J. Thurmond

Mr. THURMOND

Mr. THURMOND. I ask unanimous consent the remaining time not be charged to Senator Levin or to me.

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I commend Senator Roberts for his excellent remarks on this subject. He is a new member of the Armed Services Committee, and he has done a magnificent job. As chairman, I want to let him know that we appreciate all he has done for defense since he has been on that committee.

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, the House of Representatives has already passed this bill by a veto-proof majority of 286 to 123. The leaders of the Defense Department have indicated that they can make this compromise work and that they need this bill passed. It is hard for me to believe that any Senator would oppose the entire Defense authorization bill at a time when American troops are deployed in Bosnia and serious trouble appears to be brewing again in Iraq. I strongly encourage all Senators to vote for this bill. We must send a strong signal to the White House to demonstrate to the President that this bill which is so important to our national security should be signed. We must show the young men and women in uniform serving our Nation around the world, men and women many of whom will spend yet another Thanksgiving and Christmas holiday season away from home in service to their Nation, that we are strongly behind them. Mr. President, I might add that the conference report is the outcome of a great deal of hard work by Members and staff. I want to especially thank staff on both sides for all that they did to promote this bill. I am confident that without their good work we couldn't have brought to the floor such an outstanding bill. I want to commend Les Brownlee and David Lyles for the excellent work, and other members of the staff who cooperated with them. Mr. President, I yield the floor. Exhibit 1 The Military Coalition Alexandria, VA, October 30, 1997. Hon. Strom Thurmond, Chairman, Committee on Armed Services, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Chairman: The Military Coalition, a consortium of nationally prominent military and veterans organizations, representing five million current and former members of the seven uniformed services plus their families and survivors, is writing to strongly endorse enactment of H.R. 1119, the National Defense Authorization Act for FY 1998. Several of the provisions of the bill are vital to maintaining a high level of military readiness among the men and women of the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, Coast Guard, Public Health Service and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Others would offer significant improvements in health programs, compensation protections for deploying members, and survivor benefits programs, to name a few. Now that the conferees have made their judgments concerning defense priorities and resource allocation, the Coalition believes strongly that this legislation should be enacted as quickly as possible. The unformed servicemen and women, whose selfless dedication to this Nation frequently puts them in harm's way, need Congress' support, and that support can best be rendered at this time by passing H.R. 1119. Sincerely, The Military Coalition. Mr. LEVIN addressed the Chair.

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, the conference report for the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 is before the Senate now. This is an important component of the national security legislation that the Congress must pass each year. The Armed Services Committee worked hard this year to produce a bill that will authorize the appropriation of $268.2 billion for procurement, research and development, test and evaluation, operation and maintenance, working capital funds, military personnel, military construction and family housing within the Department of Defense, and for the weapons programs of the Department of Energy and the civil defense. This is an important piece of legislation. Mr. President, there are some Senators who will suggest that the Senate should reject this bill in order to protect interests in their States. This is a very large bill with over 600 legislative provisions. The conference report is nearly a thousand pages. In order to reach agreement on a bill of this magnitude, a lot of compromise is required. The conference report includes many programs and policies essential to the Department of Defense and the Nation. However, not everyone got everything that they wanted. As the committee prepared for our markup, we received letters of request from 99 Senators. The committee tried to accommodate as many of these requests as possible, consistent with our national security needs. Mr. President, neither South Carolina nor Michigan got everything Senator Levin and I wanted for our States. Defeating the Defense authorization bill because three or four Senators did not get everything they wanted would be the ultimate in partisanship over statesmanship. Let me explain what the Nation would lose if there is no Defense authorization bill this year. I believe the single most controversial issue in the conference report is the policy with regard to depots. In the area of privatization, the bill includes an important compromise that provides for open competition for the work at the closing depots at Kelly and McClellan Air Force Bases. If the bill is not enacted, the opportunity to support full and open competition and to resolve a longstanding and very contentious issue will be lost. The bill would also change the current 60-40 public/private split in The Department of Defense depot maintenance to 50-50, giving The Department of Defense greater flexibility to achieve an optimal mix of public and private capabilities. Mr. President, negotiating the compromise on the depot issue was a difficult and complex three-way negotiation. Senator Levin and I worked together in a totally bipartisan manner to ensure a fair resolution that provided for fair and open competition. We are in total agreement on the compromise. I want to commend Senator Levin, and members of his staff, for their tireless efforts and cooperation in achieving this compromise. I know that some Senators believe that they should have gotten more, but there are equally as many Senators from States on the other side of the issue who believe they gave up a great deal more. I hope that we agree that open competition will be in the best interests of the public and private sector and the Nation. Secretary Cohen has indicated that he can support the depot compromise. I urge my colleagues to put parochial interests aside and work with us to implement this compromise successfully. Mr. President, I could talk for hours about the important legislative provisions that the Department of Defense and our service men and women will be denied if we permit this conference report to be defeated. I will spare my colleagues that recitation, but I do want to highlight some of what we will lose. Without the Defense authorization bill, the military pay raise will be less than our service members deserve. The bill includes a 2.8- percent pay raise for military personnel. If the bill is not enacted, the pay raise for military personnel will be limited to 2.3 percent. Federal civilians will receive at least a 2.8-percent pay increase while our military personnel on duty throughout the world will receive a pay raise 1 percent below the inflation rate. Denying military personnel what I would describe as a minimal pay raise is shameful. The bill includes authority for significant increases in the special pay and bonus structure designed to respond to critical recruiting and retention problems highlighted by the Department of Defense. Specific groups that would be affected include military aviators, nuclear- qualified officers, dentists, military members on overseas tours, military members receiving family separation allowances and/or hazardous duty assignment pay, and military members serving in hardship duty locations. Reducing military pay raises while failing to increase these bonuses through defeast of the Defense authorization bill will punish those who expect us here in the Congress to look out for them. We will be repudiating the commitments we have made to improving the quality of life for military personnel and their families. Mr. President, I assure my colleagues that, unless this bill is passed, we will see increases in career personnel leaving the military services. They will see our action as a breach of faith and I cannot blame them. The bill provides authority for the Department of Defense to begin construction on the fiscal year 1998 military construction projects including quality of life and training-related facilities. If the bill is not enacted, construction cannot begin. Some may believe that since the military construction and family housing projects are funded in the Military Construction Appropriations Act, they do not need the authorization in the conference report. Let me assure my colleagues that is not correct. Both an authorization and an appropriation are required for military construction projects. The conference report includes an exception to the cost limitation for one Seawolf submarine. Without this legislation, the Navy will have to stop work on the SSN-23 later this calendar year. This could lead to significant payments to the shipyard and people who work on the Seawolf Submarines and those who supply materials for the submarines will be laid off. Not only does the Nation need the capabilities of these advanced submarines, the employees and the communities in which these people live will be tragically affected. We cannot allow this to happen. In the conference report, we re-authorized the acclaimed National Guard Youth Challenge Program. The bill would make permanent the authority for this important and popular community and youth-oriented program. If the bill is not enacted, the Department of Defense must terminate support for this popular program. Many disadvantaged youth in all our States will be denied the opportunities this worthwhile program provides. The President, and most of us here in Congress, strongly profess our support for counterdrug activities. The bill includes provisions that would extend the 1-year authority to provide counterdrug assistance to Mexico and would create a new 5-year authority to provide riverine counterdrug assistance to Colombia and Peru. The bill would establish two new assistants to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, representing the interests of the National Guard and the Reserves. This is important legislation designed to ensure that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has the benefit of the best advice with regard to all the reserve forces, in particular as it pertains to their unique capabilities and requirements. Mr. President, I could go on for hours on the good things in this bill. Some may propose stripping out some of the provisions I have discussed today and introducing separate legislation in order to avoid denying our service members key benefits. This is a shortsighted and unacceptable notion. The conferees worked very hard for many weeks to craft a bill that includes those items they agree are essential to the national security. To fracture this process would be irresponsible. Those who may propose such legislation will be trying to take care of a few at the expense of many. This is not our way. I will strongly object to any such proposals. Mr. President, suggestions to defeat the Defense authorization conference report because of the compromise on depot maintenance are irresponsible. This bill is important to the young men and women who serve in our military forces. The bill includes pay raises and increases to special incentive pay, including vital aviator bonuses. Provisions in this bill affect every aspect of our national defense including quality of life initiatives, modernization, and readiness. I remind all Senators that all military construction projects require an authorization as well as an appropriation and cannot be executed without this bill. All members of the Armed Services Committee support this bill, both Democrat and Republican. The Military Coalition, a consortium of nationally prominent military and veterans organizations representing 5 million current and former members of the seven uniformed services, their families and survivors, strongly endorses enactment of this bill. I ask unanimous consent that a letter signed by the leaders of the 22 organizations be included in the Record at the conclusion of my statement.

Mr. THURMOND. We don't have any more time.

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I commend the able Senator from Oklahoma for his excellent remarks. He is a member of the Armed Services Committee and does a fine job. I want to take this opportunity to thank him for the great service he is rendering on the Armed Services Committee. Mr. GRAMM addressed the Chair.

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, as we close this debate, I take this opportunity to commend Senator Levin for the magnificent work he has done on this bill. He is a man of integrity, ability and dedication. It is a great asset to have him on the Senate Armed Services Committee. Mr. President, there are a few obvious reasons for Americans to focus on the defense of the United States. While there is no longer a superpower threatening to dominate us, threats still abound. Events in Iraq this week demonstrate that America must be prepared to protect her interests at a moment's notice. Other nations that might pose threats includes Iran, North Korea, and Libya. Mr. President, this bill is important to the young men and women who serve in our military forces. This bill includes pay raises and increases to special incentive pay, including vital aviator bonuses. Provisions in this bill affect every aspect of our national defense, including quality-of-life initiatives, modernization, and readiness. I remind all Senators that all military construction projects require an authorization as well as an appropriation and cannot be executed without this bill. Mr. President, I want to remind the Senate that all 18 members of the Armed Services Committee support this bill--10 Republicans and 8 Democrats--every one of them support this bill. The House has already passed this by a veto-proof majority of 286 to 123. The leaders of the Defense Department have indicated that they can make this compromise work and that they need this bill passed. It is hard for me to believe that any Senator would oppose and delay the entire Defense authorization bill at a time when American troops are deployed in Bosnia and serious trouble appears to be brewing again in Iraq. I strongly encourage all Senators to vote for this bill. We must send a strong signal to the White House to demonstrate to the President that this bill, which is so important to our national security, should be signed. We must show the young men and women in uniform serving our Nation around the world that their services are appreciated and that we are backing them up. Mr. President, I am a strong supporter of the Guard and Reserves. The National Guard of South Carolina is a magnificent guard, and we appreciate what they have done. And in the whole Nation, the National Guard is so valuable. I happen to have served in the Reserves myself for over 36 years. I appreciate the reservists and commend all of them for voluntarily serving their country. They have to carry on their civilian duties, but they do this extra work. I want to say, too, to the Members of this Senate, that this bill took not days, not weeks, but months. We have spent months on this bill. We have done the best we could. We have a lot of able members on the Armed Services Committee. All of them have worked hard on this bill. It is a compromise bill. I did not have my way on everything. Senator Levin did not have his way on everything. No one did. This is a compromise bill. National security was the driving force of this bill. We could not satisfy every Senator. We did the best we could to accommodate all we could. But national security was our driving force when we considered this bill. Again, I ask all Senators to support this bill for the good of the country and to support this bill for the good of our troops and to support this bill, too, for the public good. I thank the Chair. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum, and I ask unanimous consent that the time be equally divided.

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I yield 8 minutes to Senator Coats.

Mr. THURMOND. I commend the able Senator from Indiana for his remarks, which are very helpful, and also commend the Senator for the great work he has done on the Armed Services Committee for many years. We are very proud of the Senator, and we are going to miss him when he leaves the Senate next year. We hope the Senator will reconsider and come back with us.

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, Senator Kempthorne and Senator Cleland are valuable members of the Armed Services Committee. Both of them are experts on military personnel and I wish to commend them for the important information they have given the Senate today on that subject.

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum and ask the time be equally charged to each side.

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I yield the remaining time we have to Senator Roberts.

Mr. THURMOND

Mr. THURMOND. Will the Senator yield?

Mr. THURMOND. I wish to commend the able Senator from Alabama for the excellent remarks he has made on this subject.

Mr. THURMOND

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I wish to commend the able Senator from Kentucky for the excellent treatise he just made. Mr. AKAKA addressed the Chair.

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I rise today to express my opposition to the nomination of Bill Lann Lee to be Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights. I have reached this conclusion only after much thought and careful consideration. But I am certain that this is the right course. I commend Senator Hatch for his leadership and the excellent statement he delivered on the floor yesterday in this regard. When the possibility that Mr. Lee would be nominated for this position was first brought to my attention, I was impressed by what I heard. Mr. Lee was born to a hard-working, determined family of Chinese immigrants. His success at Yale and Columbia University Law School reflects that he inherited a commitment to succeed. I was also assured then, and continue to believe, that he is a man of character, honesty, and intellect. I relayed that impression to the White House. After Mr. Lee was nominated, I met with him and made clear that I had an open mind regarding his nomination. I told him that his positions on the issues would be critical, and that the committee was eager to hear his answers to questions. Before the hearing, some expressed alarm at many of the cases and positions that Mr. Lee had taken during his leadership in activist civil rights organizations. They were concerned about whether he would use his job and army of attorneys in the Justice Department to advance the same agenda he had pursued for the Legal Defense Fund. I understood this. But, at the same time, I have known since my days as a small town lawyer that a good attorney is a strong advocate for his client, regardless of whether he agrees with everything the client wants. Mr. Lee had an obligation to convince us at the hearing that he could transfer from the role of creative advocate for activist civil rights organizations to neutral and objective enforcer of the Nation's civil rights laws. This he failed to do. He would not give any cases or positions that he had brought on behalf of the Legal Defense Fund that he would not bring as head of the Civil Rights Division. He would not cite any difference between himself and the last civil rights chief, Deval Patrick, who was an unwavering proponent of the civil rights agenda of the left. Unfortunately, it became clear during the hearing that Mr. Lee's advocacy is guided by a dedicated personal commitment to the positions he has advanced over the years. Mr. Lee started by proclaiming that proposition 209 is unconstitutional. In proposition 209, the people of California voted to end all government preferences and set-asides on the basis of race, sex, or national origin. Then, with the active support of Mr. Lee and his organization, a Federal judge blocked the will of the people, saying the referendum was unconstitutional. The claim was that proposition 209 violated the 14th amendment, when in reality it mirrored the 14th amendment. Far from violating the Constitution, proposition 209 essentially states what the Constitution requires. The Ninth Circuit recognized this simple fact on appeal. Regardless, Mr. Lee is steadfast in his view that it was unconstitutional for the people of California to bring preferences to an end. Another disturbing but related issue involves judicial taxation. I firmly believe that Federal judges do not have the Constitutional power to raises taxes or order legislative authorities to raise taxes. It is a simple issue of separation of powers. Taxes are a matter for the legislative branch, the branch that is responsive to the people. The organization for which Mr. Lee works was instrumental in the decision of a Federal judge in Missouri to order that taxes be raised. Mr. Lee would not disavow this approach. Although he stated that if confirmed he would not ask a Federal judge to order a legislative authority to raise taxes in the school desegregation context, he refused to rule out such a request in other civil rights contexts. He fails to recognize that fundamental principles of separation of powers prohibit judicial taxation. Mr. Lee's views on proposition 209 and judicial taxation represent support for a dangerous tactic of legal activists. They use the unelected, unaccountable Federal judiciary to accomplish what they cannot achieve through the democratic process. When they lost at the ballot box on proposition 209, they got a lone Federal judge to block the will of the people. When they wanted to implement their lavish desegregation experiment in Missouri, they got a lone Federal judge to raise taxes. They have pursued their solutions in utter disregard of the people. Today, Mr. Lee and his allies are failing to find support even in the courts. The Federal judiciary, led by the Supreme Court, is fashioning a civil rights jurisprudence based on the merit of the individual rather than preferential treatment for groups. Mr. Lee has fought against and continues to be uneasy with this constructive, solidifying law. It is clear that he would use his position and arsenal of attorneys to dilute or circumvent this progress toward ending preferential treatment. An excellent example of the failed approach of the past is forced busing of school children. At the hearing, Mr. Lee continued to express support for the use of forced busing in some circumstances, even in the 1990's. He would not back away from his unbelievable assertion in a Supreme Court brief that ``the term `forced busing' is a misnomer.'' Mr. President, many of us in the Senate are concerned about judicial activism on the bench, and we have every reason to be. We must keep in mind that a judicial activist decision starts with a proposal by a legal activist. We cannot and should not stop private organizations from advocating legal activism if they wish. However, we have a duty to reject legal activism as the guiding principle for our Nation's top civil rights law enforcement officer. I must strongly oppose this nomination. I yield the floor.

Mr. THURMOND

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, pursuant to section 304 of the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. sec. 1384), Notices of Adoption of Amendments to Regulations and Submission for Approval were submitted by the Office of Compliance, U.S. Congress. These notices contain amendments to regulations under sections 204, 205 and 215 of the Congressional Accountability Act. Section 204 applies rights and protections of the Employee Polygraph Protection Act of 1988; section 205 applies rights and protections of the Worker Adjustment Retraining and Notification Act; and section 215 applies rights and protections of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970. Section 304 requires these notices and amendments be printed in the Congressional Record; therefore I ask unanimous consent that the notices and amendments be printed in the Record and referred to the appropriate committee for consideration.

Mr. THURMOND

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, next week, November 11, our Nation will observe Veterans Day. Commemorative services will be held throughout the Nation on that day. I expect services will be held at Arlington Cemetery and other national cemeteries, where thousands of war dead are buried. As I mentioned in a statement last May, prior to Memorial Day, Mr. President, not all activities at our national cemeteries have honored our Nation's veterans. There have been, unfortunately, instances of vandalism and theft at our national cemeteries. While many of these incidents are minor, many attacks on national cemeteries are serious. The Department of Justice reports that between January 1, 1995, and May 31, 1997, there were 21 reports of vandalism or crime at national cemeteries, where the estimated damage was over $1,000. The total loss to our national cemeteries from these incidents is more than $98,000. In addition, more than 56 incidents were reported, with damage less than $1,000, during that same time period. These incidents caused another $15,000 in losses to the Government. The harm resulting from attacks on our national cemeteries, however, is more than economic loss. Such criminal activity is an assault on the honor of our veterans, particularly those who made the supreme sacrifice in defense of our Nation. It is an attack on the heritage and values for which our veterans fought. Such conduct is unconscionable and deserves a strong response. The time has come to demand a stop to this type of insulting behavior and punish it when it occurs. That is why I introduced S. 813, the Veterans' Cemetery Protection Act of 1997. This bill imposes criminal penalties for vandalism and theft at national cemeteries operated by the VA, the Department of Defense, and the Department of Interior. Specifically, this bill authorizes the U.S. Sentencing Commission to review and amend the Federal sentencing guidelines to provide an appropriate sentencing enhancement for any offense against the property of a national cemetery. I am delighted that Senators McCain, Inhofe, Inouye, D'Amato, and Sessions have joined as cosponsors. I thank all Senators for their support on final passage. I particularly appreciate the support from the Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs, the Senate Judiciary Committee, the Department of Justice, and the U.S. Sentencing Commission. I look forward to passage of this measure by the other body, so this bill can be on the President's desk by Veterans Day.

Mr. THURMOND

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, in a few moments, the Senate will vote to invoke cloture on the Defense authorization bill for fiscal year 1998. As all of you know, we have had a difficult time getting to this point. After months of negotiating on the depot maintenance issue, we finally achieved a breakthrough when those Members of Congress who have depots agreed to a compromise heretofore believed to be unachievable. Those Members who have depots gave up on issues extremely important to them substantively and politically. At that time, those of us who had worked over many months to achieve such a compromise believed that we could finally put this very divisive issue behind us. It was simply unthinkable to us that after those with depots had come so far toward the other side's position that the Senators from Texas and California would oppose this compromise. They have always said they only wanted the opportunity to compete. This compromise gives them that opportunity on what the Armed Services Committee believes is clearly a level playing field. All 18 members of the Armed Services Committee have signed this conference report indicating their support of the compromise. The ranking member of the committee, Senator Levin, supported the Senators from Texas and California up to the point when this compromise was negotiated. He and his staff were totally involved in drafting and negotiating the compromise. Senator Levin and I join in total support of this compromise which is fair and equitable to all parties. This bill is important to the young men and women who serve in our military forces. The bill includes pay raises and increases to special incentive pay including vital aviator bonuses. Provisions in this bill affect every aspect of our national defense including quality of life initiatives, modernization, and readiness. I remind all Senators that all military construction projects require an authorization as well as an appropriation and cannot be executed without this bill. All members of the committee support this bill. The House has already passed it by a veto-proof majority of 286 to 123. The leaders of the Defense Department have indicated that they can make this compromise work and that they need this bill passed. It is hard for me to believe that any Senator would oppose and delay the entire Defense authorization bill at a time when American troops are deployed in Bosnia and trouble appears to be brewing again in the Middle East. I strongly encourage all Senators to vote to invoke cloture on this bill. We must send a strong signal to the White House to demonstrate to the President that this bill which is so important to our national security should be passed now. I also ask the support of all Senators to defeat any further attempts to delay this bill. Show the young men and women in uniform serving our Nation around the world that we are strongly behind them. I yield the floor. I observe the absence of a quorum, Mr. President.

Mr. THURMOND

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, for the Committee on Armed Services, I report favorably 17 nomination lists in the Air Force, Army, Marine Corps, and Navy which were printed in full in the Congressional Record of June 12, September 18, October 7, 9, and 20, 1997, 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:

Mr. THURMOND

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the motion was agreed to.

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I will not take 5 minutes. Mr. President, I would just like to take a few moments to address the outcome of what was the single most controversial issue in the conference--depot maintenance. The bill contains a fair compromise that was drafted by the members and staff of the Senate Armed Services Committee after consulting with all interested parties, including the administration and the concerned delegations. It is fair to assert that none of the parties involved are completely happy with this compromise language; however, that is what happens when you have to compromise. If we all insisted on getting everything our way, nothing would ever be accomplished by the Congress. Mr. President, Senator Levin, the ranking member of our committee, and I worked together in a totally bipartisan manner to achieve this compromise and we both agree that this compromise enables the Department of Defense to conduct fair and open competitions for the workloads currently performed at Kelly and McClellan. In fact, the compromise language specifically authorizes competitions for these workloads. Mr. President, during the drafting of this compromise language the Department of Defense, as well as the staff of the concerned delegations, were provided numerous opportunities to review this language and identify their concerns. We made significant changes to this language in order to alleviate many of the concerns they raised. Mr. President, no one knows the amount of work that was put into this compromise. We worked night and day. The staffs worked night and day. If this compromise doesn't go through, all of those States will suffer, in my opinion. It is better for us to pass this bill. This is a very important bill. It means a lot to our whole Nation, not just any one State or a few States, but all of the States. I ask the Senate to pass this compromise and stand by what has been done and reached heretofore on this important matter. I yield the floor.

Mr. THURMOND

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, pursuant to section 303 of the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. sec. 1383), a notice of proposed rulemaking was submitted by the Office of Compliance, U.S. Congress. The notice publishes proposed amendments to regulations previously adopted by the Board implementing various labor and employment and public access laws to covered employees within the legislative branch. Section 304(b) requires this notice to be printed in the Congressional Record, therefore I ask unanimous consent that the notice be printed in the Record.