Robert Torricelli

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, I rise today in recognition of Herbert Tanzman, a man of many talents and accomplishments, who is a dedicated member of the Highland Park Conservative Temple and Center. From the time of his Bar Mitzvah in 1935; to his membership on the Board of Trustees for forty-four years; to his Vice-Presidency and Temple Finance Committee Chairmanship; and to his service as Gabbai, with his brother-in-law Charlie for over forty years, Herb has been committed to the temple. In recognition of this service, he was named to the select group of Honorary Life Members of the Board of Trustees, and he was on the Rabbinical Search Committees for both Rabbi Yakov Hilsenrath and Rabbi Eliot Malomet. Herb has been active in civic and Jewish communal activities for many years, and he is currently Director of the real estate firm of Jacobson Goldfarb and Tanzman Associates. Having served Highland Park as both councilman and mayor, Herb is well-known in the community. In addition to his responsibilities at the temple, he has been active in the local chapter of the Multiple Sclerosis Association, Central New Jersey Jewish Home for the Aged, YM-YWHA of Raritan Valley, New Brunswick post #138 of Jewish War Veterans, National Executive Estate Commission, Job Corps, United Community Services, and Raritan Valley UJA Federation. In the past, Herb has been on the Executive Board of the Jewish Federation of Greater Monmouth County, and he currently serves as National Vice- Chairman and National Campaign Cabinet Member of the State of Israel Bonds. Herb is also President of the Ocean Cove Condominium Association in West End, New Jersey. While these activities are impressive, Herb truly distinguished himself as a serviceman during World War II and has since been honored for his numerous achievements. As a combat veteran of the Battle of Iwo Jima, he was awarded the Navy Air Medal. Herb is also the proud recipient of the Jerusalem Covenant Award, the Humanitarian Award of the National Conference of Christians and Jews, the Ben Gurion Award, and Israel's coveted ``Sword of the Haganah'' award for record breaking achievement in bond sales. Together with his son, Roy, Herb received the Family Achievement Award of the State of Israel Bonds last year at the International Prime Ministers Club Dinner. The Chaver Award, which Herb is to receive from his temple, is a testament to his continued service on behalf of the community.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, I rise today in recognition of Patrick Campbell as he celebrates his retirement from the International Union of Operating Engineers. Pat has been a cornerstone of the labor movement in New Jersey for over fifty years, and he has made equally significant contributions to political and civic life. It is a pleasure for me to be able to honor his past accomplishments. Prior to his career with the IUOE, Pat served admirably in the United States Navy, as a Navy Seabee in the South Pacific during World War II. Upon returning to the United States, Pat joined Local 825, International Union of Operating Engineers and quickly rose through its ranks to occupy numerous leadership positions. The membership of Local 825 recognized Pat's leadership when he was chosen as Business Manager in 1976, and reelected seven times. Pat is Second General Vice President of the International Union of Operating Engineers. As General Vice President, he is delegated to attend many conferences and conventions of the Operating Engineers and also serves on joint committees of the Engineers/Teamsters, Engineers/ Laborers, and Engineers/Iron Workers. In addition, Pat is President of the Northeastern Conference of Operating Engineers, and a Vice President of the New Jersey AFL-CIO. Pat's leadership has advanced New Jersey's interests as well. He has served as Vice President of the New Jersey State Building and Construction Trades Council, and has been a delegate to numerous conferences and conventions with the council. Pat has also served on the Port Authority Development Advisory Committee of New York and New Jersey. In addition to his union activities, Pat has served as a scoutmaster for the Boy Scouts of America, has coached Little League girls' softball, and has been Vice President of the Parents' Guild of Roselle Catholic High School. Pat has also been a member of the Catholic War Veterans, the Veterans of Foreign Wars, and the Knights of Columbus. Pat is currently a member of the Council of Regents of Felician College in Lodi, New Jersey, and a member of the Housing Commission of the Archdiocese of Newark. Pat and his wife, Adele, have been married for forty-eight years and are the proud parents of four children and ten grandchildren. Pat's integrity and commitment to New Jersey are two of the qualities I admire most. He has worked to pass these same qualities along to the countless numbers he has faithfully served. Pat's contributions have done much for the future of New Jersey, and our nation as a whole. I congratulate Pat on a job well done, and I wish him the best in retirement.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, Senator Murkowski and I have submitted a resolution that is critical to the future health and well- being of the people of Taiwan and the rest of the world. I rise today to express my support for the resolution regarding the Republic of China on Taiwan's participation in the World Health Organization (WHO). Improving health care in Asia, and around the world, is one of the most important issues facing the international community as we move into the 21st century. Despite the fact that many people are better off today than their parents and grandparents were years ago, we still face tremendous obstacles to establishing basic health care in a number of regions around the world. To this date, children are still not vaccinated, clean water and sanitation are still not available to hundreds of millions of people, curative drugs and treatments are still inaccessible, and over 500,000 mothers die unnecessarily each year in childbirth. The WHO has been instrumental in helping to draw attention to these issues, and to bring needed relief to some of the most underprivileged people in the world. As we all know, sickness and disease span across borders and can affect anyone, regardless of where he or she lives. Here in the United States, we have been lucky enough to enjoy relatively easy access to the newest advances in medical technology and knowledge. However, the people of Taiwan have not been so fortunate. The 21 million citizens of Taiwan are currently barred from accessing the same technologies and techniques through the WHO that many other nations benefit from. In addition, the Taiwan has been frustrated in its attempts to share its own medical knowledge with the rest of the world. Until Taiwan gains membership in the WHO, it cannot contribute its substantial expertise in health care to furthering the organization's goals. We can all benefit from the advances Taiwan has made on its own, and Taiwan can, in turn, improve its own situation by accessing the resources amassed by the WHO. The resolution that Senator Murkowski and I have submitted addresses an issue of basic human decency, and I urge my colleagues to support our efforts to help Taiwan become a member of the WHO.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, on behalf of the family and friends of Joan D'Alessandro, I want to express gratitude for the passage of Joan's Law, a bill I introduced in October 1997, as a provision in H.R. 3494, the Child Protection and Sexual Predator Punishment Act. Twenty-five years ago, 7-year-old Joan D'Alessandro left her home in Hillsdale, New Jersey to deliver Girl Scout cookies to a neighbor and disappeared. Three days later, that neighbor, confessed to taking Joan's life and changing forever the lives of those who loved her. Joseph McGowan, a school teacher, had raped Joan, killed her, and dumped her broken, battered body in a ravine. Although McGowan was convicted and sentenced to 20 years in state prison, the nightmare for the D'Alessandro family was far from over. For the past 12 years, they have had to live with the very real prospect that their daughter's killer will walk out of jail one day a free man. Already, McGowan has twice been eligible for parole and a New Jersey appeals court recently ordered another parole hearing. No family should have to suffer the tragedy of the loss of their child and then be forced to relive it again and again through parole hearings and appeals. In response to their tragic loss, the D'Alessandro family has worked tirelessly at the state level for the enactment of Joan's Law, legislation providing that a child molester who murders a child under 13 in New Jersey will receive life in prison without the possibility of parole. Joan's Law is now on the books in New Jersey and I am proud that we, in this Congress, are seizing the opportunity to enact companion federal legislation. My original legislation states that any person who is convicted of a serious violent felony should be sentenced to either death or imprisonment for life when the victim of the crime is under 14 years of age and dies as a result of the offense. As included in Senator Hatch's substitute to the House-passed bill, the bill also contains a narrow provision which allows the court to impose a lesser sentence in a case where the defendant has provided substantial assistance in the prosecution of another person. While I would have preferred Joan's Law to move forward as originally introduced, I understand and respect the addition of such a provision. It is a change that was made in consultation with and with the approval of both the D'Allesandro family and the bill's House sponsor, Representative Bob Franks. In am heartened by the swift passage of the Child Protection and Sexual Predator Protection Act both in the Judiciary Committee and on the floor. By including Joan's Law among the bill's provisions we have sent a strong message that our society will neither tolerate nor forgive the brutal acts of a criminal who takes a young life and ensures that this murdere will never bring such harm and grief to another family.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, today I introduce the Firearms Safety and Consumer Protection Act of 1998. I am sure that this bill will face opposition, but I am equally sure that the need for this bill is so clear, and the logic so unquestionable, that we will soon see hunters, law enforcement agents and other gun consumers fighting for the passage of the legislation. Mr. President, I have long fought against the gun injuries that have plagued America for years. We succeeded in enacting the Brady bill and the ban on devastating assault weapons. And in the 104th Congress, even in the midst of what many consider a hostile Congress, we told domestic violence offenders that they could no longer own a gun. These were each measures aimed at the criminal misuse of firearms. But there is another subject that the NRA just hates to talk about-- the countless injuries that occur to innocent gun owners, recreational hunters, and to law enforcement. Every year in this country, countless people die and many more are injured by defective or poorly manufactured firearms. Yet the Consumer Product Safety Commission, which has the power to regulate every other product sold to the American consumer, lacks the ability to regulate the manufacture of firearms. Amazingly, in a nation that regulates everything from the air we breathe, to the cars we drive, the cribs that hold our children, the most dangerous consumer product sold, firearms, unregulated. Studies show that inexpensive safety technology and the elimination of flawed guns could prevent a third of accidental firearms deaths. Despite this fact, the Federal Government powerless to stop gun companies from distributing defective guns or failing to warn consumers of dangerous products. Ths gaping loophole in our consumer protection laws can often be disastrous for gun users. To take just one recent example, even when a gun manufacturer discovered that it had sold countless defective guns with a tendency to misfire, no recall was mandated and no action could be taken by the Federal Government. The guns remained on the street, and consumers were defenseless. Time after time, consumers, hunters, and gun owners are each left out in the cold, without the knowledge of danger or the assistance necessary to protect themselves from it. For too long now, the gun industry has successfully kept guns exempt from consumer protection laws, and we must finally bring guns into line with every other consumer product. Logic, common sense, and the many innocent victims of defective firearms all cry out for us to act--and act we must. To that end, I am introducing the Firearms Safety and Consumer Protection Act, legislation giving the Secretary of the Treasury the power to regulate the manufacture, distribution, and sale of firearms and ammunition. The time has come to stop dangerous and defective guns from killing American consumers. I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I ask unanimous consent that the full text of the legislation be printed in the Record.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, during last year's passage of the balanced budget agreement, Congress achieved a great victory. We created a new $24 billion program to fund children's health--the State Children's Health Insurance Program. Even with that historic effort, our work is far from finished. There are 10 million children in this country without health insurance. But even more troubling is that nearly half of these children are eligible for Medicaid health coverage yet remain unenrolled. This is the great tragedy of Medicaid. Barriers to enrollment like complicated application forms, inaccessible sign-up procedures, and demeaning eligibility processes are preventing families from enrolling their kids. A recent report by the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research (AHCPR) stressed the need for states to engage in outreach activities to increase enrollment of Medicaid-eligible children. Likewise, President Clinton recently identified Medicaid outreach as a high priority of his administration. The bill I am introducing today would go a long way toward getting these children enrolled. This bill, the Health Care for America's Children Act of 1998, would create an incentive program to reward states who engage in outreach activities to enroll the 4.7 million uninsured children who are eligible for Medicaid. States who employ effective outreach activities like shortened and simplified applications, presumptive and continuous eligibility, and outstationing of eligibility workers in schools and day care centers, would be eligible for a performance bonus. State adoption of these outreach activities is critical to removing the barriers to enrollment and ensuring that all eligible children get the Medicaid health insurance to which they are already entitled. According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), adoption of these outreach measures would increase the number of children enrolled in Medicaid by 700,000 each year after the year 2000. That means that by the year 2007, we could have all eligible children covered. Lack of health insurance can be devastating to the health status of children. Children without health insurance are four times more likely to go without needed medical or surgical care. And children without health care are less likely to grow up to be healthy productive adults, less likely to receive timely preventive care, and less likely to receive treatment even for serious illnesses. Unmet health care needs also translate into higher costs over the long run. Uninsured children are more likely to need emergency room care at twice the cost of office-based care. Each dollar invested in immunization saves $7.40 in future medical costs. Ensuring that children have access to health care is an investment in our future. Over 10 million uninsured children in this country is a crisis. But it is a travesty that we have the means to cover almost half of these children and are failing to do so. In the words of Albert Camus (CAM-OO), ``perhaps we cannot prevent this from being our world which children suffer, but we can lessen the number of suffering children.'' Mr. President, I ask that the Health Care for America's Children Act of 1998 be included in its entirety in the Record.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, today I introduce the Firearms Safety and Consumer Protection Act of 1998. I am sure that this bill will face opposition, but I am equally sure that the need for this bill is so clear, and the logic so unquestionable, that we will soon see hunters, law enforcement agents and other gun consumers fighting for the passage of the legislation. Mr. President, I have long fought against the gun injuries that have plagued America for years. We succeeded in enacting the Brady bill and the ban on devastating assault weapons. And in the 104th Congress, even in the midst of what many consider a hostile Congress, we told domestic violence offenders that they could no longer own a gun. These were each measures aimed at the criminal misuse of firearms. But there is another subject that the NRA just hates to talk about-- the countless injuries that occur to innocent gun owners, recreational hunters, and to law enforcement. Every year in this country, countless people die and many more are injured by defective or poorly manufactured firearms. Yet the Consumer Product Safety Commission, which has the power to regulate every other product sold to the American consumer, lacks the ability to regulate the manufacture of firearms. Amazingly, in a nation that regulates everything from the air we breathe, to the cars we drive, the cribs that hold our children, the most dangerous consumer product sold, firearms, unregulated. Studies show that inexpensive safety technology and the elimination of flawed guns could prevent a third of accidental firearms deaths. Despite this fact, the Federal Government powerless to stop gun companies from distributing defective guns or failing to warn consumers of dangerous products. Ths gaping loophole in our consumer protection laws can often be disastrous for gun users. To take just one recent example, even when a gun manufacturer discovered that it had sold countless defective guns with a tendency to misfire, no recall was mandated and no action could be taken by the Federal Government. The guns remained on the street, and consumers were defenseless. Time after time, consumers, hunters, and gun owners are each left out in the cold, without the knowledge of danger or the assistance necessary to protect themselves from it. For too long now, the gun industry has successfully kept guns exempt from consumer protection laws, and we must finally bring guns into line with every other consumer product. Logic, common sense, and the many innocent victims of defective firearms all cry out for us to act--and act we must. To that end, I am introducing the Firearms Safety and Consumer Protection Act, legislation giving the Secretary of the Treasury the power to regulate the manufacture, distribution, and sale of firearms and ammunition. The time has come to stop dangerous and defective guns from killing American consumers. I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I ask unanimous consent that the full text of the legislation be printed in the Record.

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, during last year's passage of the balanced budget agreement, Congress achieved a great victory. We created a new $24 billion program to fund children's health--the State Children's Health Insurance Program. Even with that historic effort, our work is far from finished. There are 10 million children in this country without health insurance. But even more troubling is that nearly half of these children are eligible for Medicaid health coverage yet remain unenrolled. This is the great tragedy of Medicaid. Barriers to enrollment like complicated application forms, inaccessible sign-up procedures, and demeaning eligibility processes are preventing families from enrolling their kids. A recent report by the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research (AHCPR) stressed the need for states to engage in outreach activities to increase enrollment of Medicaid-eligible children. Likewise, President Clinton recently identified Medicaid outreach as a high priority of his administration. The bill I am introducing today would go a long way toward getting these children enrolled. This bill, the Health Care for America's Children Act of 1998, would create an incentive program to reward states who engage in outreach activities to enroll the 4.7 million uninsured children who are eligible for Medicaid. States who employ effective outreach activities like shortened and simplified applications, presumptive and continuous eligibility, and outstationing of eligibility workers in schools and day care centers, would be eligible for a performance bonus. State adoption of these outreach activities is critical to removing the barriers to enrollment and ensuring that all eligible children get the Medicaid health insurance to which they are already entitled. According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), adoption of these outreach measures would increase the number of children enrolled in Medicaid by 700,000 each year after the year 2000. That means that by the year 2007, we could have all eligible children covered. Lack of health insurance can be devastating to the health status of children. Children without health insurance are four times more likely to go without needed medical or surgical care. And children without health care are less likely to grow up to be healthy productive adults, less likely to receive timely preventive care, and less likely to receive treatment even for serious illnesses. Unmet health care needs also translate into higher costs over the long run. Uninsured children are more likely to need emergency room care at twice the cost of office-based care. Each dollar invested in immunization saves $7.40 in future medical costs. Ensuring that children have access to health care is an investment in our future. Over 10 million uninsured children in this country is a crisis. But it is a travesty that we have the means to cover almost half of these children and are failing to do so. In the words of Albert Camus (CAM-OO), ``perhaps we cannot prevent this from being our world which children suffer, but we can lessen the number of suffering children.'' Mr. President, I ask that the Health Care for America's Children Act of 1998 be included in its entirety in the Record.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Again, I thank the Senator from Maine, Senator McCain, the Majority Leader, as well Senators Hollings and Breaux.

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President I thank Senator Snowe, Senator McCain, and Majority Leader Lott for working with us to craft a compromise regarding the coastwise eligibility of Barge APL-60. This limited certification will allow the barge to be used by Camden Iron and Metal in an important new Navy ship disposal initiative. Thanks to the diligent efforts of Senators Lautenberg and Specter, initial funding of $7.5 million for this ship disposal initiative has been included in the FY99 defense appropriations bill. I would just like to clarify with the Senator from Maine that it is her understanding that this provision will apply to all work done by the barge in connection with the initiative for as many years as the initiative continues.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, today I introduce legislation which will assist in the critical effort to preserve our nation's most vulnerable farmland. I want to first acknowledge Senator Leahy's decisive leadership on this issue, and recognize him as the author of the original legislation establishing the Farmland Protection Program in the 1996 Farm Bill. He has been a tireless advocate for this important issue, and I look forward to working closely with him in the future to protect more of our Nation's open spaces. We have heard a lot during the last decade about the dissolution and destruction of the American Family Farm. Indeed, the family farm is under serious threat of extinction. Today, there are 1,925,300 farms in the United States, the lowest number of farms in our Nation since before the Civil War. The U.S. is losing two acres of our best farmland to development every minute of every day. In my State, New Jersey, we have lost 6,000 farms, or 40 percent of our total, since 1959. This reduction has serious implications for the environment, the economy and our food supply. The threat comes partially from an anachronistic and unfair inheritance tax that threatens the generational continuity of the family farm and partially from the fact that much of America's farmland is near major cities. As our cities sprawl into neighboring rural areas, our farms are in danger of becoming subdivisions or shopping malls. Last year I strongly supported a significant reduction in the estate tax to keep farms in the family, preserve open space and ensure fairness in our tax code. This was an important victory for farmers across the Nation. However, we also need programs like the Farmland Protection Program to reinforce this effort. This critical initiative is designed to protect soil by encouraging landowners to limit conversion of their farmland to non-agricultural uses. It has proven so successful that demand for these grants currently outstrips availability of funds by 900 percent, and the last of its authorized funding was spent during fiscal year 1998. The legislation I am introducing today with Senators Leahy, DeWine and Jeffords will provide authorization for additional funding, and ensure the survival of this important program. Our bill will reauthorize the program at $55 million a year through 2002, and will broaden the original legislation to allow non-profit conservation groups to hold these easements. This provision is necessary because some State governments, such as Colorado's, are barred from holding easements by their constitution. This legislation will allow non-profit groups to hold these easements in lieu of the state government and this will broaden participation in the program. I hope my colleagues are able to support this legislation and allow us to continue building on the success of the past few years, during which we were able to protect nearly 82,000 acres on more than 230 farms.

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, today with my colleague from New Jersey, Senator Lautenberg, I introduce the ``Children's Lead Prevention and Inclusive Treatment Act of 1998.'' For almost thirty years Congress has focused attention on lead-related issues. In 1971 we first passed the Lead-based Paint Poisoning Prevention Act, and much has been done since that time to identify children with elevated lead levels, to educate parents on the dangers of lead, and to devise means of removing or controlling lead in homes. Over the last 20 years, the removal of lead from gasoline, food canning, children's toys, and other sources has seen a reduction in national population blood lead levels by over 80 percent. Yet recent studies indicate that we are still not doing enough. While national lead levels have dropped over 80 percent, the numbers for Medicaid children, and poor children overall, are nothing short of disgraceful. Since 1992 the Health Care Financing Administration, at the behest of Congress, has required that Medicaid children be screened for elevated blood-lead levels at least twice before they reach the age of 2. But the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that nationally, 890,000 children between the ages of one and five have elevated blood lead levels and have never been tested. Even worse, Mr. President, in a Report to Congress earlier this year, the General Accounting Office reported that almost 79 percent of Medicaid children under two years of age have never been screened! This means that as many as 206,000 Medicaid children between the ages of 1 and 2 have not been screened. Considering that in 1991 the U.S. Public Health Service called for a society-wide effort to eliminate childhood lead poisoning by the year 2011, it is quite apparent that we are not making much progress in reaching that goal. A subsequent GAO report further identified poor and minority children as being at greatest risk of lead poisoning. GAO reported that the prevalence of elevated blood lead levels in Hispanic children aged 1 through 5 was more than twice that of white children, and for African- American children it was more than five times that of white children. Additionally, children in families below 130 percent of the Federal poverty level had a higher prevalence of elevated blood lead levels than those children above the Federal poverty level. Yet all these children continue to be the very ones falling through the cracks! That is why, Mr. President, I am introducing this legislation. The Children's Lead PAINT Act promises to be a three-pronged attack on the lead-screening system. First, it will create a ``safety net'' through WIC and Early Start to ensure that high-risk children are screened. A parent enrolling their child in either of these programs must provide proof of screening, within 180 days of enrollment. If a child hasn't been screened, a parent can request WIC or Early Start to perform the test themselves. Additionally, if WIC or Early Start performs the test, Medicaid will be authorized to reimburse the program. Second, we will be putting teeth into the State's screening obligation, by setting a Minimum number of Screenings a State must perform, or having it face a penalty for failure. Beginning in Fiscal Year 2000, States will be required to screen at least 50 percent of Medicaid children under age 2. This will increase 10 percent each year until it hits 90 percent, where it must remain. If States fail to meet these targets, they stand to lose one percent of their Medicaid funds. Finally, Mr. President, we will require any Health Care Provider that signs a State Medicaid contract to agree in that contract to comply with the screening requirements, and to provide follow-up services to children who test positive. Although States have been required to perform these screenings, they are not a mandatory requirement of Medicaid health care contracts. Thus, there is no statutory obligation on the part of physicians to perform the tests. This will ensure that doctors perform the tests and that if a child does test positive that an environmental assessment will be done at their home and that follow- up testing and evaluations will be conducted. I am especially pleased that I have been joined in this fight by two highly regarded national advocacy groups. The Alliance to End Childhood Lead Poisoning, a non-profit public interest organization exclusively dedicated to the elimination of childhood lead poisoning, has publicly endorsed the Lead PAINT Act. Similarly, the Coalition to End Childhood Lead Poisoning, a non-profit parents and victims organization dedicated to educating the public on the dangers of lead poisoning and as well as to eradicating this disease, has also publicly endorsed this legislation. Mr. President, although we have made great progress in lead poison prevention techniques, first, by banning lead-based paint in homes and more recently by strengthening our home testing system, the GAO report makes it very clear that we are failing to identify those children with lead already in their bodies. It is time we demand accountability. Our children deserve no less. I look forward to working with my colleagues on this legislation and this issue. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, I introduce legislation that represents an important step forward in our national strategy for addressing traumatic brain injury (TBI) and spinal cord injury (SCI). Tragically, these injuries have enormous personal and economic costs on victims, their families, and our nation as a whole. Today, an estimated 4.5 million Americans live with a disability as a result of a TBI. Each year, more than two million people suffer a TBI, 10,000 of whom live in my State of New Jersey. More than 200,000 Americans live with a SCI, with 10,000 new injuries reported each year. Collectively, TBI and SCI costs the U.S. more than $35 billion per year. These statistics, however, reveal only a fraction of the problem. In the U.S., we have no standardized system of collecting information on these injuries. Instead, we rely on the work of a few limited State programs and private organizations who often lack the resources to collect complete, timely, and accurate data. Mr. President, the legislation I introduce today, the TBI/SCI Registry Act, will allow the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to make grants available to states to establish their own TBI/SCI registries. The CDC and state departments of health will then work as partners in establishing and maintaining comprehensive tracking systems that ensures patient privacy. The important information that state registries will be responsible for collecting will include: circumstances of injury and demographics of patients; length of stay in hospital and treatments used; severity of the injury; outcomes of treatments and services. The benefits will be far-reaching because the collection of accurate data will help identify high-risk populations for future prevention programs and will help link patients to effective treatments and social services. Perhaps most important, the information from these registries will help advocates and legislators justify TBI/SCI as a greater funding priority. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) currently spends approximately $60 million for SCI and $52 million for TBI. This research has contributed to tremendous progress, but we must improve our ability to identify innovative research projects and increase our financial commitment to those efforts. Mr. President, this legislation will ultimately help achieve this goal by creating a foundation for a unified scientific and public health approach for preventing, treating, and someday finding a cure for TBI/SCI. I am proud that my bill has already received the endorsement of the Christopher Reeve Foundation, the American Paralysis Association, the Brain Injury Association, and the Eastern Paralyzed Veterans Association. Mr. President, I ask that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, today I introduce legislation authorizing funding for extended school day and extended school year programs across the country. The continuing gap between American students and those in other countries, combined with the growing needs of working parents and the growing popularity of extending both the school day and the school year, have made this educational option a valuable one for many school districts. Students in the United States currently attend school an average of only 180 days per year, compared to 220 days in Japan, and 222 days in both Korea and Taiwan. American students also receive fewer hours of formal instruction per year compared to their counterparts in Taiwan, France, and Germany. We cannot expect our students to remain competitive with those in other industrialized countries if they must learn the same amount of information in less time. Our school calendar is based on a no longer relevant agricultural cycle that existed when most American families lived in rural areas and depended on their farms for survival. The long summer vacation allowed children to help their parents work in the fields. Today, summer is a time for vacations, summer camps, and part-time jobs. Young people can certainly learn a great deal at summer camp, and a job gives them maturity and confidence. However, more time in school would provide the same opportunities while helping students remain competitive with those in other countries. As we debate the need to bring in skilled workers from other countries, the need to improve our system of education has become increasingly important. In 1994, the Commission on Time and Learning recommended keeping schools open longer in order to meet the needs of both children and communities, and the growing popularity of extended-day programs is significant. Between 1987 and 1993, the availability of extended-day programs in public elementary schools has almost doubled. While school systems have begun to respond to the demand for lengthening the school day, the need for more widespread implementation still exists. Extended-day programs are much more common in private schools than public schools, and only 18 percent of rural schools have reported an extended-day program. This bill would authorize $50 million over the next five years for the Department of Education to administer a demonstration grant program. Local education agencies would then be able to conduct a variety of longer school day and school year programs, such as extending the school year to 210 days, studying the feasibility of extending the school day, and implementing strategies to maximize the quality of extended core learning time. The constant changes in technology, and greater international competition, have increased the pressure on American students to meet these challenges. Providing the funding for programs to lengthen the school day and school year would leave American students better prepared to meet the challenges facing them in the next century.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, today I introduce legislation authorizing funding for extended school day and extended school year programs across the country. The continuing gap between American students and those in other countries, combined with the growing needs of working parents and the growing popularity of extending both the school day and the school year, have made this educational option a valuable one for many school districts. Students in the United States currently attend school an average of only 180 days per year, compared to 220 days in Japan, and 222 days in both Korea and Taiwan. American students also receive fewer hours of formal instruction per year compared to their counterparts in Taiwan, France, and Germany. We cannot expect our students to remain competitive with those in other industrialized countries if they must learn the same amount of information in less time. Our school calendar is based on a no longer relevant agricultural cycle that existed when most American families lived in rural areas and depended on their farms for survival. The long summer vacation allowed children to help their parents work in the fields. Today, summer is a time for vacations, summer camps, and part-time jobs. Young people can certainly learn a great deal at summer camp, and a job gives them maturity and confidence. However, more time in school would provide the same opportunities while helping students remain competitive with those in other countries. As we debate the need to bring in skilled workers from other countries, the need to improve our system of education has become increasingly important. In 1994, the Commission on Time and Learning recommended keeping schools open longer in order to meet the needs of both children and communities, and the growing popularity of extended-day programs is significant. Between 1987 and 1993, the availability of extended-day programs in public elementary schools has almost doubled. While school systems have begun to respond to the demand for lengthening the school day, the need for more widespread implementation still exists. Extended-day programs are much more common in private schools than public schools, and only 18 percent of rural schools have reported an extended-day program. This bill would authorize $50 million over the next five years for the Department of Education to administer a demonstration grant program. Local education agencies would then be able to conduct a variety of longer school day and school year programs, such as extending the school year to 210 days, studying the feasibility of extending the school day, and implementing strategies to maximize the quality of extended core learning time. The constant changes in technology, and greater international competition, have increased the pressure on American students to meet these challenges. Providing the funding for programs to lengthen the school day and school year would leave American students better prepared to meet the challenges facing them in the next century.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, today with my colleague from New Jersey, Senator Lautenberg, I introduce the ``Children's Lead Prevention and Inclusive Treatment Act of 1998.'' For almost thirty years Congress has focused attention on lead-related issues. In 1971 we first passed the Lead-based Paint Poisoning Prevention Act, and much has been done since that time to identify children with elevated lead levels, to educate parents on the dangers of lead, and to devise means of removing or controlling lead in homes. Over the last 20 years, the removal of lead from gasoline, food canning, children's toys, and other sources has seen a reduction in national population blood lead levels by over 80 percent. Yet recent studies indicate that we are still not doing enough. While national lead levels have dropped over 80 percent, the numbers for Medicaid children, and poor children overall, are nothing short of disgraceful. Since 1992 the Health Care Financing Administration, at the behest of Congress, has required that Medicaid children be screened for elevated blood-lead levels at least twice before they reach the age of 2. But the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that nationally, 890,000 children between the ages of one and five have elevated blood lead levels and have never been tested. Even worse, Mr. President, in a Report to Congress earlier this year, the General Accounting Office reported that almost 79 percent of Medicaid children under two years of age have never been screened! This means that as many as 206,000 Medicaid children between the ages of 1 and 2 have not been screened. Considering that in 1991 the U.S. Public Health Service called for a society-wide effort to eliminate childhood lead poisoning by the year 2011, it is quite apparent that we are not making much progress in reaching that goal. A subsequent GAO report further identified poor and minority children as being at greatest risk of lead poisoning. GAO reported that the prevalence of elevated blood lead levels in Hispanic children aged 1 through 5 was more than twice that of white children, and for African- American children it was more than five times that of white children. Additionally, children in families below 130 percent of the Federal poverty level had a higher prevalence of elevated blood lead levels than those children above the Federal poverty level. Yet all these children continue to be the very ones falling through the cracks! That is why, Mr. President, I am introducing this legislation. The Children's Lead PAINT Act promises to be a three-pronged attack on the lead-screening system. First, it will create a ``safety net'' through WIC and Early Start to ensure that high-risk children are screened. A parent enrolling their child in either of these programs must provide proof of screening, within 180 days of enrollment. If a child hasn't been screened, a parent can request WIC or Early Start to perform the test themselves. Additionally, if WIC or Early Start performs the test, Medicaid will be authorized to reimburse the program. Second, we will be putting teeth into the State's screening obligation, by setting a Minimum number of Screenings a State must perform, or having it face a penalty for failure. Beginning in Fiscal Year 2000, States will be required to screen at least 50 percent of Medicaid children under age 2. This will increase 10 percent each year until it hits 90 percent, where it must remain. If States fail to meet these targets, they stand to lose one percent of their Medicaid funds. Finally, Mr. President, we will require any Health Care Provider that signs a State Medicaid contract to agree in that contract to comply with the screening requirements, and to provide follow-up services to children who test positive. Although States have been required to perform these screenings, they are not a mandatory requirement of Medicaid health care contracts. Thus, there is no statutory obligation on the part of physicians to perform the tests. This will ensure that doctors perform the tests and that if a child does test positive that an environmental assessment will be done at their home and that follow- up testing and evaluations will be conducted. I am especially pleased that I have been joined in this fight by two highly regarded national advocacy groups. The Alliance to End Childhood Lead Poisoning, a non-profit public interest organization exclusively dedicated to the elimination of childhood lead poisoning, has publicly endorsed the Lead PAINT Act. Similarly, the Coalition to End Childhood Lead Poisoning, a non-profit parents and victims organization dedicated to educating the public on the dangers of lead poisoning and as well as to eradicating this disease, has also publicly endorsed this legislation. Mr. President, although we have made great progress in lead poison prevention techniques, first, by banning lead-based paint in homes and more recently by strengthening our home testing system, the GAO report makes it very clear that we are failing to identify those children with lead already in their bodies. It is time we demand accountability. Our children deserve no less. I look forward to working with my colleagues on this legislation and this issue. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, today I introduce legislation which will assist in the critical effort to preserve our nation's most vulnerable farmland. I want to first acknowledge Senator Leahy's decisive leadership on this issue, and recognize him as the author of the original legislation establishing the Farmland Protection Program in the 1996 Farm Bill. He has been a tireless advocate for this important issue, and I look forward to working closely with him in the future to protect more of our Nation's open spaces. We have heard a lot during the last decade about the dissolution and destruction of the American Family Farm. Indeed, the family farm is under serious threat of extinction. Today, there are 1,925,300 farms in the United States, the lowest number of farms in our Nation since before the Civil War. The U.S. is losing two acres of our best farmland to development every minute of every day. In my State, New Jersey, we have lost 6,000 farms, or 40 percent of our total, since 1959. This reduction has serious implications for the environment, the economy and our food supply. The threat comes partially from an anachronistic and unfair inheritance tax that threatens the generational continuity of the family farm and partially from the fact that much of America's farmland is near major cities. As our cities sprawl into neighboring rural areas, our farms are in danger of becoming subdivisions or shopping malls. Last year I strongly supported a significant reduction in the estate tax to keep farms in the family, preserve open space and ensure fairness in our tax code. This was an important victory for farmers across the Nation. However, we also need programs like the Farmland Protection Program to reinforce this effort. This critical initiative is designed to protect soil by encouraging landowners to limit conversion of their farmland to non-agricultural uses. It has proven so successful that demand for these grants currently outstrips availability of funds by 900 percent, and the last of its authorized funding was spent during fiscal year 1998. The legislation I am introducing today with Senators Leahy, DeWine and Jeffords will provide authorization for additional funding, and ensure the survival of this important program. Our bill will reauthorize the program at $55 million a year through 2002, and will broaden the original legislation to allow non-profit conservation groups to hold these easements. This provision is necessary because some State governments, such as Colorado's, are barred from holding easements by their constitution. This legislation will allow non-profit groups to hold these easements in lieu of the state government and this will broaden participation in the program. I hope my colleagues are able to support this legislation and allow us to continue building on the success of the past few years, during which we were able to protect nearly 82,000 acres on more than 230 farms.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, I introduce legislation that represents an important step forward in our national strategy for addressing traumatic brain injury (TBI) and spinal cord injury (SCI). Tragically, these injuries have enormous personal and economic costs on victims, their families, and our nation as a whole. Today, an estimated 4.5 million Americans live with a disability as a result of a TBI. Each year, more than two million people suffer a TBI, 10,000 of whom live in my State of New Jersey. More than 200,000 Americans live with a SCI, with 10,000 new injuries reported each year. Collectively, TBI and SCI costs the U.S. more than $35 billion per year. These statistics, however, reveal only a fraction of the problem. In the U.S., we have no standardized system of collecting information on these injuries. Instead, we rely on the work of a few limited State programs and private organizations who often lack the resources to collect complete, timely, and accurate data. Mr. President, the legislation I introduce today, the TBI/SCI Registry Act, will allow the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to make grants available to states to establish their own TBI/SCI registries. The CDC and state departments of health will then work as partners in establishing and maintaining comprehensive tracking systems that ensures patient privacy. The important information that state registries will be responsible for collecting will include: circumstances of injury and demographics of patients; length of stay in hospital and treatments used; severity of the injury; outcomes of treatments and services. The benefits will be far-reaching because the collection of accurate data will help identify high-risk populations for future prevention programs and will help link patients to effective treatments and social services. Perhaps most important, the information from these registries will help advocates and legislators justify TBI/SCI as a greater funding priority. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) currently spends approximately $60 million for SCI and $52 million for TBI. This research has contributed to tremendous progress, but we must improve our ability to identify innovative research projects and increase our financial commitment to those efforts. Mr. President, this legislation will ultimately help achieve this goal by creating a foundation for a unified scientific and public health approach for preventing, treating, and someday finding a cure for TBI/SCI. I am proud that my bill has already received the endorsement of the Christopher Reeve Foundation, the American Paralysis Association, the Brain Injury Association, and the Eastern Paralyzed Veterans Association. Mr. President, I ask that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. I thank the majority leader and minority leader for bringing this legislation forward. Although time has been short, to some of us this is very important. Mr. President, this is a simple effort to conserve 15 acres of land in Morristown, NJ. It is for most Americans a sacred piece of real estate. It is where George Washington spent the winter of 1779. There are few more hallowed grounds in American history. While previous Congresses have saved much of this real estate, this particular acreage is under threat of development. This is a simple authorization. The U.S. Government can either enter into a contract to purchase or receive it as a gift, this final threatened acreage. I am very grateful for this support and bringing this forward today. Finally, Mr. President, I want to mention, while Senator Gorton is on the floor, that in separate legislation in the Interior bill he has authorized a study of all remaining threatened lands from the Revolutionary War, that we no longer have to do this on a piecemeal basis. I thank again the majority leader, Mr. President. I yield the floor.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, I rise today to join the Holy Name Healthcare Foundation in honoring Joseph C. Parisi and Lucille his wife as they receive the Lifetime Achievement Award. The Parisi's record of community activism and involvement has been extensive, and I am pleased to recognize them on this occasion. Joseph C. Parisi has served as Mayor of Englewood Cliffs since 1976. Prior to that he served on the town council for four years and was also the Englewood Cliffs Police Commissioner. His involvement in the Englewood Cliffs community for over twenty-five years has made Englewood Cliffs one of the finest towns in the North Jersey area. Mayor Parisi has worked on behalf of a diverse pool of charitable and civic organizations that include the Witte Scholarship Fund, the Quincentennial Columbus Day Celebration, Veterans of Foreign Wars, and the Knights of Columbus. The Englewood Chamber of Commerce, UNICO, and the New Jersey Insurance Agents, have all honored Mayor Parisi as their ``Man of the Year'' in the past. Lucille Parisi has equaled her husband's accomplishments in a number of civic organizations. As President of the Hudson County Independent Insurance Agents, President of the Englewood Cliffs Democratic Club, and Director of the Fort Lee Savings and Loan, Lucille has been an active member of the community. For the past 16 years, she has also served on the Board of Trustees and the Foundation of the Holy Name Hospital. As a native of Bergen County, I have known the Parisis well for many years. I have seen their dedication to the Englewood Cliffs Community firsthand, and I have consistently been impressed by their level of commitment. They truly embody the activism and dedication to community that is so vital. I know they will inspire others to take an interest in improving their communities. They have earned a place in the hearts of Englewood Cliffs residents, and it is my pleasure to be able to honor them and their family on this occasion.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize Maurice River Township as it celebrates its 200th anniversary on Saturday October 3rd. It is a pleasure for me to be able to recognize this important milestone. Maurice River Township has a rich and varied history that will be celebrated and honored this Saturday. Maurice River Township was first chartered as one of six precincts of the County of Cumberland, created by the Colonial Legislature, in the Colony of West Jersey on January 19th, 1747. Together, Greenwich, Hopewell, and Stow Creek, on the North side of Cohansey Creek, as well as Fairfield, Deerfield, and Maurice River on the South side of Cohansey Creek, formed Cumberland County. The Maurice River Precinct contained all of the land on the East side of Prince Maurice's River. In 1798, Maurice River was finally incorporated as a Township by the New Jersey State Legislature. Over the past 200 years the Township of Maurice River has developed into a thriving community, incorporating the eight villages of Delmont, Bricksboro, Dorchester, Leesburg, Heislerville, Port Elizabeth, Cumberland, and Milmay. Today, Maurice River stands as one of the most vibrant communities in the State of New Jersey, and I am confident it will continue to grow in a positive direction. The determination and the spirit of the Maurice River community make it a privilege for me to recognize its bicentennial anniversary. The Township has become one of New Jersey's brightest stars, and I look forward to another two hundred years of success.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, I rise today to offer my appreciation to my colleagues on the Labor Committee for their hard work on the Higher Education Reauthorization Act of 1998. I am especially grateful to the Chairman and Ranking Member, Senator Jeffords and Senator Kennedy, for their inclusion of two provisions I authored which are critical to the people of this Nation and of my state of New Jersey. The first addresses the issue of campus safety. Mr. President, every year, over 10 million students and their parents agonize over where to attend college. They spend months researching schools and visiting campuses in an effort to find the perfect fit. Just as information is the key to making an informed choice about professors or scholarships, it is the key to choosing a safe learning environment. Currently, students and their parents do not have access to all the information. Current law requires colleges and universities to report statistics on crimes that occur on their campuses. Reports of hate crimes, however, is limited to only those that result in murder, rape, or aggravated assault. This is the law notwithstanding the fact that these 3 categories of crimes only represent 16 percent of the total number of hate crimes that occur on college campuses every year. Over 80% take the form of other crimes, including simple assault and robbery. An amendment I offered, which is now part of the Higher Education Act, will ensure that students and their parents have all the information necessary to choose a safe school. This amendment will require colleges and universities to report all hate crimes that involve either bodily injury or a serious property crime such as burglary or arson. It also expands the definition of a hate crime to protect women and the disabled. Current law only protects against crimes motivated by prejudice based on race, ethnicity, religion, or sexual orientation. Our children are our future. Their college years are among the most exciting and formative of their lives. Expanding the types of hate crimes colleges and universities must report will empower students and parents with all of the information necessary to ensure that those years are as safe as possible. I would also like to thank Senators Jeffords and Kennedy for their inclusion of another amendment I authored which will freeze the status of a student reservist's grace period for paying back their education loans until they return from active duty service. All students are permitted a grace period of up to nine months after graduating or withdrawing from class before they must begin to repay their student loans. However, the typical length of active duty service for a reservist is currently 270 days, meaning that a student's grace period has often expired by the time they return home from military service. We should not welcome our courageous men and women in uniform home from active duty by handing them a bill. Students who serve their country in the armed forces should at least have the peace of mind of knowing that their student loans are not increasing while they are abroad. This provision will provide them with that peace of mind. For these two provisions and for all their hard work on this very important piece of legislation, I thank Senator Jeffords, Senator Kennedy and all of my colleagues on the Labor Committee.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. That is correct.

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, I rise today to offer an amendment on the underlying legislation of FAA reauthorization. I do so in recognition of the reality of life of hundreds of thousands of people that I represent--and, indeed, most Members of the Senate represent-- who, by the chance of the place of their birth or where they choose to live, have a daily encounter with the rising problem of airplane noise in our country. We have through recent decades learned to expand our concept of pollution of the air and the water to toxins, to chemicals we work with every day. But to most Americans they, in their own lives, have already come to understand and reach the decision that I bring before this Senate today: Noise is a pollution, and it is a very real part of the quality of life of most people in our country, impacting their communities. I offer this amendment because this problem will not solve itself and, indeed, as the years pass, it is clear it is going to get worse. The FAA predicts that by the year 2007 there will be 36 percent more airplane flights than this Nation will experience this year; 60 of the 100 largest airports in this country in each of our major metropolitan regions are planning expansions with new runways. To some, this is a choice between economic expansion and the quality of life or health of our families. We do not have to reach that choice. If we build airports, plan their expansion, and deal with the issue of flight paths with good, scientific information, understanding the impact of noise on health and how it can be mitigated, there is no reason to compromise economic growth while we legitimately address the health of our families. We already know that 25 million Americans are impacted by noise problems every day. Even the rudimentary studies that have been undertaken lead us to understand that noise exposure is an element of hypertension difficulties and cardiovascular problems. It is estimated that another 40 million people with different levels of noise exposure have sleep or work disruption that affect their productivity and their own quality of life. The Environmental Protection Agency for a time was involved in these issues. Some of the judgment I bring before the Senate today was made more than two decades ago. Then Congress understood the impact of noise on health and quality of life. But in 1981 the Congress eliminated the Office of Noise Abatement and Control, so much scientific work and the advice of scientists and others with this responsibility ceased. In the EPA's absence, the Federal Aviation Administration has been charged with the responsibility of monitoring aircraft noise. Mr. President, the FAA has a mission, it has technical capabilities, and it performs its mission admirably. But dealing with the problem of noise is not its expertise or its mission. There is an obvious conflict of interest between promoting the expansion of the aviation industry and its airports and their operations, and dealing with the problem of noise. This conflict was recently highlighted by the Natural Resources Defense Council's own study that found that the FAA's policy, relying on a 65-decibel threshold for determining the level of noise compatibility with residential communities, was far too high and completely inappropriate. Yet that is the level the FAA continues to use because it does not force the critical choices in dealing with noise abatement. I cannot adequately describe, for the quarter of a million people who live in New Jersey who are impacted by noise problems from Newark Airport, JFK, and La Guardia every day, how disappointing it is that this work in the Federal Government has ceased and the FAA alone is exercising this responsibility. In our absence in these 17 years, much of this work and much of the progress on the question of noise and airports has been ceded to European leadership where much of the current health studies are being undertaken. For example, in Munich, Germany, a scientific study recently found that chronic exposure to airplane noise was affecting the psychological well-being of young children. Another study in England, where in our absence this work also was continuing, found that children studying under flight paths to Heathrow Airport in London had a reading age 6 months behind children who were not similarly exposed to aircraft noise. The amendment I offer today, of which I now speak, would reengage the EPA in the serious business of evaluating alternatives and the impacts of airplane noise. It is based on legislation that I introduced last year with Senators Sarbanes, Wellstone, Lautenberg, Moynihan, Murray, D'Amato, and Boxer. I have termed it the ``Quiet Communities Act,'' and it would reestablish within the EPA an Office of Noise Abatement and Control. Some of that mission is reflected in the amendment I bring to the floor today for this authorization legislation. It will require the EPA to conduct a study which examines the FAA selection of noise measurement methodologies, so we know when the FAA does undertake studies whether their methodologies are sound and reasonable, as well as establishing a threshold of noise at which health impacts are felt. So that in communities all across America, when people gather with local airport authorities and State authorities and Federal authorities, there is a scientific basis to know with some certainty whether or not their children's health is being impacted. It is important to note that this bill will only give the EPA the authority to recommend new standards. It will only give them authority to recommend. It imposes nothing. The EPA can make its suggestions. It can do scientific studies. It can give a baseline. It will not change the authority in making final judgments. Mr. President, I believe this is a reasonable suggestion to go down the path that other industrialized democracies have followed and which this Congress recognized two decades ago, that noise is a real and persistent problem in America that affects health. It is only reasonable that on a voluntary basis the EPA be able to make recommendations at what level and what methodologies so we can have an informed debate. Mr. President, I offer this amendment for my colleagues' consideration, and I urge its adoption. I yield the floor. Mr. McCAIN addressed the Chair.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, in a few moments, the Senate will vote on an amendment that I have offered with my colleague, Senator Lautenberg. The amendment could not be simpler on its face or more modest in its intent. We could have required an environmental impact statement for every time the FAA changes a flight path. We did not do that. We could have given the EPA the power to set standards for noise, for health. Maybe we should have, but we did not do that. All that we have asked is that, as with each of our other major industrial competitors in the western world, noise be considered as a factor in the operation of this Nation's airports. That is all. And on two bases. First, when the FAA establishes methodology to determine whether or not particular noise involving airplanes is safe for schoolchildren or families or recreation, that methodology be evaluated by the EPA. That is all. They will not establish it. They will not make the decisions. They will evaluate whether the methodology is sound because scientific studies are indicating our current methodology does not accurately gauge whether or not our children are safe. Second, that the appropriate levels of what is safe be established. There is also independent scientific evidence, as confirmed by European allies, that current levels may allow a level of noise pollution that does have detrimental health impacts. We would like the EPA's judgment on what the appropriate levels might be. They will not make a decision. They will offer their advice. Mr. President, it is modest in its intent. It recognizes that noise is a real part of their lives for 40 million Americans every day of this expansion of our air networks. I urge adoption of this amendment.