John Warner

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, for the Committee on Armed Services, I report favorably nomination lists which were printed in the Records of the dates indicated, and ask unanimous consent, to save the expense of reprinting on the Executive Calendar that these nominations lie at the Secretary's desk for the information of Senators.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I rise today to once again introduce a resolution with my colleague from Washington, Senator Murray, to establish October 17, 2000, as the Day of National Concern About Young People and Gun Violence. According to Health and Human Services Secretary Donna Shalala, 10 children and teens across the country are killed by firearms each day. This statistic is an alarming one, but, nevertheless, statistics can be so impersonal. We must remember that these 10 children lost everyday are real people. They are children, they are brothers, they are sisters, and they are grandchildren to real people. They are also a lost part of our future as a country. When put in real terms such as this, it is difficult to imagine a more important task facing our great nation than eliminating gun violence among America's youth. We all remember the events in Conyers, Georgia; Littleton, Colorado; Peal, Mississippi; West Paducah, Kentucky; Jonesboro, Arkansas; and Springfield, Oregon, Neighborhoods in these areas have all been home to horrific school shootings. Youth gun violence, however, is not limited to these all too often incidences of school shootings. America has lost thousands of children in what has become the all-too-common violence of drive-by shootings, drug wars and other crimes, as well as in self- inflicted and unintentional shootings. The good news in our fight against youth gun violence is that child gun deaths in America have fallen every year since 1994. Nevertheless, Mr. President, 10 deaths a day is 10 too many. While there is no simple solution as to how to stop youth violence, a Minnesota homemaker, Mary Lewis Grow, developed the idea of a Day of National Concern About Young People and Gun Violence. I believe this idea is a step in the right direction, as do such groups as Mothers Against Violence in America, the National Association of Student Councils, the American Federation of Teachers, the National Parent Teacher Associations, and the American Medical Association. Simply put, this resolution will establish October 17, 2000, as the Day of National Concern About Young People and Gun Violence. On this day, students in every school district in the Nation will be invited to voluntarily sign the ``Student Pledge Against Gun Violence.'' By signing the pledge, students promise that they will never take a gun to school, will never use a gun to settle a dispute, and will use their influence in a positive manner to prevent friends from using guns to settle disputes. Just last year over 2 million young Americans signed the Student Pledge Against Gun Violence. I am confident the number of student's signing this year's pledge will be even greater. Though this resolution is not the ultimate solution to preventing future tragedies, if it stops even one incident of youth gun violence, this resolution will be invaluable. I urge all of my colleagues to join in this resolution to focus attention on gun violence among youth.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, as we say, ``yea'' today on this historic vote, Congress pays its respects to the venerable institution of marriage. It is as simple as that. I yield the floor.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, the emerging field of bioinformatics uses information technology to analyze the billions of bits of data that create a human or plant genome. The research efforts at Virginia Tech will complement and support efforts by the Department to develop new bioinformatic tools, biological data bases, and other information management tools, which hold the promise of reinvigorating our rural communities through high-technology jobs in agri-biotechnology. This amendment provides $500,000 to support Virginia Polytechnic Institute's (VPI) Bioinformatics initiative.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, during consideration of the 1990 Farm Bill, a provision was inserted granting the USDA Graduate School the ability to enter non-competitive, interagency agreements for the provision of training services to other agencies. The Graduate School pursues and enters into these side agreements with other Federal agencies on a non-competitive basis. The private sector is shut out, unable to bid on these contracts. Section 1669 enables the United States Department of Agriculture Graduate School (Graduate School) to accept non-competitive agreements from federal agencies to provide training and other human resource services. The provision limits--and even discourages--competition in contracting, the cornerstone of fair and equitable pricing in the award of government contracts. Despite its name and 80-year history, the Graduate School is not a part of the federal government. The Comptroller General of the United States ruled that the Graduate School is a ``Non-Appropriated Fund Instrumentality'' (NAFI). NAFIs do not receive budget authority or appropriations from Congress and are supported entirely by fees or prices for their services. Like other NAFIs the Graduate School is not subject to the Federal Acquisition Regulations, the Freedom of Information Act, or other laws and regulations governing the operations of federal agencies. The Comptroller General ruled that the Graduate School, as a NAFI, is not a proper recipient of interagency order from Government agencies for training services. And under law, these orders are only permissible if a commercial enterprise can't provide the goods or services as conveniently or cheaply. Various federal laws do indeed provide preferential treatment for economically disadvantaged firms in the award of government contracts. Under these programs administered and monitored by federal agencies, such as the Small Business Administration, Department of Labor, and Department of Commerce, many small businesses, minority-owned enterprises, and firms in labor surplus areas qualify by meeting established regulatory standards. The Graduate School, however is not economically disadvantaged. The Graduate School earned net profits exceeding $13 million over the past five years. Effective on the close of its 1998 fiscal year on September 30, its net worth was $18.5 million; its aggregate retained earnings (1993-1998) were $13.3 million, and its current asset/liability ratio was 2.01. In spite of this financially advantageous position, the Graduate School pays ``bargain rate'' non-profit postage, receives donated space and services from federal agencies, and pays no federal income tax. Only the Graduate School benefits from the preferential treatment afforded by Section 1669. The Graduate School has government subsidized facilities in Washington, D.C., Chicago, Philadelphia, Honolulu, Atlanta, Dallas, and San Francisco. It offers a range of business, finance and management courses that could be offered by hundreds of local community colleges or private training firms. The Graduate School benefits at the expense of small and large tax- paying businesses and is not selling any commodity they could not provide. Indeed, many large and small-business training enterprises are ready, willing, and able to compete for the Graduate School's share of agency training budgets. Mr. President, competition requires a level playing field. Without it, American taxpayers take the hit. And agencies and taxpayers are not receiving the benefits for quality and pricing that competition provides. In Section 1669 restrictive, narrowly based, preferential legislation undermines proven forces of the market economy to determine fair and equitable prices. Section 1669 of the 1990 Agriculture Act (PL 101-624) must be repealed.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, in the 211-year history of the Senate, the State of Georgia has one of the richest and most storied legacies. Since the formation of the Senate, and that was in 1789, Georgia has sent to the Senate 62 individuals as Senators. I have had the distinct privilege of serving with 6 of them, including our beloved Paul Coverdell. When the people of Georgia elected Paul Coverdell to represent them here in the Senate 8 years ago, they sent to Washington a unique, especially talented, and gracious gentleman; a gentleman of the South, I say to those of us who are privileged to come from that region. Paul began his service to the Nation nearly 30 years ago when he served his Nation in the U.S. Army, stationed in Okinawa, Taiwan, and Korea, and he never stopped in his quest to serve the people. He was truly a public servant. He gave almost half his life to serving the Nation and the State of Georgia. It is no overstatement to say that his presence in public life has made this Nation more prosperous and more secure. He was a leader in the fight against drugs and the fight for better education and the struggle to keep this Nation strong, both economically and militarily. We have a saying around the Senate: There are show horses and workhorses. We know for sure Paul was no show horse; He was a workhorse. He worked hard and often he worked behind the scenes. He did not seek the headlines. Paul Coverdell did not seek the headlines. He would seek results--he wanted to get the job done, let others take the credit--and always results that were in the best interests of our Nation. That was his guide; that was his compass. All of us here, before we cast the first vote, before we discharge the first responsibility, take the oath of office. We solemnly commit ``to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies.'' We commit ``to bear true faith and allegiance.'' We undertake ``to faithfully discharge'' our duties. Paul Coverdell fulfilled each of those constitutional obligations under the oath of office. He was a man of his word and he has lived his life in the Senate true to his principles and true to that oath. He was a quiet man. His office was right across the hall from mine in the old Russell Building. How often we would meet walking to and from the votes. Those are the moments when Senators do not have staffs around them, constituents are waiting somewhere, and you share those private thoughts, comments, and ideas. How often I shared them with this giant of a Senator. The Nation lost a true patriot, a true gentleman, a true statesman. But his memory and his legacy will remain with us forever. May God bless his family. God blessed America with this man's service. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, today I introduce legislation to establish a federal commission to join the Commonwealth of Virginia in preparing for the 400th anniversary of the founding of the Jamestown settlement, the first permanent English settlement in the United States. In a little more than six years, America will observe one of its most important anniversaries with the celebration of the Jamestown quadricentennial. On May 13, 1607, nearly five months after setting sail from London, a group of 104 English men and boys selected a site on the banks of Virginia's James River as their new home. Settling Jamestown was a momentous event in American history. While the Spanish founded St. Augustine in Florida in the 1560's and the English attempted to colonize Roanoke Island in North Carolina in the 1580's, Jamestown was America's first successful, permanent European settlement. Jamestown is the birthplace of our nation, and is where representative government in the Americas began. The founding of Jamestown marks the beginning of what Alex de Toqueville described as the United States' ``great experiment'' in democracy. The establishment of Jamestown remains a cornerstone event in American history because of the lasting traditions that the English brought with them, including the legacy of language and common law that have shaped our great republic for decades. Celebrating the 400th Anniversary of Jamestown marks an important opportunity to remember and reflect on how our ancestors established Virginia: how they treated America's original inhabitants, the Indians, and how the slave trade was begun. While injustice is a major part of this historical legacy, it is also the legacy that marked the beginning of our rich cultural heritage that defines the United States today. With the 2007 celebration we have a chance to properly remember a story--too often glossed over--of the ``darker side of the Jamestown legacy'' as one scholar has noted, ``a legacy of slavery; of warfare and conquest; of the displacement and decimation of Native Americans; of damage to the natural environment.'' The history of Jamestown is rich, complex, tragic and inspirational. Certainly, an important part of Jamestown's history is the beginning of the distinct American spirit of exploration and adventure. The Jamestown adventure led directly to the formation of the great American principles of rule of law, religious and political freedom and the rights of man. The establishment of these pillars of American government was, again, unique in the history of man and government. The United States stands today as the world's longest lived, continuous democratic republic in existence today. The Jamestown story is also the story of the beginning of truly global commerce. Not only was the establishment of Jamestown a commercial venture, it was a venture that coincided with an emerging worldwide capitalism. The landing was one of many efforts by primarily western European countries to go beyond a country's boundaries in search of commercially important natural resources. The English came to Virginia looking for economic gain, but found personal freedom. They quickly found that the British model of government was not well-suited to the challenges of the New World. Americans have joined in celebrating Jamestown's founding with major events during the past two centuries, most recently in 1957. These occasions have been marked with parades to an eight-month international exposition. The 2007 Jamestown celebration will allow us to learn from our past as we prepare for the future. It is a national event that deserves our national attention and commemoration. The commission will bring the many talents of noted historians and scholars together with the Commonwealth's plans to fully observe the Jamestown experiment and its lasting contributions to our society.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, today I introduce legislation to establish a federal commission to join the Commonwealth of Virginia in preparing for the 400th anniversary of the founding of the Jamestown settlement, the first permanent English settlement in the United States. In a little more than six years, America will observe one of its most important anniversaries with the celebration of the Jamestown quadricentennial. On May 13, 1607, nearly five months after setting sail from London, a group of 104 English men and boys selected a site on the banks of Virginia's James River as their new home. Settling Jamestown was a momentous event in American history. While the Spanish founded St. Augustine in Florida in the 1560's and the English attempted to colonize Roanoke Island in North Carolina in the 1580's, Jamestown was America's first successful, permanent European settlement. Jamestown is the birthplace of our nation, and is where representative government in the Americas began. The founding of Jamestown marks the beginning of what Alex de Toqueville described as the United States' ``great experiment'' in democracy. The establishment of Jamestown remains a cornerstone event in American history because of the lasting traditions that the English brought with them, including the legacy of language and common law that have shaped our great republic for decades. Celebrating the 400th Anniversary of Jamestown marks an important opportunity to remember and reflect on how our ancestors established Virginia: how they treated America's original inhabitants, the Indians, and how the slave trade was begun. While injustice is a major part of this historical legacy, it is also the legacy that marked the beginning of our rich cultural heritage that defines the United States today. With the 2007 celebration we have a chance to properly remember a story--too often glossed over--of the ``darker side of the Jamestown legacy'' as one scholar has noted, ``a legacy of slavery; of warfare and conquest; of the displacement and decimation of Native Americans; of damage to the natural environment.'' The history of Jamestown is rich, complex, tragic and inspirational. Certainly, an important part of Jamestown's history is the beginning of the distinct American spirit of exploration and adventure. The Jamestown adventure led directly to the formation of the great American principles of rule of law, religious and political freedom and the rights of man. The establishment of these pillars of American government was, again, unique in the history of man and government. The United States stands today as the world's longest lived, continuous democratic republic in existence today. The Jamestown story is also the story of the beginning of truly global commerce. Not only was the establishment of Jamestown a commercial venture, it was a venture that coincided with an emerging worldwide capitalism. The landing was one of many efforts by primarily western European countries to go beyond a country's boundaries in search of commercially important natural resources. The English came to Virginia looking for economic gain, but found personal freedom. They quickly found that the British model of government was not well-suited to the challenges of the New World. Americans have joined in celebrating Jamestown's founding with major events during the past two centuries, most recently in 1957. These occasions have been marked with parades to an eight-month international exposition. The 2007 Jamestown celebration will allow us to learn from our past as we prepare for the future. It is a national event that deserves our national attention and commemoration. The commission will bring the many talents of noted historians and scholars together with the Commonwealth's plans to fully observe the Jamestown experiment and its lasting contributions to our society.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, the Senate is again considering legislation that will provide, at long last, relief from the marriage tax penalty. The marriage tax penalty unfairly affects middle class married working couples. For example, a manufacturing plant worker makes $30,500 a year in salary. His wife is a tenured elementary school teacher, also bringing home $30,500 a year in salary. If they both file their taxes as singles they would pay 15 percent in income tax. But if they choose to live their lives in holy matrimony and file jointly, their combined income of $61,000 pushes them into a higher tax bracket of 28%. The result is a tax penalty of approximately $1,400. The Republican marriage penalty relief bill eliminates this unfairness without shifting of the tax burden and without increasing taxes on any individual. Middle and low income families would benefit as much as earners with higher incomes. According to the Congressional Budget Office, almost half of all married couples--21 million--are affected by the marriage penalty. Over 640,000 couples in Virginia are affected, according to one study. Most of the tax relief under our plan goes to the middle class. The Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation's distribution analysis estimates that couples making under $75,000 annually will be the biggest winners. Additionally, the Joint Tax Committee estimates that couples earning between $20,000 and $30,000 will receive the biggest percentage reduction in their federal taxes out of any income level, with couples making between $30,000-$40,000 fairing almost as well. This money belongs to the taxpayers. With a surplus of over $2 trillion, not including Social Security, all taxpayers are entitled to a return of their tax overpayment. In addition, the federal government, through tax policy, should not discourage either parent from staying at home with children. The government should not penalize a family simply because it takes both spouses working outside of the home to make ends meet. Being a stay at home parent should be rewarded. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that taxpayers will send Uncle Sam almost $2 trillion in additional surplus taxes over the next ten years--after Congress has locked up 100% of Social Security surplus and paid down the public debt. This proposal gives back to the middle class families just 10 cents out of every surplus dollar they send to Washington. As I have said before, the Federal government should not put a price tag on the sacrament of marriage.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, since January, I have been working on an initiative that deals with introducing new cutting-edge technology into the combat arms of our Armed Services. The initiative is to have one- third of our airborne deep strike aircraft remotely operated within 10 years, and one-third of our ground combat vehicles remotely operated within 15 years. I asked one of our ``Captains of Industry,'' Mr. Kent Kresa, the Chief Executive Officer of Northrop Grumman, for his assessment of the technical feasibility for such an undertaking. He expressed his unqualified support for the initiative, saying that it was certainly feasible from a technical viewpoint. His thoughts have been published in the July 2000, issue of National Defense, the magazine of the National Defense Industrial Association. I ask unanimous consent this article be printed in the Record.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

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

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, under the previous order, we will now proceed to the amendment by the Senator from Illinois. At such time as he concludes his portion of the 2 minutes, I yield my time to the senior Senator from Mississippi, Mr. Cochran.

Mr. WARNER. Second, to the vote on the amendment of the distinguished Senator from Illinois. At this time, I believe we have 2 minutes for those in opposition. But in deference to the proponents, we are willing to hear from the proponents first. They are not going to use it. Then I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished chairman of the Subcommittee on Strategic Forces.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, it is my understanding that under the order we will now proceed to two votes. I recommend to the Senate that we proceed to the Feingold vote first.

Mr. WARNER

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

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senator from Virginia and the Senator from Michigan be able to proceed for not to exceed 5 minutes equally divided.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, since 1961, the Senate has passed an authorization bill for our military. We are about to pass another. I first thank the leadership of the Senate, and my distinguished ranking member, Mr. Levin, for hanging in as we had to move this bill under some difficult circumstances in the last 30 days. I wish to pay a special respect to all members of the Senate Armed Services Committee. We conduct our affairs as best we can in the spirit of what is in the best interest of our Nation. The bill reflects those decisions. I wish to thank our respective staffs, both majority and minority. I yield to my distinguished colleague who has been with me some 22 years in the Senate on this committee. We have worked together as a team in the best interests of our country.

Mr. WARNER. I thank my distinguished colleague.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I wish to associate myself with the remarks on Mr. Reid. He was very helpful to get some time agreements and other matters resolved. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I thank my colleagues for their work on this bill and for their overwhelming support. It sends the strongest of signals, first and foremost, to the men and women in the Armed Forces. This bill provides increased benefits, which they have so richly deserved and long been denied. This bill also initially starts the first balanced program to provide for more health care for the retirees who gave so much, together with their families, over the years. This bill sends a strong message throughout the world that America is committed to remain strong and lead in the cause of freedom and human rights. I yield the floor.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, if I could have 1 minute to thank the distinguished leader. I wish to acknowledge my deep appreciation to our distinguished majority leader, and, indeed, to Senator Daschle, Senator Harry Reid, Senator Nickles, and all. Yes, chairmen work hard and this posed some problems, but never once did I have any feeling that leadership was not determined on behalf of the whole Senate and this country to see that this bill was passed. There was never a flicker of doubt in my mind from the date we started some 3\1/2\ weeks ago. I thank this body for the leadership that we have to get these difficult tasks performed. I yield the floor.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, it says in part the following: On behalf of the Nation's elected State and local government officials, we would like to express our strong opposition to this legislation or any other proposals before Congress to repeal or suspend any portion of the Federal gasoline tax. Further down in the letter: It is our understanding that the amendment being proposed . . . would suspend the 18.4 cents Federal gasoline tax for 150 days. As a result of this loss of revenue, States and localities could face significant reductions in spending for transportation planning, highway and bridge repairs, public transit, bike and pedestrian facilities, clean air programs, and most importantly highway safety. Also, without a predictable flow of Federal highway, transit, and aviation funding, States and localities may face more difficulty in long-term transportation planning which will cause projects to be more costly and result in safety concerns. We learned through the many years that I have been associated with this issue on the Environment and Public Works Committee that planning goes forward years in advance. Contracts are let based on a source of these funds guaranteed by Congress and Federal law. These contractors are not going to risk their working capital. Employers are not going to risk trying to hire additional people if there remains this constant uncertainty around this tax. I hope the Senate stands with the Four Horsemen, and that we will be able to protect, once again, the interests of the people with the tax which probably is the least objectionable of all taxes. I yield the floor. Exhibit I National League of Cities, National Association of Counties, Council of State Governments, International City/ County Management Association July 12, 2000. Hon. Trent Lott, Majority Leader, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. Hon. Tom Daschle, Minority Leader, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. Dear Senators Lott and Daschle: It is our understanding that the Senate may consider an amendment this week which would temporarily suspend the 18.4 cents federal excise tax on gasoline. On behalf of the nation's elected state and local government officials, we would like to express our strong opposition to this legislation or any other proposals before Congress to repeal or suspend any portion of the federal gasoline tax. We believe such proposals would jeopardize funding for critical transportation improvements. We also oppose the proposal to hold the highway trust fund harmless by paying for the loss of gasoline tax revenue with projected non- social security budget surplus monies from the general fund of the U.S. Treasury. This type of shift could endanger funding for vital state and local priorities such as education, public safety, and healthcare. We recognize that the rise in gasoline prices is a very important issue facing the nation, but temporarily repealing the 18.4 cents federal gasoline tax will not provide long- term solutions to the problem. It will, however, detrimentally affect our ability to continue vitally needed transportation improvements which will directly benefit our shared constituents. It is our understanding that the amendment being proposed by Senator Abraham would suspend the 18.4 cents federal gasoline tax for 150 days. As a result of this loss of revenue, states and localities could face significant reductions in spending for transportation planning, highway and bridge repairs, public transit, bike and pedestrian facilities, clean air programs, and most importantly highway safety. Also, without a predictable flow of federal highway, transit, and aviation funding, states and localities may face more difficulty in long-term transportation planning which will cause projects to be more costly and result in safety concerns. In 1998, we supported the funding guarantees created in the landmark Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA 21). TEA 21 not only established a record level of investment in surface transportation, it also established a direct link between the collection of transportation user fees and transportation spending. Any reduction in the current federal gas tax will put this carefully crafted, bipartisan agreement at risk. Thank your for your consideration in this matter. If you have any questions concerning our views on this issue, please feel free to contact us. Sincerely, Donald J. Borut, Executive Director, National League of Cities. Larry E. Naake, Executive Director, National Association of Counties. Daniel M. Sprague, Executive Director, Council of State Governments. William H. Hansel, Jr., Executive Director, International City/County Management Association.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I thank my colleague. Mr. President, may I inquire of the time remaining?

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, it is like the Four Horsemen of the great Notre Dame team--Mr. Byrd, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Voinovich, and Mr. Warner-- that time and time again comes out on this issue. But it requires the strength of the famous Four Horsemen on the football team because this tax is one that probably--I hesitate to say this, but I am going to say it anyway--is more acceptable to the public than any that I know of because they see this tax translated into things they desperately need by way of road improvements, by way of other improvements, and safety improvements. How many times do they drive up and down the highways in my State and we see the projects going on. It delays the traffic and they are irritated. But when they go by, they say: When that is fixed it will be better. These are those dollars that go directly from the gas pump to the project to employment in their States. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record following my remarks a letter from the National League of Cities, National Association of Counties, Council of State Governments, and the International City/County Management Association dated July 12 of this year. It is addressed to our distinguished leaders, Mr. Lott and Mr. Daschle.