Robert Torricelli

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation that will improve the lives of 30,000 Americans, 850 of whom live in my State of New Jersey, who are stricken with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS). Many of us know Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) as the disease that struck down the famed Yankees 1st baseman, Lou Gehrig, yet, few of us are aware of the tragic effects ALS has on its victims. Fewer still are aware of the inherent flaws in the Medicare program which further compound the suffering of those with ALS. Despite the short life expectancy of three to five years, ALS patents must endure a two year waiting period in order to receive Medicare services. Forcing ALS patients to wait until the final months of their illness defies common sense and human decency. In fact, as a result of the Medicare waiting period, approximately 17,000 ALS patients remain ineligible for Medicare services right now, regardless of the severity of their condition. My bill, the ALS Treatment, and Assistance Act waives the 24-month Medicare waiting period for ALS patients. A similar waiver is granted for victims of end-stage renal disease due to the rapid onset of symptoms. The immediacy of symptoms in ALS patients and extremely short life expectancy illustrate the need to extend the waiver for ALS. In addition, many ALS victims have had productive lives and will have paid into the Social Security system well before the onset of ALS. The legislation also requires Medicare to provide coverage for all FDA-approved drugs that treat ALS. While Medicare typically does not provide coverage for prescription drug therapies, over the past few years, exceptions have been granted to provide drug coverage to treat osteoporosis and certain types of cancer. Due to the rapid onset of symptoms and the short life expectancy of ALS patients, the need for another exception is clear. In addition, expanding Medicare coverage for ALS therapies will stimulate further research. ALS is a disease that strikes at every community, with the potential for striking every American. No one is immune, and everyone is vulnerable. I am pleased to be joined by my colleague Senator Wellstone in introducing legislation that represents a first real step toward improving the quality of life for people with ALS while bringing us much closer to finding a cause and a cure. Mr. President, I ask at this time that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, on the morning of April 19, 1995, in one horrible moment, an explosion devastated the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and took the lives of 168 Americans. Every year, thousands of people are killed or maimed because of the use or misuse of illegal explosive devices, and millions of dollars in property is lost. Between 1991 and 1995, there were more than 14,000 actual and attempted criminal bombings. 326 people were killed and another 2,970 injured in these incidents and more than $6 million in property damage resulted. In recent years, the criminal use of explosives has moved in a new direction, as is evidenced by the bombings of the World Trade Center in New York and the Oklahoma City bombing. These two incidents took the lives of many innocent men, women, and children, left others permanently scarred, and caused great suffering for the families of the victims--as well as all of America. These crimes were intended to tear the very fabric of our society; instead, their tragic consequences served to strengthen our resolve to stand firm against the insanity of terrorism and the criminal use of explosives. In the wake of the Oklahoma City bombing, I was stunned--as were many--to learn how few restrictions on the use and sale of explosives really exist. I soon after introduced this legislation, the ``Explosives Protection Act'' to take a first step towards protecting the American people from those who would use explosives to do them harm. I am introducing it again today in the hope that this bill will, in some small way, prevent future bombings--whether by terrorists of symbolic targets, malcontents of random ones, or even spouses involved in marital disputes. While we have increasingly restricted the number of people who can obtain and use a firearm, we have been lax in extending these prohibitions to explosives. For instance, while we prohibit illegal aliens from obtaining a gun, we allow them to obtain explosives without restriction. And someone who has been dishonorably discharged from the armed forces can no longer buy a gun, but can purchase a truckload full of explosives. The same is true for people who have renounced U.S. citizenship, people who have acted in such a way as to have restraining orders issued against them, and those with domestic violence convictions. Each of these categories of persons are prohibited from obtaining firearms, but face no such prohibition on obtaining explosive material. Many of these differences in the law are simply oversights--Congress has often acted to limit the use and sale of firearms, and has neglected to bring explosives law into line. And in so doing, we have made it all too easy for many of the most dangerous or least accountable members of society to obtain materials which can result in an equal or even greater loss of life. Congress has already made the determination that certain members of society should not have access to firearms, and the same logic clearly applies to dangerous and destructive explosive materials. It is time to bring explosives laws into line with gun laws. My bill would simply expand the list of people prohibited from purchasing explosives so that it mirrors the list of people already prohibited from purchasing firearms. This is a simple bill meant only to correct longstanding gaps and loopholes in current law. I hope we can quickly move to get this passed and protect Americans from future acts of explosive destruction. I ask unanimous consent that the full text of the legislation be printed in the Record.

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, I rise today, along with my colleagues from New York and Illinois, Senator Schumer and Senator Durbin, to introduce the Gun Kingpin Penalty Act of 1999. In introducing this bill, we hope that our colleagues will soon join us in sending a clear and strong signal to gunrunners--your actions will no longer be tolerated. Mr. President, recent numbers gathered by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms clearly demonstrate what many of us already knew all too well--several of our nation's highways have become pipelines for merchants of death who deal in illegal firearms. My own State of New Jersey is proud to have some of the toughest gun control laws in the nation. But for far too long, the courageous efforts of New Jersey citizens in enacting these tough laws have been weakened by out of state gunrunners who treat our State like their own personal retail outlet. We learned from the ATF data that in 1996, New Jersey exported fewer guns used in crimes, per capita, than any other state--less than one gun per 100,000 residents, or 75 total guns. Meanwhile, an incredible number of guns used to commit crimes in New Jersey last year came from out of state--944 guns were imported and used to commit crimes compared to only 75 exported--a net import of 869 illegal guns used to commit crimes against the people of New Jersey. This represents a one way street--guns come from states with lax gun laws straight to states (like New Jersey) with strong laws. It is clear that New Jersey's strong gun control laws offer criminals little choice but to import their guns from states with weak laws. We must act on a federal level to send a clear message that this cannot continue and will not be tolerated. The Gun Kingpin Penalty Act would create a new federal gunrunning offense for any person who, within a twelve-month period, transports more than 5 guns to another state with the intent of transferring all of the weapons to another person. The Act would establish mandatory minimum penalties for gunrunning as follows: A mandatory 3 year minimum sentence for a first offense involving 5- 50 guns; a mandatory 5 year minimum sentence for second offense involving 5-50 guns; and a mandatory 15 year minimum sentence for any offense involving more than 50 guns. Additionally, the bill contains two ``blood on the hands'' provisions, which will significantly increase penalties for a gunrunner who transfers a gun subsequently used to seriously injure or kill another person. A mandatory 10 year minimum sentence is required if one of the smuggled guns is used within 3 years to kill or seriously injure another person. And a mandatory 25 year minimum sentence must be imposed if one of the smuggled guns is used within 3 years to kill or seriously injure another person and more than 50 guns were smuggled. Finally, our bill adds numerous gunrunning crimes as RICO predicates, and authorizes 200 additional Treasury personnel to enforce the Act-- Congress must provide law enforcement with the resources to enforce the laws we pass. The fight against gun violence is a long-term, many-staged process. We succeeded in enacting the Brady bill and the ban on devastating assault weapons. And these laws have been effective: more than a quarter of a million prohibited individuals have already been denied a handgun due to Brady background check--70% of these people were either felons or domestic violence offenders. Traces of assault weapons have plummeted since the ban, and prices have gone up. We can never rest though when it comes to gun violence. This problem will not just go away, and we cannot stand by and watch as innocent men, women and children die at the hands of criminals armed with these guns. I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I ask unanimous censent that the full text of the legislation be printed in the Record.

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the ``Bounty Hunter Accountability and Quality Assurance Act of 1999.'' This bill will begin the process of reforming the revered but antiquated system of bail enforcement in this country. Throughout our nation's proud history, bounty hunters have proved a valuable addition to our law enforcement and recovery efforts. About 40 percent of all criminal defendants are released on bail each year, and in 1996 alone more than 33,000 skipped town. Police departments, no matter how efficient or determined, cannot be expected to deal with so many bail jumpers in addition to their other duties. Thus, while public law enforcement officers recover only about 10 percent of defendants who skip town, bounty hunters catch an incredible 88 percent of bail jumpers. Because of the special, contractual nature of the relationship between bail bondsmen and those who use them to get out of jail, bounty hunters have traditionally enjoyed special rights--a nineteenth century Supreme Court case affirmed that while bounty hunters may exercise many of the powers granted to police, they are not subject to many of the constitutional checks we place on those law enforcement officials. As a result, bounty hunters need not worry about Miranda rights, extradition proceedings, or search warrants. The ability to more efficiently track and recover criminal defendants serves a valuable purpose in our society. But the lack of constitutional checks on bounty hunters also opens the system up to the risk of abuse. Each of us has read or heard about cases in which legitimate bounty hunters or those simply posing as recovery agents have wrongfully entered a dwelling or captured the wrong person. In one recent Arizona case, several men claiming to be bounty hunters broke into a house, terrorized a family and ended up killing a young couple who tried to defend against the attack. It now appears that these men were simply ``posing'' as bounty hunters, but there are other reported incidents in which ``legitimate'' bounty hunters have broken down the wrong door, kidnaped the wrong person, or physically abused the targets of their searches. And there is little recourse for the innocent victims of wrongful acts. This legislaiton would begin the process of making bounty hunters more accountable to the public they serve, and would help to restore confidence in the bail enforcement system. The bill would not unduly impose the will of the federal government on states, which have traditionally regulated bounty hunters. The ``Bounty Hunter Accountability and Quality Assurance Act'' directs the Attorney General of the United States to establish model guidelines for states to follow when creating their own bail enforcement regulations. In the course of her work, the Attorney General will be specifcially directed to look into three areas identified by the bill--whether bounty hunters should be required to ``knock and announce'' before entering a dwelling, whether they should be required to carry liability insurance (most already do), and whether convicted felons should be allowed to obtain employment as bounty hunters. Mr. President, it is time to start the process of making rouge bounty hunters more accountable, while at the same time restoring America's confidence in the long tradition of bail enforcement that dates from the earliest days of this nation. I urge my colleagues to join me in taking this first step toward this process. I ask unanimous consent that the full text of this bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, I rise today, along with my colleagues from New York and Illinois, Senator Schumer and Senator Durbin, to introduce the Gun Kingpin Penalty Act of 1999. In introducing this bill, we hope that our colleagues will soon join us in sending a clear and strong signal to gunrunners--your actions will no longer be tolerated. Mr. President, recent numbers gathered by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms clearly demonstrate what many of us already knew all too well--several of our nation's highways have become pipelines for merchants of death who deal in illegal firearms. My own State of New Jersey is proud to have some of the toughest gun control laws in the nation. But for far too long, the courageous efforts of New Jersey citizens in enacting these tough laws have been weakened by out of state gunrunners who treat our State like their own personal retail outlet. We learned from the ATF data that in 1996, New Jersey exported fewer guns used in crimes, per capita, than any other state--less than one gun per 100,000 residents, or 75 total guns. Meanwhile, an incredible number of guns used to commit crimes in New Jersey last year came from out of state--944 guns were imported and used to commit crimes compared to only 75 exported--a net import of 869 illegal guns used to commit crimes against the people of New Jersey. This represents a one way street--guns come from states with lax gun laws straight to states (like New Jersey) with strong laws. It is clear that New Jersey's strong gun control laws offer criminals little choice but to import their guns from states with weak laws. We must act on a federal level to send a clear message that this cannot continue and will not be tolerated. The Gun Kingpin Penalty Act would create a new federal gunrunning offense for any person who, within a twelve-month period, transports more than 5 guns to another state with the intent of transferring all of the weapons to another person. The Act would establish mandatory minimum penalties for gunrunning as follows: A mandatory 3 year minimum sentence for a first offense involving 5- 50 guns; a mandatory 5 year minimum sentence for second offense involving 5-50 guns; and a mandatory 15 year minimum sentence for any offense involving more than 50 guns. Additionally, the bill contains two ``blood on the hands'' provisions, which will significantly increase penalties for a gunrunner who transfers a gun subsequently used to seriously injure or kill another person. A mandatory 10 year minimum sentence is required if one of the smuggled guns is used within 3 years to kill or seriously injure another person. And a mandatory 25 year minimum sentence must be imposed if one of the smuggled guns is used within 3 years to kill or seriously injure another person and more than 50 guns were smuggled. Finally, our bill adds numerous gunrunning crimes as RICO predicates, and authorizes 200 additional Treasury personnel to enforce the Act-- Congress must provide law enforcement with the resources to enforce the laws we pass. The fight against gun violence is a long-term, many-staged process. We succeeded in enacting the Brady bill and the ban on devastating assault weapons. And these laws have been effective: more than a quarter of a million prohibited individuals have already been denied a handgun due to Brady background check--70% of these people were either felons or domestic violence offenders. Traces of assault weapons have plummeted since the ban, and prices have gone up. We can never rest though when it comes to gun violence. This problem will not just go away, and we cannot stand by and watch as innocent men, women and children die at the hands of criminals armed with these guns. I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I ask unanimous censent that the full text of the legislation be printed in the Record.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, today I rise today to introduce the ``Neighborhood Watch Partnership Act of 1999.'' This bill will broaden the eligibility of groups that may apply for essential funding for neighborhood watch activities. Communities across the country are finding sensible ways to solve local problems. Through partnerships with local police, neighborhood watch groups are having a decisive impact on crime. There are almost 20,000 such groups creating innovative programs that promote community involvement in crime prevention techniques. They empower community members and organize them against rape, burglary, and all forms of fear on the street. They forge bonds between law enforcement and the communities they serve. Unfortunately, many communities find it difficult to afford the often expensive equipment such as cellphones and CBs needed to start a neighborhood watch organization. While the COPS program within the Department of Justice provides funding for some neighborhood watch groups, an organization must incorporate to benefit from the current program. A mere 2000 of the nearly 20,000 groups incorporate, however, meaning that the vast majority of watch groups cannot apply for funding assistance. This makes very little sense. The time has come to make a clear commitment to these groups. That is why I am introducing a bill to extend COPS funding to unincorporated neighborhood watch organizations. The bill would provide grants of up to $1,950 to these groups. Under current law, either the local police chief or sheriff must approve grant requests by unincorporated watch groups. We would impose the same requirement on unincorporated groups, thus providing accountability for the disbursement of funds. Mr. President, neighborhood watch organizations provide an invaluable service. By extending the partnership between community policing and watch group organizations, we will boldly encourage small and large communities to preserve and create crime prevention tools. We should act now. I ask unanimous consent that the full text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the ``Bounty Hunter Accountability and Quality Assurance Act of 1999.'' This bill will begin the process of reforming the revered but antiquated system of bail enforcement in this country. Throughout our nation's proud history, bounty hunters have proved a valuable addition to our law enforcement and recovery efforts. About 40 percent of all criminal defendants are released on bail each year, and in 1996 alone more than 33,000 skipped town. Police departments, no matter how efficient or determined, cannot be expected to deal with so many bail jumpers in addition to their other duties. Thus, while public law enforcement officers recover only about 10 percent of defendants who skip town, bounty hunters catch an incredible 88 percent of bail jumpers. Because of the special, contractual nature of the relationship between bail bondsmen and those who use them to get out of jail, bounty hunters have traditionally enjoyed special rights--a nineteenth century Supreme Court case affirmed that while bounty hunters may exercise many of the powers granted to police, they are not subject to many of the constitutional checks we place on those law enforcement officials. As a result, bounty hunters need not worry about Miranda rights, extradition proceedings, or search warrants. The ability to more efficiently track and recover criminal defendants serves a valuable purpose in our society. But the lack of constitutional checks on bounty hunters also opens the system up to the risk of abuse. Each of us has read or heard about cases in which legitimate bounty hunters or those simply posing as recovery agents have wrongfully entered a dwelling or captured the wrong person. In one recent Arizona case, several men claiming to be bounty hunters broke into a house, terrorized a family and ended up killing a young couple who tried to defend against the attack. It now appears that these men were simply ``posing'' as bounty hunters, but there are other reported incidents in which ``legitimate'' bounty hunters have broken down the wrong door, kidnaped the wrong person, or physically abused the targets of their searches. And there is little recourse for the innocent victims of wrongful acts. This legislaiton would begin the process of making bounty hunters more accountable to the public they serve, and would help to restore confidence in the bail enforcement system. The bill would not unduly impose the will of the federal government on states, which have traditionally regulated bounty hunters. The ``Bounty Hunter Accountability and Quality Assurance Act'' directs the Attorney General of the United States to establish model guidelines for states to follow when creating their own bail enforcement regulations. In the course of her work, the Attorney General will be specifcially directed to look into three areas identified by the bill--whether bounty hunters should be required to ``knock and announce'' before entering a dwelling, whether they should be required to carry liability insurance (most already do), and whether convicted felons should be allowed to obtain employment as bounty hunters. Mr. President, it is time to start the process of making rouge bounty hunters more accountable, while at the same time restoring America's confidence in the long tradition of bail enforcement that dates from the earliest days of this nation. I urge my colleagues to join me in taking this first step toward this process. I ask unanimous consent that the full text of this bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, on the morning of April 19, 1995, in one horrible moment, an explosion devastated the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and took the lives of 168 Americans. Every year, thousands of people are killed or maimed because of the use or misuse of illegal explosive devices, and millions of dollars in property is lost. Between 1991 and 1995, there were more than 14,000 actual and attempted criminal bombings. 326 people were killed and another 2,970 injured in these incidents and more than $6 million in property damage resulted. In recent years, the criminal use of explosives has moved in a new direction, as is evidenced by the bombings of the World Trade Center in New York and the Oklahoma City bombing. These two incidents took the lives of many innocent men, women, and children, left others permanently scarred, and caused great suffering for the families of the victims--as well as all of America. These crimes were intended to tear the very fabric of our society; instead, their tragic consequences served to strengthen our resolve to stand firm against the insanity of terrorism and the criminal use of explosives. In the wake of the Oklahoma City bombing, I was stunned--as were many--to learn how few restrictions on the use and sale of explosives really exist. I soon after introduced this legislation, the ``Explosives Protection Act'' to take a first step towards protecting the American people from those who would use explosives to do them harm. I am introducing it again today in the hope that this bill will, in some small way, prevent future bombings--whether by terrorists of symbolic targets, malcontents of random ones, or even spouses involved in marital disputes. While we have increasingly restricted the number of people who can obtain and use a firearm, we have been lax in extending these prohibitions to explosives. For instance, while we prohibit illegal aliens from obtaining a gun, we allow them to obtain explosives without restriction. And someone who has been dishonorably discharged from the armed forces can no longer buy a gun, but can purchase a truckload full of explosives. The same is true for people who have renounced U.S. citizenship, people who have acted in such a way as to have restraining orders issued against them, and those with domestic violence convictions. Each of these categories of persons are prohibited from obtaining firearms, but face no such prohibition on obtaining explosive material. Many of these differences in the law are simply oversights--Congress has often acted to limit the use and sale of firearms, and has neglected to bring explosives law into line. And in so doing, we have made it all too easy for many of the most dangerous or least accountable members of society to obtain materials which can result in an equal or even greater loss of life. Congress has already made the determination that certain members of society should not have access to firearms, and the same logic clearly applies to dangerous and destructive explosive materials. It is time to bring explosives laws into line with gun laws. My bill would simply expand the list of people prohibited from purchasing explosives so that it mirrors the list of people already prohibited from purchasing firearms. This is a simple bill meant only to correct longstanding gaps and loopholes in current law. I hope we can quickly move to get this passed and protect Americans from future acts of explosive destruction. I ask unanimous consent that the full text of the legislation be printed in the Record.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. I thank the Senator for yielding an additional minute. But only the Feinstein amendment offers not only restricting this class of weapon to young people, but also closes the loophole that allows these multibullet clips that allow the rage of a child who would take a single life to destroy a school, an entire group of people--to commit a mass murder. I do not argue this alone will stop these tragedies. No one here can argue that any one formula, any one idea will eliminate this problem. But I will tell you this, Senator Feinstein has the one proposal that can address the rage, the inexplicable rage that must be dealt with--by families and schools and churches and synagogues, exploding on such a level--by taking both these weapons of mass destruction and these multibullet clips out of circulation. I congratulate her for her amendment. I ask the Senate, with all the rage you felt after Littleton, with all the conviction you felt to solve this problem, and all the compassion you felt for those children, have that strength, that courage and that conviction now. For once, at long last, let's take a stand and cast a vote so, as the years pass, we will have real pride that we made some contribution. Just as we ask those parents, those schools, those churches, those synagogues to play their role and be part of this solution, let the Senate be part of this solution, too. I yield the floor.

Mr. TORRICELLI. I thank the Senator from California for yielding. Mr. President, all of us, after Littleton, grieved together. I believe all of those prayers and condolences were sincere. But we also pledged to finally take the issue of gun violence and young people in America seriously. Those pledges may not have been as sincere. It was my hope in this debate that we would deal with some very fundamental issues--restricting the ability to buy handguns to one a month; stopping the wholesale transfer of these guns into our cities and small towns in States like my own of New Jersey. I hoped we would extend the Brady period to give a cooling off period to people who buy these weapons. I hoped to regulate firearms like any other consumer product. We decided not to do these things because we wanted to meet our opponents, those who are advocates for the gun lobby, halfway. So we restricted ourselves to the most reasonable, the least controversial. It might have been a mistake, because even those commonsense initiatives, which I think most Americans would subscribe to, are not succeeding. Yesterday, this Senate failed in an effort to restrict sales at gun shows without background checks--4,000 gun shows that operate outside of the current checks for mental illness and previous legal convictions. Now we return again with another provision that should be equally noncontroversial. Most people in America wouldn't believe this provision is necessary. I would have a hard time convincing most people in New Jersey that this amendment is required, because most people would believe it was already law: That an 18- or 19-year-old can buy an assault rifle; that any child can buy a rifle or shotgun, including assault rifles such as the infamous street-sweeper; that any youth 18 to 21 can privately buy an assault pistol such as the TEC-9 used in Littleton. Our country has recognized that there is an age of maturity to drive an automobile. We recognize there is an appropriate age of maturity to consume alcohol, to exercise the right to vote--the basic sovereignty of our people. Yet, with the power to take a human life by the exercise of the extraordinary power in these weapons, young people like those in Littleton who consumed so many lives operate without restrictions. I believe those who responded to the massacre in Littleton were sincere in wanting to deal with this problem. But it requires more than words. It requires the one area of political life that I most admire and is in the shortest supply in our country--courage--the courage to go to those few advocates who believe they are so right and their privileges are so important that the larger good of the public must be compromised. I suggest to them they must compromise for the sake of the Nation. That is the moment in which we now find ourselves. Senator Feinstein has offered an amendment that would interfere with the rights of no parents who want to teach their child to use a firearm responsibly or want to have a firearm in their home. It deals only with that class of weapons for which there is no hunting purpose, no legitimate function for which any teenager in any school of America should want to own an assault rifle or a multibullet clip. That is all we deal with. Inexplicably, I do not know if we will succeed. Last year, we lost over 3,500 young people to gunfire; 3,500 deaths. This is no perfect answer. It will not eliminate all of those deaths. It may not eliminate a majority of those deaths. But no one on this Senate floor can credibly argue that with the adoption of the Feinstein amendment some lives will not be saved; that the chances of a Littleton are not measurably reduced. The Senate has a choice. Senator Ashcroft has also offered an amendment and it would also restrict to minors access to some of these weapons.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, today, Senators Boxer, Feinstein, Kerry (Ma.), Lautenberg and I rise to introduce legislation to end the use of the conventional steel-jawed leghold trap. I rise to draw this country's attention to the many liabilities of this outdated device and ask for my colleagues support in ending its use. While this bill does not prohibit trapping, it does outlaw a particularly savage method of trapping by prohibiting the import or export of, and the interstate shipment of conventional steel-jawed leghold traps and articles of fur from animals caught in such traps. The conventional steel-jawed leghold trap is a cruel and antiquated device for which many alternatives exist. The American Veterinary Medical Association and the American Animal Hospital Association have condemned leghold traps as ``inhumane'' and the majority of Americans oppose the use of this class of trap. California became the fourth state in recent years to pass a statewide ballot initiative to ban steel-jawed leghold traps--Arizona, Colorado, and Massachusetts are the other three states to have decided the issue by a direct vote of the people. A number of other states, including Florida, New Jersey, and Rhode Island, have legislative or administrative bans on these devices. In addition, 88 nations have banned their use. This important and timely issue now takes on added importance as the United States and the European Union (E.U.) recently reached an agreement to implement humane trapping standards. This agreement requires the U.S. to phase out leghold traps. Without this agreement, the E.U. would have prohibited the importation of U.S. fur from thirteen species commonly captured with leghold traps. Adoption of my legislation will fulfill the U.S. obligation to the E.U. and reduce tremendous and unnecessary suffering of animals. By ending the use of the conventional steel-jawed leghold trap within our borders, we will effectively set a humane standard for trapping, as well as protect the U.S. fur industry by keeping Europe's doors open to U.S. fur. One quarter of all U.S. fur exports, $44 million, go to the European market. Of this $44 million, $21 million would be eliminated by the ban. This would clearly cause considerable economic damage to the U.S. fur industry, an important source of employment for many Americans. Since many Americans rely on trapping for their livelihood, it is imperative to find a solution which prevents the considerable damage that this ban would cause to our fur industry. It is important to note that since the steel-jawed leghold trap has been banned in Europe, alternatives have been provided to protect and maintain the European fur industry. Our nation would be far better served by ending the use of the archaic and inhumane steel-jawed leghold trap. By doing so, we are not only setting a long-overdue humane standard for trapping, we are ensuring that the European market remains open to all American fur exports.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize the Young Women's Christian Association of Trenton, New Jersey, and their Tenth Annual ``Celebration of Women'' luncheon which will honor and recognize six award recipients for their outstanding contributions to the community. The YWCA of Trenton was established in 1904 with its primary mission to provide a residence and recreational activities for women in the work force during the industrial revolution. Since this beginning, the Board of Directors and staff have developed the YWCA into community based organization committed to the empowerment of women and girls and to erase racism through diverse activities and programs. The YWCA provides leadership training, public advocacy, education, support services, health promotions and recreation within the city of Trenton and the surrounding communities. The awards given have become a distinguished tradition in the New Jersey capital region since they were first introduced years ago as the Tribute to Women in Industry, or TWIN, awards. The recipients of this year's award embody the mission of the YWCA. Eileen Thorton will receive the Woman of Achievement Award given to a woman who has achieved distinction in her field while using her power to encourage opportunity. J. Dolores Baker is this year's recipient of the Woman of Inspiration Award presented to a woman who has overcome insurmountable odds. Molly Merlino will receive the Meta Griffith Community Service Award, named after the prominent civic leader. This award is given to a woman who has effectively recognized and addressed community needs through exemplary volunteer service. Gwendolyn I. Long will be the recipient of the Ethel Downing Johnson Memorial Award, named in honor of a YWCA board member who died in 1992. The woman who receives this award has demonstrated an earnest and sincere commitment to mission and purpose of the YWCA. Cotempo Press is the recipient of the Organizational Commitment Award, presented to an organization or corporation which has provided innovative corporate policies and company attitudes enabling women to excel in the workplace. The Artist of the Year award will be given to Carl McClease whose piece, titled ``Trio Sublime,'' will become a permanent exhibit at the YWCA. Each of these individuals have distinguished themselves this year in their chosen fields. They have made the city of Trenton and the State of New Jersey. I am pleased to recognize the YWCA of Trenton and the six award recipients for their continuing commitment to the people of New Jersey.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, I am pleased to submit for the Record a statement in honor of one of our former colleagues, Senator R. Vance Hartke, (D-Indiana), who served in this body from 1959 to 1976. The statement is written by a good friend of mine, former Congressman Bob Mrazek, who worked for Senator Hartke from 1969 to 1971. Congressman Mrazek was thoughtful enough to submit this in honor of the Senator's 80th birthday, which takes place later this month. We wish him the best. I ask that the statement be printed in the Record. The statement follows. Tribute to Former Senator R. Vance Hartke (By Hon. Bob Mrazek) It was my privilege to serve on the staff of former U.S. Senator R. Vance Hartke (D-Indiana), from 1969 to 1971. These were tumultuous times for the United States in the bitter aftermath of the assassinations of Senator Robert F. Kennedy and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. As the Vietnam War continued to cause deep divisions in the nation's social and political fabric, I was proud to witness Senator Hartke's courageous opposition to that war, which he began at great personal cost in 1965. Throughout his 18 years of service as a U.S. Senator, Vance Hartke demonstrated absolute fearlessness and political courage in taking principled stands on the most important issues facing the nation, often at the risk of prematurely ending his career. His prodigious legislative achievements undoubtedly distinguish Vance Hartke as one of the greatest Senators of the 20th century. From his contributions to creating the Head Start program and Medicare to the Guaranteed Student Loan Program and the International Executive Service Corps, Senator Hartke was a leader who made America and the world a better, more humane place. I am honored to call this legendary legislator my friend. In what I believe is a long overdue tribute, I would like to present the highlights of a career that continues to have a positive impact on our country and the entire world. Senator Hartke is credited by the definitive book on the Great Society, Guns or Butter, with being one of six Senators who passed Medicare, the crown jewel of the Great Society. He is often called the ``Father of Medicare.'' The Jeffersonville Evening News wrote that he was, ``instrumental in gaining passage of more legislation to benefit the elderly than any other senator.'' Vance Hartke created his own Peace Corps, the International Executive Service Corps still going strong after 30 years, with activities all over the world. The U.S. ``business peace corps'' has been emulated in 23 developed countries in the world, with 35,000 business leaders participating, with each replicated version also having outreach to every developing country in the world. His successful passage of the Kidney Dialysis Amendment saved 500,000 lives and continues to save lives today, earning him the following observation by Richard Margolis: ``We can measure our greatness in compassion, too.'' Perhaps this quote best represents Hartke's legacy. During his 18 years in the U.S. Senate, Hartke spearheaded the passage of every major educational bill, among them, the Guaranteed Student Loan Act and the Adult Education Act, which are still going strong today. He has a perfect voting record as rated by the National Education Association. As a matter of personal conscience, he broke with President Lyndon Johnson in 1965 to oppose the war in Vietnam at a time when fewer than 300 Americans had been killed. Senator Hartke was a Civil Rights champion--even in the face of death threats to his family in Indiana from the Ku Klux Klan. Ralph Nader said of Hartke, ``He was the most consistently effective advocate of the consumer in the Senate.'' Ed Lewis, the well-known Indiana lawyer who died in 1996, called him ``a visionary, an environmentalist before people knew how to spell the word.'' The national environmental community honored him with a ``Special Tribute'' at the 1997 Clinton-Gore Environmental Inaugural Ball. Senator Hartke was a candidate for President of the United States in 1972. In summation, this prodigious record of achievement represents not only a tremendous contribution to the people he represented for 18 years in Indiana, but to every citizen of this nation who has benefitted from the legacy he created for us. S. Res. 68 Whereas millions of women and girls living under Taliban rule in Afghanistan are denied their basic human rights; Whereas according to the Department of State and international human rights organizations, the Taliban continues to commit widespread and well-documented human rights abuses, in gross violation of internationally accepted norms; Whereas, according to the United States Department of State Country Report on Human Rights Practices (hereafter ``1998 State Department Human Rights Report''), violence against women in Afghanistan occurs frequently, including beatings, rapes, forced marriages, disappearances, kidnapings, and killings; Whereas women and girls under Taliban rule are generally barred from working, going to school, leaving their homes without an immediate male family member as chaperone, and visiting doctors, hospitals or clinics; Whereas according to the 1998 State Department Human Rights Report, gender restrictions by the Taliban continue to interfere with the delivery of humanitarian assistance to women and girls in Afghanistan; Whereas according to the 1998 State Department Human Rights Report, under Taliban rule women are forced to don a head-to- toe garment known as a burqa, which has only a mesh screen for vision, and many women found in public not wearing a burqa, or wearing a burqa that does not properly cover the ankles, are beaten by Taliban militiamen; Whereas according to the 1998 State Department Human Rights Report, some poor women under Taliban rule cannot afford the cost of a burqa and thus are forced to remain at home or risk beatings if they go outside the home without one; Whereas according to the 1998 State Department Human Rights Report, the lack of a burqa has resulted in the inability of some women under Taliban rule to get necessary medical care because they cannot leave home; Whereas according to the 1998 State Department Human Rights Report, women under Taliban rule reportedly have been beaten if their shoe heels click when they walk; Whereas according to the 1998 State Department Human Rights Report, under Taliban rule women in homes must not be visible from the street, and houses with female occupants must have their windows painted over; Whereas according to the 1998 State Department Human Rights Report, under Taliban rule women are not allowed to drive, and taxi drivers reportedly have been beaten if they take unescorted women as passengers; Whereas according to the 1998 State Department Human Rights Report, women under Taliban rule are forbidden to enter mosques or other places of worship; and Whereas women and girls of all ages under Taliban rule have suffered needlessly and even died from curable illness because they have been turned away from health care facilities because of their gender: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that-- (1) the President should instruct the United States Representative to the United Nations to use all appropriate means to prevent any Taliban-led government in Afghanistan from obtaining the seat in the United Nations General Assembly reserved for Afghanistan so long as gross violations of internationally recognized human rights against women and girls persist; and (2) the United States should refuse to recognize any government in Afghanistan which is not taking actions to achieve the following goals in Afghanistan: (A) The effective participation of women in all civil, economic, and social life. (B) The right of women to work. (C) The right of women and girls to an education without discrimination and the reopening of schools to women and girls at all levels of education. (D) The freedom of movement of women and girls. (E) Equal access of women and girls to health facilities. (F) Equal access of women and girls to humanitarian aid.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize Mayor Gerald A. Calabrese of Cliffside Park, New Jersey as he is honored for a lifetime of distinguished service to the citizens of his community, county, and state by the Temple Israel Community Center, celebrating its 75th anniversary. Gerry began his career in public service by enlisting in the Navy and serving his country during World War II. After returning to the United States, Gerry turned his focus to education and entered St. John's University where he was chosen as an All-American for basketball. Upon graduation, he continued playing basketball in the National Basketball Association for the Syracuse Nationals. Gerry retired from his sports career and was quick to enter into public service as he was elected to the Cliffside Park Borough Council in 1955. In 1959, Gerry was elected to his first term as the mayor of Cliffside Park, a post he has retained for the past forty years. During his tenure, Gerry has been always ready and willing to meet with his constituents and listen to their concerns. He has raised the bar in constituent services, as he has always been ready and willing to help those in need. Continuing in this vein, Gerry served on the Bergen County Board of Freeholders from 1975 to 1985, as Bergen County Democratic Chairman from 1991 to 1998, the New Jersey Delegation to the National Democratic Convention in 1988 and 1992, on the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities from 1960 to 1987, and on the 1992 New Jersey Congressional Re-Districting Committee. Gerry Calabrese is respected by all in and around his community and his activities extend beyond his public service career. He is a life member of the PBA Local 96, N.J. State Association of Chiefs of Police, Cliffside Park Little League, Polish American Democratic Club. Hackensack Unico and Cliffside Park B'nai B'rith named him ``Man of the Year.'' Mayor Calabrese is a legendary public servant in New Jersey and is most deserving of this distinguished honor. I am proud to recognize Gerry and his many years of distinguished service.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Early Treatment for HIV Act. In recent years, exciting scientific breakthroughs have led to an improved understanding of AIDS and provided powerful new treatments for Americans living with HIV disease. Commonly known as the protease cocktail, these drugs have helped transform HIV into a manageable chronic disease. To be most effective, the medical community and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) recommends the use of these treatments early in the course HIV infection, before the onset of symptoms. Tragically though, the high cost of these drugs means that only those of significant financial means have access to them. In another tragic irony, vulnerable low-income HIV-positive Americans cannot receive AIDS-preventing drugs under the Medicaid program until they develop full blown AIDS. By that time, their preventive value has greatly diminished. To correct this glaring flaw in the Medicaid program, the Early Treatment for HIV Act will ensure that HIV positive, low income patients, will be eligible for medical services immediately. The benefits of this legislation are overwhelming. A report released at the 12th World AIDS Conference in Geneva found that treatment for HIV early in the course of the disease is both medically and economically effective. Another report by the University of California found that expanding Medicaid to provide wider access to HIV therapies would prevent thousands of deaths and AIDS diagnoses, leading to 14,500 more years of life for persons living with HIV disease over five years. In terms of economic savings, several recent studies have found that money spent ``up front'' on medications are offset by later savings on hospitalizations and other expensive care and treatments for AIDS- related illnesses. A report by the Medical Associates of Los Angeles found that each dollar spent on combination drugs therapies resulted in at least two dollars of savings and overall treatment costs. Mr. President, the Early Treatment for HIV Act will help thousands of low-income people with HIV live longer, more fulfilling lives by allowing them to overcome the financial barriers to effective medical treatments. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. TORRICELLI

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

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Early Treatment for HIV Act. In recent years, exciting scientific breakthroughs have led to an improved understanding of AIDS and provided powerful new treatments for Americans living with HIV disease. Commonly known as the protease cocktail, these drugs have helped transform HIV into a manageable chronic disease. To be most effective, the medical community and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) recommends the use of these treatments early in the course HIV infection, before the onset of symptoms. Tragically though, the high cost of these drugs means that only those of significant financial means have access to them. In another tragic irony, vulnerable low-income HIV-positive Americans cannot receive AIDS-preventing drugs under the Medicaid program until they develop full blown AIDS. By that time, their preventive value has greatly diminished. To correct this glaring flaw in the Medicaid program, the Early Treatment for HIV Act will ensure that HIV positive, low income patients, will be eligible for medical services immediately. The benefits of this legislation are overwhelming. A report released at the 12th World AIDS Conference in Geneva found that treatment for HIV early in the course of the disease is both medically and economically effective. Another report by the University of California found that expanding Medicaid to provide wider access to HIV therapies would prevent thousands of deaths and AIDS diagnoses, leading to 14,500 more years of life for persons living with HIV disease over five years. In terms of economic savings, several recent studies have found that money spent ``up front'' on medications are offset by later savings on hospitalizations and other expensive care and treatments for AIDS- related illnesses. A report by the Medical Associates of Los Angeles found that each dollar spent on combination drugs therapies resulted in at least two dollars of savings and overall treatment costs. Mr. President, the Early Treatment for HIV Act will help thousands of low-income people with HIV live longer, more fulfilling lives by allowing them to overcome the financial barriers to effective medical treatments. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, last week the sense of security that Americans had in their own communities, our sense of the strength of our culture, our ability to protect our families and our homes, was once again shattered. The challenge did not come from Kosovo, and it was not from a computer problem with the new millennium. It was from the most basic form of human violence, striking us where we are most vulnerable, and taking the life of a child. James Agee once wrote that in every child who is born, no matter what circumstances or without regard to their parents, the potentiality of the human race is born again. It may be because of the sense we possess that our own renewal is in the life of our children that the death of a child shakes us so dramatically. Rarely have we seen an America more traumatized by individual acts of violence than as a result of the murders in Littleton, CO. All of us recognize that there is no one answer, no one explanation for this tragedy. The answer lies in the strengths of our families, the responsibility of parents, the roles of school administrators and parents and local police. Almost every critic has a point; virtually none has a complete answer. The increasing level of violence in the entertainment industry, the new use of technologies which have sanitized the very concepts of death and murder, the failure of role models, the growing isolation of children from parents and siblings and extended families--all critics are right; no criticism is complete. But in this constellation of problems there is the persistent issue of access to guns in American society. Only a few years ago, when a similar tragedy rocked the United Kingdom, the British Parliament responded in days. A gunman killed 16 students in Dunblane, Scotland. The Parliament was outraged. The British people responded. And the private ownership of high-caliber handguns was not regulated or controlled; it was banned. This Congress can rightfully cite a variety of challenges to the American people to ensure that Littleton never occurs again, though, indeed, we failed to do so after Jonesboro, Paducah, Springfield, and a variety of other cities and schools that had similar tragedies. Now the question is, Do we visit upon this tragedy the same silence as after those other school shootings, or do we have the same courage the British Parliament exhibited 3 years ago in dealing with this problem? The amount of death that this Congress is prepared to witness before we deal realistically with the problems of guns in America defies comprehension. Last year, 34,000 Americans were victims of gun violence. But the year before and the year before that, for a whole generation, the carnage has been similar. Every year, 1,500 people die from accidental shootings. Every 6 hours, another child in America commits suicide with a gun. No gun control can eliminate all of this violence. I do not believe any gun control can eliminate a majority of this violence. But no one can credibly argue that some reasonable gun control cannot stop some of this violence. I am heartened that the majority leader has promised the Senate that within a matter of weeks there will be a debate on this floor and an opportunity to present some reasonable forms of additional gun control. At a minimum, this should include the question of parental responsibility for children who get access to guns. Where parents have knowledge or facilitate that purchase, they must bear some responsibility for the likely, in some cases inevitable, consequences of minors having those weapons. Second, there is the question of whether or not minors should be able to purchase certain weapons at all. It is arguable that a minor should not be able to purchase a handgun. It is irrefutable, in my judgment, that a minor should not be able to purchase a semiautomatic weapon. Third, the question of whether, through the new technologies of the Internet, it is appropriate that guns be sold or purchased in any form; if it is not an invitation to violate and avoid existing State and Federal laws; if a person does not have to present themselves in a retail establishment with credentials to purchase a weapon. Remote sales, in my judgment, should not be allowed. Then there is the larger question of the regulation of all weapons through the Federal Government--whether, when we live in a society where everything from an automobile to a child's teddy bear has regulations on their designs and materials to ensure safety, that same regulatory scheme should not be used for weapons; whether a weapon is designed properly to assure its safety; whether its materials are the best possible; whether technology is being used to ensure that the gun is used properly. One can envision that the Treasury Department or another Federal agency would require gun manufacturers to have safety locks so that children could not misuse them. Future technology may allow a thumbprint to ensure that only the owner of the gun is using the gun. More basic technologies might require better materials or that a gun does not misfire when it is dropped. Proper regulations might ensure how these guns are sold, to ensure that they are sold properly, that State gun laws are not being evaded by oversupplying stores on State borders with permissive laws so that they are sold into States with restrictive laws. Inevitably this must be part of the debate: the proper Federal role in ensuring the proper design and distribution and sale of these weapons. I am grateful, Mr. President, that the majority leader has invited the Senate to participate in this debate; proud, if the Senate responds to the challenge. There were so many prayers throughout this country for the victims of the shooting in Littleton, sincere prayers on the floor of the Senate. The victims and their families and traumatized Americans need our prayers, but they need more than our prayers. They need the courage that comes from a people who recognize that change is both possible and required to avoid these tragedies from repeating themselves. The victims of Littleton will be grateful for our prayers, but they will curse our inaction if political intimidation, the fear of change, results in the Senate offering nothing but prayers. This Senate has a responsibility to respond. We know what needs to get done. The President of the United States has challenged us. Americans are waiting and watching. Every Senator must use these next few weeks to think about how they will vote, searching their own consciences on how they will answer their constituents, their families, and themselves, if Littleton becomes one more town in a litany of forgotten schools, forgotten children, and a rising spiral of carnage. Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize George Ring who is being honored by Catholic Community Services, the largest non-profit social service agency in the state of New Jersey. Headquartered in Newark, CCS serves more than 200,000 poor and disadvantaged citizens throughout northern New Jersey. George has been an ardent supporter of this organization and is most deserving of this honor. George has served New Jersey and the nation in many capacities. After graduating from Seton Hall University, George joined the United States Army and served from 1966-1969 as a Platoon Leader, Company Commander, and General's Aide. He received multiple awards and citations for his service, including the Distinguished Service Cross, the Silver Star, Oak Leaf Cluster, and a Presidential Unit Citation. After working several years in the banking industry, George co- founded Cross Country Cable, Ltd. This firm was involved in the ownership, construction and operation of cable television and microwave systems inside the United States and around the world. In 1995, he sold this company and formed a new company, Wireless Cable International Inc. George is the president and CEO of this new company. George has been active at his alma mater and in his community. At Seton Hall University, he is a member of the Executive and Finance Committees of the Board of Regents and is a member of the Board of Trustees. He is also a recipient of the ``Distinguished Alumnus Award'' from Seton Hall University and Union High School. In addition, George has served on the boards of several visual arts programs and symphony orchestras as well as New Jersey Public Broadcasting. He is a past President of the Watchung-Warren Rotary Club and has been active with local youth sports leagues. He has given his financial support to numerous schools and charities. Catholic Community Services has been one of the grateful recipients of George's generosity. He has spent countless hours fundraising on behalf of CCS. For his acts of philanthropy and his visible role in the community, I am proud to recognize George Ring as he is honored by CCS.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, today, Senators Mack, Gregg, Graham, Moynihan, Kerry, Boxer, Reed, Feinstein, Murray, and I are introducing the National Estuary Conservation Act of 1999. I rise to draw this country's attention to our nationally significant estuaries that are threatened by pollution, development, or overuse. With forty five percent of the nation's population residing in estuarine areas, there is a compelling need for us to promote comprehensive planning and management efforts to restore and protect them. Estuaries are significant habitat for fish, birds, and other wildlife because they provide safe spawning grounds and nurseries. Seventy five percent of the U.S. commercial fish catch depends on estuaries during some stage of their life. Commercial and recreational fisheries contribute $111 billion to the nation's economy and support 1.5 million jobs. Estuaries are also important to our nation's tourist economy for boating and outdoor recreation. Coastal tourism in just four states-- New Jersey, Florida, Texas, and California--totals $75 billion. Due to their popularity, the overall capacity of our nation's estuaries to function as healthy productive ecosystems is declining. This is a result of the cumulative effects of increasing development and fast growing year round populations which increase dramatically in the summer. Land development, and associated activities that come with people's desire to live and play near these beautiful resources, cause runoff and storm water discharges that contribute to siltation, increased nutrients, and other contamination. Bacterial contamination closes many popular beaches and shellfish harvesting areas in estuaries. Also, several estuaries are afflicted by problems that still require significant research. Examples include the outbreaks of the toxic microbe, Pfiesteria piscicida, in rivers draining to estuaries in Maryland and Virginia. Congress recognized the importance of preserving and enhancing coastal environments with the establishment of the National Estuary Program in the Clean Water Act Amendments of 1987. The Program's purpose is of facilitate state and local governments preparation of comprehensive conservation and management plans for threatened estuaries of national significance. In support of this effort, section 320 of the Clean Water Act authorized the EPA to make grants to states to develop environmental management plans. To date, 28 estuaries across the country have been designated into the Program. However, the law fails to provide assistance once plans are complete and ready for implementation. Already, 18 of the 28 plans are finished. As the majority of plans are now in the implementation stage, it is incumbent upon us to maintain the partnership the Federal Government initiated ten years ago to insure that our nationally significant estuaries are protected. The legislation we are introducing will take the next step by giving EPA authority to make grants for plan implementation and authorize annual appropriations in the amount of $50 million. To insure the program is a true partnership and leverage scarce resources, there is a direct match requirement for grant recipients so funds will be available to upgrade sewage treatment plants, fix combined sewer overflows, control urban stormwater discharges, and reduce polluted runoff into estuarine areas.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, today, Senators Mack, Gregg, Graham, Moynihan, Kerry, Boxer, Reed, Feinstein, Murray, and I are introducing the National Estuary Conservation Act of 1999. I rise to draw this country's attention to our nationally significant estuaries that are threatened by pollution, development, or overuse. With forty five percent of the nation's population residing in estuarine areas, there is a compelling need for us to promote comprehensive planning and management efforts to restore and protect them. Estuaries are significant habitat for fish, birds, and other wildlife because they provide safe spawning grounds and nurseries. Seventy five percent of the U.S. commercial fish catch depends on estuaries during some stage of their life. Commercial and recreational fisheries contribute $111 billion to the nation's economy and support 1.5 million jobs. Estuaries are also important to our nation's tourist economy for boating and outdoor recreation. Coastal tourism in just four states-- New Jersey, Florida, Texas, and California--totals $75 billion. Due to their popularity, the overall capacity of our nation's estuaries to function as healthy productive ecosystems is declining. This is a result of the cumulative effects of increasing development and fast growing year round populations which increase dramatically in the summer. Land development, and associated activities that come with people's desire to live and play near these beautiful resources, cause runoff and storm water discharges that contribute to siltation, increased nutrients, and other contamination. Bacterial contamination closes many popular beaches and shellfish harvesting areas in estuaries. Also, several estuaries are afflicted by problems that still require significant research. Examples include the outbreaks of the toxic microbe, Pfiesteria piscicida, in rivers draining to estuaries in Maryland and Virginia. Congress recognized the importance of preserving and enhancing coastal environments with the establishment of the National Estuary Program in the Clean Water Act Amendments of 1987. The Program's purpose is of facilitate state and local governments preparation of comprehensive conservation and management plans for threatened estuaries of national significance. In support of this effort, section 320 of the Clean Water Act authorized the EPA to make grants to states to develop environmental management plans. To date, 28 estuaries across the country have been designated into the Program. However, the law fails to provide assistance once plans are complete and ready for implementation. Already, 18 of the 28 plans are finished. As the majority of plans are now in the implementation stage, it is incumbent upon us to maintain the partnership the Federal Government initiated ten years ago to insure that our nationally significant estuaries are protected. The legislation we are introducing will take the next step by giving EPA authority to make grants for plan implementation and authorize annual appropriations in the amount of $50 million. To insure the program is a true partnership and leverage scarce resources, there is a direct match requirement for grant recipients so funds will be available to upgrade sewage treatment plants, fix combined sewer overflows, control urban stormwater discharges, and reduce polluted runoff into estuarine areas.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, I rise today together with Senators Thomas, Reed, Helms, Wellstone, Coverdell, and Kerry, to submit a resolution on Indonesia's upcoming Parliamentary elections. These are both exciting and troubling times in Indonesia. The elections scheduled for June 7th could be the beginning of a new, democratic Indonesia. At the same time, though, we receive almost daily reports of increased social unrest and a bleak economic future. While inflation and interest rates have fallen, the Indonesian economy remains unstable. Recent clashes between Muslims and Christians in Ambon remind us that Indonesia's ethnic tensions could overwhelm the country at any minute. The status of East Timor is an ongoing issue for the people of Indonesia, although President Habibie has vowed to come to resolution by the end of the year. Depending upon the outcome of the vote on autonomy, the Parliament elected in June could have a direct influence on East Timor's future. The upcoming June elections are a critical benchmark for Indonesia's efforts to pursue democratic reform. A freely elected Parliament will further distance Indonesia from its past and help instill a democratic culture. If these elections are proven to be free, fair and transparent, Indonesia will be well on its way to having a government with popular legitimacy. I applaud the Administration's efforts to ensure that the elections on June 7th are open and transparent. U.S. support for a fair election process will send a strong message to the participants. The pledge of $30 million to help Indonesia realize its goal of free and fair elections demonstrates an understanding of how important June 7th is, not only in Indonesia, but in Southeast Asia as a whole. While Indonesia's new election laws provide for monitors at the national, provincial and district levels, we must ensure that monitors are properly trained and educated. We must move quickly to maximize the interim period before the elections and encourage other nations to actively support our efforts to promote a free and fair process. Producing transparent and legitimate election results is a responsibility that cannot be overlooked. However, we must look forward at the same time. The economic and social problems Indonesia is currently facing will be with the country past the election, and they need continued attention from this Congress and the Administration. The country's future will be uncertain if the pressing issues of today are ignored. For this reason, I have introduced a resolution that supports Indonesia's efforts to hold free and fair elections. It calls upon all political, military and ethnic leaders to refrain from violence and work toward a peaceful campaign period. In addition, it urges all candidates to address some of these social problems and incorporate possible solutions into their election platforms. This Congress can have a positive impact on democracy in Indonesia by helping to keep its future leaders focused on achieving long term social and economic stability.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize Dr. R. Gordon Douglas, Jr., President of the Vaccine Division of Merck & Co., Inc. as he prepares for his retirement after decades of distinguished service. As a leader in one of New Jersey's largest pharmaceutical companies, Dr. Douglas has been responsible for the research, development, manufacturing and marketing of Merck's vaccine line. In addition to his responsibilities at Merck, Dr. Douglas has helped improve the lives of thousands of people throughout the world through his leadership roles in his company's and the State's blood drives. In 1998, Dr. Douglas encouraged over 3,400 Merck employees in New Jersey to give the life-saving gift of blood. He took a significant leadership role with the New Jersey Blood Services by chairing the Blood Donor Campaign in 1997-1998 and encouraging colleagues in other corporations to increase their blood drive efforts. Under his leadership, the Merck Blood Drive Program received the America's Blood Centers 1999 Platinum Award, the highest blood drive award given by the Nation's largest network of independent, community blood centers. Dr. Douglas has served as a physician, academician, and world-class leader in the fight against infectious diseases. As a graduate of Cornell University Medical School, he has served as a clinical investigator at the National Institute of Health, a member of the faculty at the Baylor College of Medicine, and the School of Medicine at the University of Rochester, and later returned to Cornell as Chairman of the Department of Medicine in the Medical College before beginning his career at Merck. In a career marked by many valuable achievements, I am pleased today to highlight Dr. Douglas' contributions to New Jersey and society.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, it is an unfortunate result of today's modern health care system that many health care providers face serious financial difficulties. Increasingly, these health care providers are filing for the protection of the bankruptcy system. This reality was demonstrated recently in New Jersey where the parent company of the HIP Health Care Plan went bankrupt, leaving the plan's 194,000 subscribers in health care limbo. The bankruptcy system, for all of the benefits it provides to debtors, creditors and the public, does little to protect patients of insolvent health care providers. These patients have no choice when their provider files for bankruptcy, they are, quite literally, innocent victims. In some cases such as the HIP HMO in New Jersey, state insurance commissioners have stepped in to manage failing providers. However, such steps will not always be possible, and in those cases patients must have adequate protections. Furthermore, this bill applies not only to HMOs, but also to hospitals, nursing homes, and long term care providers. Senator Grassley and I have worked diligently to craft a fair bankruptcy bill that addresses the true problems of the bankruptcy system. We believe that the increasing frequency of health care bankruptcy and the problems it creates for patients is a serious problem that deserves to be addressed in our bankruptcy reform effort. Our bill would create several important patient protections. It would provide for the appointment of an ombudsman to monitor and assure continued quality of the care being provided to patients. The bill would set up procedures to ensure that the confidentiality of patient records is strictly maintained as a health care provider closes its operation. Our legislation would also raise the priority in bankruptcy of the costs associated with closing a health care business. Those cost are often incurred by state agencies, and thus the taxpayers. Finally, the bill would require a bankruptcy trustee to use best efforts to transfer patients to alternative providers when a health care business fails. The reality of today's health care system is that there will inevitably be providers who fall upon financial difficulties and seek the protection of the bankruptcy system. Given that reality, we must take the steps today to ensure that the patients of these providers have adequate protections.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, I rise today to commemorate the 84th anniversary of the Armenian genocide. This is an event that has defined the Armenian people for the past 84 years, and my thoughts and sympathies are again with them as they remember these events. It is with a great sense of sorrow that we mark the 84th year since the tragic genocide and exile of the Armenian people. The Turkish Ottoman Empire expelled nearly 1.5 million Armenians as part of a staged campaign. In doing so, the world witnessed one of the most sobering events in modern history. As the first genocide of the 20th century, the period between 1915 and 1918 deserves our attention and respect, and it should remind us of the need to keep all those who perished during the Genocide alive in our memory. While humankind has the ability to sponsor acts of great kindness and sacrifice, we also have the capacity for great evil. By pausing to commemorate the Armenian Genocide, we ensure that it will never slip into the recesses of history. Along with the Holocaust, the Armenian Genocide signifies our ability to promote evil, but if we close our eyes to the tragedies of the past, we risk the chance of repeating them in the future. Sadly, the Armenian American community has its roots in the Armenian Genocide. Many individuals living here in the United States either lost family members at the hands of the Ottomans, or are survivors themselves. They have risen above adversity to become prominent and successful citizens despite a tragic past. The Armenian American community has been vocal in expressing its anguish about the Genocide. It is my hope that their perseverance in marking this event each year, as well as our own efforts here in the United States Senate, will be enough to allow us to remember the lessons of the Genocide. We are constantly forced to relearn the effects of evil unchecked, but I hope, in this case, we will be guided to a better future.