percent of American adults do not engage in levels of physical activity necessary to provide health benefits. More than a third of young people in our country aged 12 to 21 years do not regularly engage in vigorous physical activity, and the percentage of overweight young Americans has more than doubled in the past 30 years. Daily participation in high school physical education classes dropped from 42 percent in 1991 to 27 percent in 1997. Right now, only one state in our union--Illinois--currently requires daily physical education for grades K through 12. I think that is a staggering statistic. Only one State requires daily physical education for our children. The impact of our poor health habits is staggering: obesity-related diseases now cost the Nation more than $100 billion per year, and inactivity and poor diet cause more than 300,000 deaths per year in the United States. We know from the Centers for Disease Control and others that lifelong health-related habits, including physical activity and eating patterns, are often established in childhood. Because ingrained behaviors are difficult to change as people grow older, we need to reach out to young people early, before health-damaging behaviors are adopted. To me, schools provide an ideal opportunity to make an enormous, positive impact on the health of our Nation. The PEP Act, to me, is an important step toward improving the health of our Nation. The PEP Act would help schools get regular physical activity back into their programs. We can, and should, help our youth establish solid health habits at an early age. The incentive grants provided for by my bill could be used to provide physical education equipment and support to students, to enhance physical education curricula, and to train and educate physical education teachers. The future cost savings in health care for emphasizing the importance of physical activity to a long and healthy life, to me, are immense.

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. That is correct. Some of the class members in this lawsuit were paid $5,000 restitution before the funds in the Civil Liberties Education Fund were exhausted. However, there are a number of class members who filed timely claims under the Mochizuki settlement who were not provided with restitution because there were no funds remaining. In addition, some class members were not able to complete the documentation necessary for the Department of Justice to determine, prior to the termination of the Civil Liberties Public Education Fund and the expiration of the redress program six months later, whether they were eligible for redress under the settlement agreement. This provision would allow those individuals, if they filed timely claims, to provide any necessary information to the Department of Justice, and allow the Department to complete its review of their files. If the Department determines that they are eligible, or has already done so, this provision allows the Attorney General to pay them restitution under the settlement agreement.

Mr. STEVENS. I thank the Chair, and I thank my good friend from Mississippi for managing the bill for us as we had a distinguished visitor in the Appropriations Committee room. Mr. President, there is a lot of controversy about this bill, but I think this bill represents the best of America. We have reacted to crises abroad and crises in this country. There are items in this bill that are not emergencies. While many people are saying they should not be here because they are not emergencies, they are here because this is a supplemental and an emergency bill. It is a bill that we can all vote for in good conscience, and I hope there will be an overwhelming vote for this. Again, I point out for the Senate that the men and women of the armed services are aware of this bill. It means a great deal to them. It is a symbol of our commitment to the pay raise for which we have already gone on record. It is a symbol that we are going to step forward to modernize the armed services. It is a symbol that we are going to provide the money to assure these people when they are sent overseas, whether it is Kosovo or in the area of Iraq or in South Korea, or in Bosnia--wherever it may be in those 93 countries of the world that the American service men and women are now serving--we are going to stand behind them and give them all the support they need not only for their safety but for their comfort. The passage of this bill will mean that we can now go ahead with the balance of our necessary actions in the Appropriations Committee. We have 13 full bills that come forward. I hope this will be the last supplemental of this year. I join the majority leader in not welcoming supplemental bills. But I know there are times when it is necessary; and this one is necessary. Anyone who looks at our involvement in the world knows that we cannot calculate in advance the costs of events, such as the Kosovo operation, both militarily and in regard to refugees. These were things that came up after we planned expenditures for 1999 in the fall of last year. I urge the Members of the Senate to vote for this bill. I urge that we, as quickly as possible, get it to the President so he can sign it today. I yield back any time I have and ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask for just 2 minutes on this motion to waive. I thank the Senator from New Mexico for making that motion to waive. My point in addressing the Senate now is to inform the Senators that, basically, this point of order deals with the moneys that are in the bill for PL-480 food aid, for refugee assistance, for farm aid, aid for the Wye River, aid to Jordan, for the Central America and Caribbean emergency due to Hurricane Keith, and for the FEMA disasters that have taken place throughout our country. All of those are matters that could not have been contemplated in 1947. We controlled $1.8 trillion on a 2-year period. And the Senator from Texas is objecting to the fact that these events, that have taken place totally unexpectedly, are going to cost $29.6 billion. He is talking about 16 one-hundredths of 1 percent of the total spending that we control. In other words, estimates that were made have been exceeded now because of unforeseen circumstances in Central America, in farm aid, in terms of the assistance to Jordan, in terms of FEMA disasters, and national disasters declared by the President, and have consumed 16 one-hundredths of 1 percent more money than we estimated. He is wrong in talking about the bill for the year 2000. We have not gotten to the year 2000. This does not have any impact on the year 2000 except in terms of defense. It aids us in defense trying to deal with defense matters. These are things that the Budget Act rightfully said there is a time when you can have emergencies, when they are unexpected items that have happened. There are a lot of things in this bill that are not emergencies; they are supplemental; they are supplemental items. We can argue about them, but they are not involved in what the Senator from Texas is doing. An opinion about lumping all those things in the bill is one thing, but to deal with this concept of knocking out the emergency clause is wrong. I hope the Senators will support the motion of the Senator from New Mexico.

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, let's go back to what we are talking about. If a family had a $16,000-a-year income and had a 16 one- hundredths of 1 percent overage in their expenditures that year, they would have to borrow $20. We are talking about 16 one-hundredths of 1 percent in excess of the budget. And it is for items that are emergencies. What family would not borrow $20 to meet an emergency? Is it disaster relief emergency? Yes. Is the Central America-Caribbean expenditure an emergency? Yes. The Wye River accord for Jordan, was that an emergency? Yes. Is farm country in trouble? Is that an emergency? Yes. All we are saying is we are going to deal with that $20 out of $16,000. That is the comparison for an average family. Mr. President, the thing that bothers me most about this is, we have to contemplate change. I will make one statement to you. If the New Madrid Fault that runs through the center of this country suffers an earthquake again--the last time it went off, the church bells rang in Boston because of an earthquake that took place going through the area west of the Mississippi. It changed the Mississippi River. It went backwards. It started a new channel which it has today. Can you imagine the amount of money we would have to have? That is why the Budget Act provides money for emergencies. If the Senator is trying to say you have to have 60 votes to overcome that, now, that is wrong. I hope we have them today, Mr. President. This is an emergency, and this money is needed by the Department of Defense, and the agencies need it. Thank you very much.

Mr. STEVENS. I urge the Senators to take their time starting now. Mr. DORGAN addressed the Chair.

Mr. STEVENS. Does that allocate fully the Senator's 42 minutes?

Mr. STEVENS. Is the Senator reserving some time for himself?

Mr. STEVENS. Please tell us what they are.

Mr. STEVENS. The Senator has 42 minutes, but I will give him 3 of my minutes.

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on the motion to waive.

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the vote take place at 15 minutes after 2, in 7 minutes, and I yield that time until the vote to the Senator from Pennsylvania, Mr. Specter. The vote will take place at 2:15, in 7 minutes.

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I am surprised by some of the items listed in the Senator's statement. This bill is both a supplemental and an emergency appropriations bill. A supplemental appropriations bill that was submitted by the President in March contained a request for $48 million to replace the National Public Radio satellite system. It is in this bill not as an emergency but as a supplemental appropriation. When we passed this bill in March, the Senate version of this bill contained $18 million for the satellite system. That was less than the President's request. The President made that request because the Public Radio system satellite failed and radio programs are currently being sent through an emergency backup satellite that will not be available until around the middle of September, early fall. The supplemental funding was requested by the President and approved by the Senate at the level of $18 million. The House insisted on the full $48 million. It is an item that is not designated as an emergency. There are a series of other misunderstandings, I think, with regard to this bill, and I will be happy to discuss them with the Senator from Arizona later. I don't disagree with him about legislation on appropriations bills. The point of order under the rules that were previously in place against legislation on the appropriations bills was destroyed through a maneuver here on the floor of the Senate before my becoming chairman. We have had a tough time trying to get that put back into our system. I will be happy to help restore the point of order against legislation. I don't look with favor on the omnibus process that occurred last fall and occurred once before I became chairman. But clearly, my job is to carry forward the bills as they come out of the Senate and out of the House and out of the conference by a majority vote. Under the current circumstances, there is not a point of order in the Senate on legislation against appropriations. Mrs. FEINSTEIN addressed the Chair.

Mr. STEVENS. I ask the Senator from West Virginia if we can make a list of who is going to be recognized, because almost all the time is allocated, as I understand it. I yield 5 minutes of my time to the Senator from Virginia, Mr. Warner. I reserve 7 minutes of the time. Can the Senator allocate his time?