J. Thurmond

Mr. THURMOND

Mr. THURMOND. The extent of current and future readiness problems were laid out in stark detail Tuesday morning by the Joint Chiefs of Staff at a hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee. The service Chiefs all testified on the manner in which our current readiness is fraying and the long-term health of the Total Force is in jeopardy. While additional funding in fiscal year 1999 will help address the most pressing short-term concerns, it is imperative that we provide significant continuing increases in funds for modernization above that for additional pay and benefits. The Marine Corps estimates a shortfall of $1.8 billion per year in modernization over the Future Years Defense Program under the current administration projections. The Army estimates an annual $3 to $5 billion per year shortfall during the same period. We must embark on a course of sustained increases in defense investment over the next several years. Mr. President, at the beginning of this Congress, I called for developing a clearer strategic context within which to design an effective, affordable national defense to meet our foreign policy commitments. The need for this clarity has never been greater. With the belated recognition by the President of the need for increased defense resources, we have an opportunity to free the determination of U.S. strategy from being a by-product of the budget process. As I said in February 1997, let us seize the day. We must work in a cooperative, bipartisan fashion to avert a certain military decline. The first step in that process is the rapid and overwhelming approval of this conference report. Exhibit 1 Staff of the Armed Services Committee Charlie Abell, John Barnes, June Borawski, Philip Bridwell, Les Brownlee, Stuart Cain, Monica Chavez, Chris Cowart, Dan Cox, Madelyn Creedon, Rick DeBobes, Marie Fabrizio Dickinson, Katy Donovan, and Shawn Edwards. Jon Etherton, Pamela Farrell, Richard Fieldhouse, Maria Finley, Jan Gordon, Creighton Greene, Gary Hall, Larry Hoag, Melinda Koutsoumpas, Larry Lanzillotta, George Lauffer, Henry Leventis, Peter Levine, and Paul Longsworth. David Lyles, Steve Madey, Mike McCord, Reaves McLeod, John Miller, Ann Mittermeyer, Bert Mizusawa, Cindy Pearson, Sharen Reaves, Cord Sterling, Scott Stucky, Eric Thoemmes, Roslyne Turner, and Banks Willis. Exhibit 2 The White House, Washington, September 22, 1998. Hon. Strom Thurmond, Chairman, Committee on Armed Services, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Chairman: Preserving our military's readiness has been the top priority of my national security program. Since I first took office, increasingly greater shares of our Defense budget have been allocated to ensuring that our armed forces are ready to respond and have the tools to accomplish their mission. Although we have done much to support readiness, more needs to be done. This year alone, important steps have been taken to protect military readiness. For FY 1998, we worked with the Congress to secure both an additional $1 billion in military readiness funds through a budget reprogramming and a $1.85 billion emergency funding package to cover the costs of unanticipated operations in Bosnia and Iraq. For FY 1999, my Administration proposed a Defense budget request that increased funding for personnel and operations programs over the 1998 appropriated levels and a $1.9 billion emergency budget amendment to fund the ongoing peacekeeping operations in Bosnia. Passage of this emergency funding is critical to avoid a readiness crisis in the fiscal year that begins on October 1. I strongly urge the Congress to approve these requests. We also have done a lot on our own to address the burden on our men and women who have been deployed at higher than anticipated rates. We established standards for deploying units and intensively manage the force to minimize the possibility that units exceed these standards. We cut Air Force temporary duty assignments in half. And we are cutting back, by 25 percent over the course of five years, the total number of exercise days. Additionally, we reduced or replaced some overseas deployments with units on stand-by in the United States. My Administration has sought ways to get a greater readiness return from each dollar spent implementing better management practices, cutting overhead, and reducing base infrastructure. Working together, we can identify methods for eliminating wasteful spending. I need your help in addressing these objectives if we are to ensure that our men and women in uniform receive the best training and equipment possible in the most cost effective manner. They deserve no less. I recently met with Secretary Cohen and the Commanders-in- Chief of our U.S.-based and overseas forces to receive a status report of the units under their command. As always, the dedication of our civilian and military leaders to the troops' well being was clearly evident in their reports. I was particularly satisfied to hear that our forces are capable of carrying out our national military strategy and meeting America's defense commitments around the globe. They are, in the words of the Chiefs, the best-trained and best- equipped forces in the world. Notwithstanding this assessment of our overall posture, the Secretary and the Chiefs identified several concerns that must be addressed to sustain high military readiness levels. To address our readiness needs, I believe several steps are in order: 1. We must act now to provide additional resources in FY 1999 for operations and personnel programs important to military readiness. This includes resources to minimize shortfalls in certain critical spare parts, Navy manpower, and Army unit training activities. I have asked key officials of my Administration to work together over the coming days to develop a fully offset $1 billion funding package for these readiness programs. 2. I have instructed the Office of Management and Budget and the National Security Council to establish with Secretary Cohen and General Shelton a separate process within the context of the FY 2000 joint budget review that will examine the longer-term military readiness issues raised at my meeting with the CINCs. Meeting this challenge will require a multi-year plan with the necessary resources to preserve military readiness, support our troops, and modernize the equipment needed for the next century. I anticipate this examination will result in a series of budget and policy proposals for the FY 2000 Defense budget and the Future Years Defense Program. Our challenge is to strike a balance between providing sufficient resources for military readiness while maintaining fiscal discipline and appropriate funding levels for other investments necessary to sustain a growing economy. The security of the nation depends on our military forces' ability to quickly, effectively, and successfully prosecute their mission. Ensuring that these forces are trained and ready is a priority upon which we all can agree. Sincerely, Bill Clinton. Mr. LEVIN addressed the Chair.

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I want to thank the leadership of the Senate for their cooperation and support in bringing this conference report to the floor for approval of the Senate. The bipartisan support of both the majority and the minority leaders is critical to successful passage of the conference report of such magnitude. The majority leader, Senator Lott, a former member of our committee, recognizes the importance of this bill and has always given his full support and assistance in passing a bill of this nature. I thank him for his time and support and all he has done in this respect. I extend my appreciation to the leadership staff and the floor staff for their assistance which is essential to passing this large, complex bill. In that connection, Mr. President, I wish to especially commend Les Brownlee, staff director of the Armed Services Committee. He has rendered yeoman service to this committee, and I can't say enough in support of all he has done. George Lauffer, the deputy staff director, has also been most faithful and has done an outstanding job. We appreciate that and thank him for what he has done in this connection. I also wish to thank David Lyles on the other side, and those who worked with him, for their fine cooperation and support. They have been most cooperative and have rendered a great service. Mr. President, we appreciate the work of two House Members. We thank Floyd Spence, who happens to be from my State, for handling the House bill. He is an outstanding gentleman of character and ability, and I thank him for all he has done in cooperating with us on the defense legislation. Ike Skelton, a Democrat, who works with Congressman Spence, has also been cooperative and helpful, and I express my appreciation to him, too. I yield the floor.

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, today the Senate considers the conference report to accompany the Strom Thurmond National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999. I want to thank all the members of the conference committee for their hard work and cooperation. To give the Members of the Senate some insight into the complexity and magnitude of the work involved in the conference process, we had to reconcile nearly 1,000 funding differences and craft compromises for over 570 legislative issues in disagreement between the House and Senate bills. The conferees succeeded in settling the many difficult issues in this complex process only by putting the national interest above all others. I particularly want to thank Senator Levin, the ranking member of our committee, for his continued leadership and support. I also want to acknowledge the contributions of Senator Coats, Senator Kempthorne, and Senator Glenn. This is their last defense authorization bill. On behalf of the committee and the Senate, I wish to thank them again for their dedication to the national security of our country and their support for the young men and women who serve in our armed services. We will miss their valuable counsel next year. Mr. President, I also want to acknowledge the contribution of the staff of the Senate Armed Services Committee in bringing our conference process to closure. We on the committee are very proud of our staff. They are a model of bipartisan competence and everyone in this body is indebted to them for their dedication to excellence. I ask unanimous consent that a list of the members of the staff be printed in the Record following my remarks.

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

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

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the time for the quorum call be charged equally to both sides.

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I also wish to recognize the members and staff of the Senate Defense Appropriations Subcommittee. We have worked more closely together this year than ever before. I want to express on behalf of the Armed Services Committee our appreciation to Chairman Stevens and to the members and staff of the Defense Subcommittee for their cooperation and support. Working together, we have produced a bill which keeps the Department of Defense on a steady course and is consistent with the balanced budget agreement. It is a sound bipartisan approach to some very difficult policy issues. This is reflected in the fact that for the first time in memory, all of the conferees in both committees have signed the conference report. This bill sends a strong signal to our men and women in uniform and their families that we are fully committed to supporting them as they perform their dangerous missions around the world. The conference report addresses three challenges to maintaining a strong national defense in the 21st century: the training and readiness of our military forces, the modernization of weapon systems and other defense equipment, and the preservation of quality of life programs for our military personnel and their families. The conference report, for example, authorizes funding of increases to a number of readiness accounts totaling nearly $1 billion above the administration request. We have also authorized the construction of six new ships, increased the procurement of new tactical aircraft, and provided an increase of approximately $90 million for advanced space systems and technologies as well as an increase of about $132 million for strategic force upgrades. In the conference, we have authorized a 3.6-percent pay raise and a comprehensive series of accession and retention bonuses and special pay to reduce the financial sacrifices involved with military service. In order to enhance the quality of life for our service personnel and their families, we have authorized increases totaling $666 million above the request for military construction and family housing. The conferees have also crafted a number of management initiatives to ensure that limited budgets are managed more efficiently and that the burdens of service for our men and women in uniform are kept to a reasonable level. The bill includes provisions to ensure that commercial sole-source spare parts are procured in a cost-effective manner. The conference report authorizes a series of initiatives to test new health care benefits for Medicare-eligible military retirees. The bill also requires the Department of Defense to address the Year 2000 information technology issues in a more comprehensive fashion. Mr. President, this conference report is a sound and balanced approach to meeting our national security needs with constrained resources. It is my hope that the Senate will vote to adopt the report overwhelmingly. This is the 40th defense authorization conference report on which I have worked since joining the Armed Services Committee in 1959. It is the fourth and last as chairman of the committee as I have announced my intention to step down as chairman at the end of this year while retaining my seat on the committee. I regard my work on the committee to ensure a strong national defense as among the most important accompishments of my public service. My tenure as chairman over the last 4 years has been the culmination of that service. Words cannot express the pride and appreciation I feel for the honor my colleagues have bestowed by designating this authorization bill as the Strom Thurmond National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999. Looking back over the national security issues that have challenged the United States over the past 40 years and turning forward to the 21st century, I am very concerned about maintaining our ability to meet foreign policy ambitions with declining defense resources. If we do not change course soon, present and projected defense investment levels will expose the people of the United States to unacceptable levels of risk. We will have abdicated our fundamental responsibility to provide for a strong common defense. We are in the midst of a period of unprecedented commitment of U.S. military forces in peacetime. The United States is using military forces to respond to a growing spectrum of international aggression, ethnic unrest, and domestic conflict. The operational tempo of each of our services is at an all time high as we respond in a sustained manner to crises in Africa, the Persian Gulf, and the Balkans. As we struggle with supporting these operational deployments, the backlog of modernization and real property upgrades continues to climb. Moreover, the imperative of maintaining our defense technological superiority over the next 10 to 15 years will soon generate a further requirement for substantial new investment. Yet our defense spending is declining. The authorization for new budget authority in this conference report is $270.5 billion, which is $2.6 billion below the inflation-adjusted level for fiscal year 1998. We are currently spending barely more than 3 percent of our gross domestic product on defense. This level is consistent with defense spending during the Depression-ridden 1930's. That level is projected to decline even further to 2.6 percent by 2002. We cannot hope to meet increasing foreign policy commitments with such declining resources. We are already seeing the effects of this mismatch of resources and commitments. The Chiefs of the military services indicate that they have now hit rock bottom in readiness and modernization. We are seeing increasing spare parts shortages, increased cannibalization, declining unit operational readiness rates, cross-decking of critical weapons, equipment and personnel. Personnel retention rates--especially for skilled personnel such as pilots--are in a steep decline. These trends have been evident for the last several years. The leadership in the military services, distinguished observers in the defense community, such as former Secretary of Defense Schlesinger, and even the political leaders in the Department of Defense have been sounding warnings of increasing peril for our national security. Now even the President has been forced by the mounting evidence to recognize the impact of underfunded administration requests and to call for an immediate increase in defense spending. In a letter to me last week, the President called for a series of steps to redress defense underfunding, including an increase of $1 billion in fiscal year 1999 and a process for revising the programmed spending in the future years defense plan. I commend the President for this proposal and look forward to working with the administration to make it a reality. I ask that the full text of the President's letter be printed in the Record at the end of my statement.

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

Mr. THURMOND

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I wish to thank the able Senator from North Dakota for his kind remarks and commend him for the great service that he has rendered to the Senate during his tenure. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on this defense bill.

Mr. THURMOND

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, earlier today, my good friend, the junior Senator from Arizona, Senator Kyl, entered into a colloquy with Senator Warner and others regarding the tritium provisions included in the Defense authorization conference report. Senator Kyl later made a statement about the agreement we negotiated in conference on the tritium issue. While I appreciated the kind words he said about me, I was somewhat surprised by some of his comments made about the tritium agreement we negotiated in conference. I'm reminded of something my old friend, Will Rogers used to say, ``It's not what he don't know that bothers me, it's what he knows so well, that ain't so.'' I want to take this opportunity to clarify what the conference agreement actually does. The tritium provision included in this bill will not cause any meaningful delay in the resumption of tritium production. Let me repeat that so all of my colleagues are clear about this point--our conference provision on tritium does not cause any meaningful delay in the Department of Energy's tritium production program. Energy Secretary Richardson stated this fact in a letter dated September 24, 1998, in which he said that the conference provision will have a ``minimal impact'' on DOE's tritium program. Just so all Senators will understand the compromise agreement we made on the tritium issue, I want to take a few moments to explain it. First and foremost, we require the Secretary of Energy to select his preferred technology on time, in December of this year. Second, the Department of Energy is prohibited from spending only about 5 percent of the overall tritium program budget in fiscal year 1999. The conference agreement does not, however, limit the DOE from spending funds for design, research, or demonstration activities. These design, research, and demonstration activities account for approximately 95 percent of the program that DOE presented to Congress this year, which the Congress authorized. Thus, virtually all of those activities which the Department intended to conduct in fiscal year 1999 are authorized to be conducted by the conference agreement and the conferees expect the Secretary to complete those activities in fiscal year 1999. This includes much of the work to be conducted on the tritium extraction facility, which would be constructed regardless of which technology were selected by the Secretary. Third, and most importantly, we require the Secretary of Energy to submit a comprehensive plan in January, 1999--just 20 days after he makes his preferred technology selection-- on how tritium production will be restored. Such a plan does not exist currently, nor has one been proposed by the administration. This comprehensive implementation plan goes to the very issue raised by the Senator from Arizona. So I hope all Senators can readily see that we managed to achieve a compromise on this very difficult issue, with virtually no adverse impact on the tritium program, while avoiding a veto threat, and satisfying most of the desires of most members. This is a very strong bipartisan bill. Every member of the conference committee--both Democrats and Republicans--have indicated their strong support the conference agreement by signing the conference report, which as many of my colleagues know has not happened in many years. This is a good conference report and it should be passed with unanimous support.

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, as the Senate takes up the conference report on the national defense authorization bill, it brings to an end a process that began in February with the introduction of the President's defense budget by Secretary Cohen. During the intervening months, the committee conducted more than 50 hearings which identified the declining readiness status of our military. In response, the committee formulated a bill that addressed these issues and garnered the support of both the civilian and military leadership of the Department of Defense. The committee completed the markup of the defense bill in mid-May. However, due to the intervening debate on the tobacco bill, the Senate took more than four weeks to complete action on the bill. Although the floor debate was protracted, I want to thank my colleagues for their overwhelming 88 to 4 vote in favor of the bill, and for their contributions during the floor debate. The Senate's strong support of the bill was a key factor during the difficult conference with the House. When we began the conference to resolve the differences between the House and Senate bills, we faced a veto threat on four provisions. I am pleased to report that we were able to mitigate each of these objections. At this point, I am not aware of any remaining veto issues, and expect that the President will sign this bill. Mr. President, tomorrow prior to the vote on final passage, Senator Levin and I will provide specific details on the conference report. Suffice it to say that this is a very good bill and contains vital provisions necessary for the security of our nation. However, like all compromise bills it does not please everyone and, unfortunately, one Senator has objected to provisions in the bill and delayed action on the report despite the fact that all members of the Senate Armed Services Committee and the House National Security Committee signed the conference report and despite the fact that the House passed the bill by a vote of 373 to 50. I am disappointed that it took until today to get the report to the floor, but am certain that the Senate will show its strong support for the bill when we vote tomorrow. Mr. President, I want to emphasize again that this is a sound bill. It provides the best possible outcome for our national security while complying with the guidelines established in the balanced budget agreement. I recommend the conference report on the national defense authorization bill for fiscal year 1999 to the Senate and urge its adoption.

Mr. THURMOND

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, on behalf of the leader, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to the consideration of the conference report to accompany H.R. 3616, the Department of Defense authorization bill. I further ask unanimous consent that following any debate today in relation to the conference report, the conference report be temporarily set aside. I further ask that at 9 a.m. on Thursday, the Senate resume consideration of the conference report and there be an additional 3 hours for debate divided as follows: 1 hour equally divided between the majority and minority managers, 1\1/2\ hours under the control of Senator Ford, 30 minutes under the control of Senator Thompson. I further ask unanimous consent that at 12 noon on Thursday the Senate proceed to a vote on adoption of the conference report with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. THURMOND

Mr. THURMOND. Madam President, I rise today in support of cloture on S. 2176, the Federal Vacancies Reform Act. This legislation should be entirely nonpartisan because it is essential to the advice and consent role of the Senate. Recent Administrations, both Republican and Democrat, have failed to send nominations to the Senate in a timely manner. Instead, they have appointed people to serve in an acting capacity for long periods of time without seeking confirmation. This is a matter of great significance. One of the primary fears of the Founders was the accumulation of too much power in one source, and the separation of powers among the three branches of government is one of the keys to the success of our great democratic government. An excellent example of the separation of powers is the requirement in Article 2, Section 2 of the Constitution that the President receive the advice and consent of the Senate for the appointment of officers of the United States. As Chief Justice Rehnquist wrote for the Supreme Court a few years ago, ``The Clause is a bulwark against one branch aggrandizing its power at the expense of another branch.'' The Vacancies Act is central to the Appointments Clause because it places limits on the amount of time that the President can appoint someone to an advice and consent position in an acting capacity without sending a nomination to the Senate. For too many years, the Executive Branch has failed to comply with the letter or the spirit of the law. I raised this issue for the first time this Congress in April of last year at a Justice Department oversight hearing. At the time, almost all of the top positions at the Justice Department were being filled in an acting capacity. They included the Associate Attorney General, Solicitor General, Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights, Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division, and Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel. President Clinton allowed the Criminal Division of the Justice Department to languish for over two and one half years before submitting a nomination. The government had an Acting Solicitor General for an entire term of the Supreme Court. Most recently, the President installed Bill Lann Lee as Acting Chief of the Civil Rights Division in blatant disregard of the Judiciary Committee's decision not to support his controversial choice. Mr. Lee has been serving as Acting Chief for ten months, and the President apparently has no intentions of nominating someone the Judiciary Committee can support. Let me be clear. The issue is not about any one President or any one nominee. It is about preserving the institutional role of the Senate. A Republican President has no more right to ignore the appointments process than a Democrat President. I responded to this problem by introducing a resolution about one year ago. However, I soon realized that a total rewrite of the Vacancies Act with an enforcement mechanism would be required to force the Executive Branch to follow the law in this area. Thus, earlier this year, I sponsored a bill on behalf of myself and the Majority Leader to rewrite the law regarding vacancies. Today, I am pleased today to be an original cosponsor of S. 2176, the bill that we are debating today. It contains the two primary objectives that I outlined when I testified before the Governmental Affairs Committee earlier this year: the need to totally redraft the Vacancies Act and to provide a mechanism for enforcement. Senator Thompson has done a fine job in drafting S. 2176 and in shepherding it through the Governmental Affairs Committee. He has worked hard to create a bipartisan consensus for this legislation. In that regard, I am pleased that my distinguished colleague who is an expert on the institution of the Senate, Senator Byrd, is an original cosponsor of this legislation. S. 2176 would correct the Attorney General's misguided interpretation of the current Vacancies Act. In fact, she practically interprets the Act out of existence. Based on various letters to me, it is clear that if her interpretation were correct, no department of the Federal government would be bound by the Vacancies Act. There would be no limitation on the amount of time someone could serve in an acting capacity. There would be no limitation on how long the advice and consent role of the Senate could be ignored. Additionally, the bill has an enforcement mechanism, while the current law has none. Because there is no consequence if the Vacancies Act is violated today, the Executive Branch simply ignores it. This change is essential for the Act to be followed in the future. The bill provides that the actions of any person serving in violation of the Vacancies Act are null and void, until a nominee is forwarded. There can be no argument that this will paralyze an office because the President can make the office active by simply forwarding a nomination. It is also important to note that the bill gives the President an extra 30 days to submit a nomination. It extends the time from 120 days to 150 days, with even more time at the start of the administration. These were concessions to the Executive Branch. Indeed, the bill overall makes no more change than necessary in the Vacancies Act to make sure it will be followed in the future. The question before us is cloture on S. 2176. We should invoke cloture now and move to any amendments that members wish to propose. Cloture on the motion to proceed was easily invoked last week in a completely bipartisan vote, and I hope we can get a similar consensus today. Madam President, we must act in a bipartisan fashion to preserve the advice and consent role of the Senate. We must require any administration in power, whether Democrat or Republican, to respect this Constitutional role of the Senate. As the Supreme Court has stated, ``The structural interests protected by the Appointments Clause are not those of any one branch of Government but of the entire Republic.'' By passing the Vacancies Reform Act, we can reaffirm the separation of powers for the sake of the Senate and the entire Republic. Madam President, I yield the floor.

Mr. THURMOND

Mr. THURMOND. Madam President, from the Committee on Armed Services, I report favorably the attached listing of nominations which were printed in full in the Records of July 22, 1998, July 30, 1998, September 2 1998, September 3, 1998, September 10, 1998, September 11, 1998 and September 14, 1998, and ask unanimous consent, to save the expense of printing on the Executive Calendar, that these nominations lie at the Secretary's desk for the information of Senators.

Mr. THURMOND

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I am a cosponsor of this amendment. I believe that it is a very important amendment. Other countries are going forward and developing missile systems. Can we afford not to do it? For the sake of our people and the sake of this Nation, we should seize this opportunity to go forward on this matter promptly. It is in the interest of our Nation and the people of this country that we take that step. I thank the Senator, very much, for yielding to me. Mr. COCHRAN addressed the Chair.

Mr. THURMOND

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I rise today in support of cloture on the motion to proceed to S.1301, the Consumer Bankruptcy Reform Act, which will be voted on later today. This legislation is urgently needed to address abuses of our bankruptcy laws and help make sure bankruptcy is reserved for those who truly need it. We have had Federal bankruptcy laws for 100 years, and no one disputes that some people must file for bankruptcy. Some people fall on hard times and have financial problems that dwarf their financial means. They need to have the debts that they cannot pay forgiven under chapter 7. However, other people who file for bankruptcy have assets or have the ability to repay their debts over time. These people should reorganize their debts under chapter 13. Bankruptcy should not be an avenue for someone to avoid paying their debts when they have the ability to do so. People should pay what they can. Unfortunately, too many people today who file for bankruptcy choose to discharge their debts rather than reorganize them and pay what they can. The reason may be because filing for bankruptcy does not have the moral stigma it once had. It may be because the person needs to be educated on how to better manage their money. Maybe attorneys do not encourage enough people to reorganize their debts. Whatever the reason, it is a big problem today. The problem is becoming more serious because more and more people are filing for bankruptcy every year. In fact, more Americans filed for bankruptcy last year than ever before, about 1.35 million people. S.1301 addresses the issue by making it easier for judges to transfer cases from chapter 7 discharge to chapter 13 reorganization, based on the income of the debtor and other factors. The bill permits creditors to be involved if they believe the debtor has the ability to repay. However, if a creditor abuses that power and brings such motions without substantial justification, the creditor is penalized. Also, the legislation places more responsibility on attorneys to steer individuals toward paying what they can. The bill makes reforms without jeopardizing the truly needy. For example, the bill has special provisions to protect mothers who depend on child support by making these payments the top priority for payment in bankruptcy. Mr. President, it is too easy to file for bankruptcy. It is too easy to get the slate wiped clean. We recognize that some people need a fresh start. But a fresh start should not mean a free ride. We must stop this type of abuse. It is important to note that we are only attempting to proceed to the bill. It is only appropriate that we consider this legislation on the merits this year. Under the outstanding leadership of Senator Grassley, we held numerous hearings during this Congress in the Judiciary Committee on bankruptcy and on this bill in particular. We have considered and debated this legislation at the subcommittee and full committee, where it was reported out on a bipartisan vote of 16 to 2. Much work has been invested in this complex issue, and it would be a mistake not to act on this important reform proposal this year. It deserves our consideration and our support. I yield the floor.

Mr. THURMOND

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, last Thursday the Armed Services and foreign Relations Committees held a joint hearing to hear testimony from a courageous and dedicated American--Major Scott Ritter. Major Ritter began his opening statement by saying, Last week I resigned my position with UNSCOM out of frustration because the U.N. Security Council, and the United States, as its most significant supporter, were failing to enforce the post-Gulf War resolutions designed to disarm Iraq. I sincerely hope that my actions might help to change things . . . For nearly three hours, Major Ritter responded to Senators' questions, describing how U.S. policies in support of United Nations Security Council resolutions were not being honestly implemented. He also expressed his views regarding the dangers associated with Iraq's continuing pursuit of weapons of mass destruction and how this Nation's victory in the Persian Gulf war was being squandered. Major Ritter served as an intelligence officer in the Marine Corps during the Persian Gulf War to liberate Kuwait from Iraq. He became a United Nations inspector in 1991 and acted under international law created by the United States and the United Nations. His job as an inspector was to plan and conduct inspections to eliminate illegal weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Major Ritter was deeply dedicated to his duties. He explained that his duty as a weapons inspector represented a vital continuation of what many Americans had fought and died for during the Gulf War. Finding and destroying these dangerous weapons is critically important to the United States and our allies. These weapons of mass destruction could one day be used again by Saddam Hussein to attack his neighbors, dominate the region and threaten vital interests of the United States. Major Ritter was dedicated to reducing the threat from such weapons. He earned a reputation as a tough, demanding inspector. Saddam Hussein feared his perseverance and tried to get him removed from UNSCOM and Iraq. I regret that he has resigned. I felt better knowing Major Ritter was on the job. However, Major Ritter found that he was repeatedly and systematically hindered from performing his duties. The very laws he was asked to enforce were not now being supported by the U.N. Security Council nor his own government. Major Ritter's resignation from his position as an UNSCOM inspector was a selfless and patriotic act. However, his resignation and the reason for his resignation deserve our immediate attention and action. I hope that his personal sacrifice will spur the Congress and the Administration to act with the same courage and urgency as Major Ritter. During the hearing, Major Ritter was asked all the most difficult questions to challenge his judgment and veracity. His challengers were unsuccessful. He simply told the truth, and the truth is a National embarrassment. Although Major Ritter had the courtesy not to say it, his message was clear. ``Congress, I have done my job. It is now time to do yours.'' Our job in Congress requires the same courage Major Ritter displayed last week and for the past nine years as a weapons inspector for the United Nations. I am deeply disappointed that such a brave and bright young American was forced into choosing to resign from his duties because of his principles. His actions clearly send us a message. ``This Nation's actions must be consistent with its policies.'' I believe that our Nation and the world are far less safe as a result of Saddam Hussein's programs of weapons of mass destruction. We must insist that UNSCOM be allowed to do its job. We in government must say what we mean, and do as we say. We have not been doing this recently in our foreign and national defense policies. Mr. President, it is now Congress' responsibility to ensure that this happens. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. THURMOND

Mr. THURMOND. The Senator from Connecticut, who has just made some remarks, is one of the finest and ablest Members of this body. For as long as he has been in the Senate, and the longer I have dealt with him, I am more impressed with him. He is a member of the opposite party from me, but we can't go by party in deciding the merits of a man. We have to decide his own qualities. The Senator from Connecticut has impressed me as having the right qualities, which we all could emulate. Mr. HATCH addressed the Chair.

Mr. THURMOND

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I am speechless. I can't thank enough the Members of the Senate for their kind words--Senator Lott, the majority leader; Senator Daschle, the minority leader, Senator Byrd, Senator Biden, Senator Conrad, Senator Wellstone, Senator Hollings, Senator Coats, and Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison. I will not take time now to say much. I just want to express my appreciation to all of them for their kind words. I have been in the Senate now for 44 years, and I have never known or served with finer people than we have here. I have cast my 15,000th vote. The quality of the people in this body is just outstanding, and I wish all of them to stay here until they could cast 15,000 votes. It is an experience to be in this body that one will never forget. As time goes by I think we appreciate more and more the Members of this body, what they stand for, and their outstanding service. Again, I thank all of them for their kind words. I thank all of you for listening, and I deeply appreciate everything that you have done for me and to help me. After all, inspiration is one of the finest qualities, and you people here have inspired me, and I hope I have been able to be of some inspiration to you. Good luck and God bless all of you. (Applause, Senators rising.) Mr. McCONNELL addressed the Chair.

Mr. THURMOND

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, a few hundred miles south of here, stands Fort Bragg, a sprawling military installation that is the home of the 82nd Airborne Division, and where thousands of paratroopers are ready to go anywhere in the world, ``stand in the door'', and jump into harm's way in order to protect the national security and vital interests of the United States. Today, I am pleased to remind my colleagues that August 16, 1998 has been designated ``National Airborne Day'' as a way to honor all those who have worn the winged parachute badge on their uniform. Though the concept of using airborne troops in warfare is only a little more than fifty years old, the versatility and effectiveness of these forces is above question. In particular, ``America's Guard of Honor'', the 82nd Airborne Division, has established an especially proud record over the past five decades. During World War II, the paratroopers of the 82nd Airborne Division participated in the campaigns of Anzio, Normandy--where I landed with the 325th Glider Infantry Regiment--, and the Battle of the Bulge. In the years that have passed since the surrender of the Axis powers, the 82nd Airborne Division has been involved in almost every major military operation undertaken by the United States. Among other places, paratroopers have deployed to the Dominican Republic; Vietnam; Grenada; Panama; and Southwest Asia in order to protect the security, interests, and citizens of the United States. In each and every instance, those who wear the ``Double AA'' patch on their shoulder have distinguished themselves as brave soldiers, determined warriors, and great Americans. Mr. President, we are indeed fortunate to have the 82nd Airborne Division as an integral part of the United States Army. That the paratroopers of the 82nd are ready to deploy anywhere in the world with just a few hours notice is testament to the bravery, professionalism, and patriotism of these soldiers. I think it is only fitting that we honor all those who have ever served in the 82nd Airborne Division, or who have ever worn the parachutist badge, by remembering them on August 16, ``National Airborne Day''. This is a small, but worthy, way to recognize the contributions that the Airborne Soldiers of our Army have made to keeping the United States free and safe.

Mr. THURMOND

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, even those who possess essentially no knowledge of military affairs or military history understand the significance of the green beret worn by those who serve in the United States Army Special Forces, as well as what that headgear indicates about the soldier wearing it. Established in the early days of the cold war, the Green Berets were intended to be a versatile, unconventional force that could do everything from serve as instructors and advisors to carryout both humanitarian and direct action missions. Over the past almost fifty years, those who have served in the Special Forces have established a well deserved and well respected reputation for bravery, dedication to duty, and patriotism. There is ample reason that so many people, not only in the United States but throughout the world, know just how special an individual the man who wears the Green Beret is. Today, I rise to pay tribute to one of those men. Major Preston Johnson, who has left his assignment at the Special Operations Command Office of Legislative Affairs to attend the Marine Corps Command and General Staff College. Major Johnson began his military career the tough way, by enlisting in the United States Army following his 1985 graduation from Rice University. His ability and leadership skills were obviously apparent from his early days in the Army as a recruit going through basic training, as he was selected to attend Officer Candidate School. A little more than one year after graduating from basic training, Preston Johnson pinned on the gold bar of a Second Lieutenant and the crossed rifles brass of the Infantry and began what has been a career dedicated to not only the Army, but to special operations. Over the past thirteen years Preston Johnson has accumulated a resume of impeccable credentials in Army special operations. He began his career as an Infantryman in the 3rd Ranger Battalion, in Fort Benning, Georgia, and continued it after OCS as both a Rifle Platoon Leader and Long Range Reconnaissance Platoon leader in Fort Lewis, Washington where he served with the 2nd Battalion/47th Infantry and the 1st Squadron/9th US Cavalry. The Rangers are well known for their toughness, expertise in small unit tactics, and for an impressive record in battle. Certainly, the lessons Preston Johnson learned when he wore the black beret of the Regiment served him well not only as an Infantryman in the deep woods of Fort Lewis, but when he volunteered for Special Forces training in 1990 and in the years he has served in the Green Berets as well. Over the past eight-years Preston Johnson has held a number of assignments in the Special Forces that have led him around the world and have included serving as: Detachment Commander of Special Forces Operational Detachment A-363 in the 3rd Special Forces Group (Airborne); Company Commander of the Special Forces Selection and Assessment Company; Aide-de-Camp to Major General William Garrison, the Commanding General of the John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School; and as the Battalion Operations Officer of the 2nd Battalion, 1st Special Warfare Training Group (Airborne). Additionally, he has earned recognitions that reflect that Major Johnson is truly a member of one of the nation's most elite military forces. Of course, many of us know him from his last assignment with the Special Operations Command Office of Legislative Affairs, where he has worked hard, especially with members of the Senate Armed Services Committee, to assist us with our efforts to create a military force capable of meeting the security challenges of the post-Cold War era. If we are going to protect the citizens, borders, and interests of our nation, we must be prepared to counter possible threats that include nuclear, biological and chemical warfare; ethnic warfare; intranational warefare; and, regional conflicts. Furthermore, we must build strong bilateral ties with the militaries of other nations, and there is no question that we will have to rely increasingly upon those who serve in special operations units to meet these goals. The skills and unique capabilities the special operations community possess will be invaluable in ensuring that the United States enjoys peace and stability into the 21st Century. On almost every continent around the world, members of the United States Special Operations Command are carrying out missions that help to protect American security and vital national interests. They operate in a world that requires that they rarely acknowledge their purpose, and they almost never receive credit for a job well done. Recognition, however, is not what motivates these ``quiet professionals'', and we are indeed fortunate to have such selfless individuals who are willing to serve our nation and make the sacrifices they do. Major Johnson is an excellent example of the caliber of individual who volunteers for a career in special operations. He has represented the Special Operations Command well on Capitol Hill and I have every confidence that he will continue to distinguish himself in the years to come.

Mr. THURMOND

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to a man who was a friend, a leading businessman, and one of the most public spirited South Carolinians I have ever had the honor to know, Buck Mickel, who passed away last week. Buck is best known and remembered for his leadership of the Fluor Corporation, one of the leading construction companies in the world. Buck began his career with Daniel Construction Company, which would later merge with Fluor, in 1948 and he very quickly began his climb up the corporate ladder. By the beginning of 1965, he was elected President and General Manager, and in 1974, he was elected as Chairman of the Board, a position he retained until he retired in 1987. Not surprisingly, a businessman who possessed the talents Buck did was respected and admired throughout the corporate community. As a result, he was asked to participate in many different ventures. He held more than twenty directorships and served on numerous boards. He was recognized with honors that included being named the 1983 ``Businessman of the Year'' by the South Carolina Chamber of Commerce, and being inducted into the South Carolina Business Hall of Fame. In his role as a corporate executive, Buck certainly helped to make significant contributions to South Carolina by creating jobs and generating revenues for the Palmetto State, but his efforts to benefit our home state went far beyond what he was able to accomplish as a businessman. Buck was a tireless and enthusiastic advocate for education, and served as a life trustee of both my alma mater Clemson University, and of Converse College, as well as on the boards of the Georgia Institute of Technology, Furman University, Presbyterian College, and Wofford College. Furthermore, he was a member of the Advisory Boards of the South Carolina Foundation of Independent Colleges, the University of South Carolina Business School, and the National Advisory Council. His efforts to promote higher education in South Carolina not only earned him the respect and admiration of citizens, educators, and government officials, but helped to create a better education system in the Palmetto State. Buck's sense of service certainly must have been instilled in him at a very young age as he served in the United States Merchant Marine during World War II, and then in the Army during the Korean War. This desire to contribute continued throughout his life and manifested itself in many ways, including his commitment to education, and through his philanthropic actions, both as a private citizen and as the Chairman of the Daniel/Mickel Foundation. On a more personal note, Buck was a devoted friend and supporter who was always ready to help me however he could. He served as an officer on several of my re-election campaigns and played an important role in helping to get the Strom Thurmond Institute built at Clemson University. Mr. President, it is never easy to summarize the accomplishments of a man such as Buck Mickel who has given so much of himself and achieved so much. That he passed at such a young age only compounds the sadness all who knew him feel at his death, but we all take consolation in the fact that he leaves behind an enviable record of successes as a businessman and of helping others. My condolences go out to his widow, Minor Herndon Mickel; their children Minor Shaw, Buck, and Charles; as well as their five grandchildren. They can be proud of the work their husband, father, and grand-father did, as well as the reputation he leaves behind.

Mr. THURMOND

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I am pleased to submit today a Senate Resolution which authorizes and requests the President to designate the week beginning September 20, 1998, as ``National Historically Black Colleges and Universities Week.'' It is my privilege to sponsor this legislation for the thirteenth time honoring the Historically Black Colleges of our Country. Eight of the 104 Historically Black Colleges, namely Allen University, Benedict College, Claflin College, South Carolina State University, Morris College, Voorhees College, Denmark Technical College, and Clinton Junior College, are located in my home State. These colleges are vital to the higher education system of South Carolina. They have provided thousands of economically disadvantaged young people with the opportunity to obtain a college education. Mr. President, thousands of young Americans have received quality educations at these 104 schools. These institutions have a long and distinguished history of providing the training necessary for participation in a rapidly changing society. Historically Black Colleges offer our citizens a variety of curricula and programs through which young people develop skills and talents, thereby expanding opportunities for continued social progress. Mr. President, through passage of this Senate Resolution, Congress can reaffirm its support for Historically Black Colleges, and appropriately recognize their important contributions to our Nation. I look forward to the speedy passage of this Resolution.

Mr. THURMOND

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, today I introduce, along with Senator Hollings, a bill which will suspend the duty imposed on certain textured rolled glass sheets. Currently, this glass is not manufactured in the United States nor is a substitute readily available. Therefore, suspending the duty on this item would not adversely affect domestic industries. I hope the Senate will consider this measure expeditiously. I ask unanimous consent that the text of this bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. THURMOND

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, for the Committee on Armed Services, I report favorably 18 nomination lists in the Air Force, Army, Marine Corps, and Navy which were printed in full in the Congressional Record of May 22, June 15, July 7, and July 17, and ask unanimous consent, to save the expense of reprinting on the Executive Calendar, that these nominations lie at the Secretary's desk for the information of Senators.