Paul Wellstone

Mr. WELLSTONE

Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, it was my pleasure this week to address the 15th annual Washington conference of the American Student Association of Community Colleges. I ask to have printed in the Record the students' statement of priorities for the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act. The statement follows: Statement Of ASAAC As a voice of the nation's largest post-secondary student body, the American Student Association of Community Colleges thanks the Congress for last year's 12 percent increase in the Pell Grant, and for extending employee educational assistance (tax code section 127) into the new century. Both programs are proven cornerstones of advanced work force training, which grows steadily in importance to American economic competitiveness. To ensure a high standard of living, a work force with cutting-edge skills will always be essential. More and more Americans look to their community colleges for such skills. Employers who offer tuition assistance report that community colleges are the most frequent choice of employees using this training incentive. With this in mind, ASACC urges the House and Senate to enact these priorities in the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act: --The $5,000 Pell Grant maximum advocated by Senator Paul Wellstone and Congressman James P. McGovern. More than ever, the Pell Grant is the backbone of post-secondary access for low-income students. Because community colleges serve the highest low-income enrollment, their students benefit least from Hope scholarships and the other educational tax incentives enacted last year. --The 5,500 Income Protection Allowance for independent students, as provided in the House subcommittee draft of the HEA, giving the independent students equal footing with dependent students in award computation. --The promise of Pell Grants as early as the sixth grade to students in impoverished communities who finish high school, as proposed by Congressman Chaka Fattah in H.R. 777. --The provision of child-care assistance to colleges serving the larger Pell Grant enrollments, as proposed by Senators Christopher Dodd, Edward Kennedy, and Olympia Snowe in S. 1151. The bill recognizes that ``students who are parents and receive campus-based child care are more likely to remain in school, and to graduate more rapidly . . . than students who are parents (without) campus based child care. For parents juggling family, school and employment, the convenience of child care is crucial. A college could become eligible for successive three-year grants under the bill, if Pell Grants totaled $1 million or more in the preceding fiscal year. ASACC urges that small colleges whose yearly Pell total is under $1 million also be made eligible for such grant, provided half or more of their eligible students are receiving Pell Grants. We do not want to see small rural colleges arbitrarily excluded from the program.

Mr. WELLSTONE

Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I was remiss in not mentioning earlier that Senator Helms absolutely lived up to his commitment to make sure that the Senate Foreign Relations Committee took up this matter. I thank him for that. Finally, I just want to say to my colleague from Florida that I very much appreciate his eloquence. I think he really feels these issues. I think it was more than a scripted speech. I think what he said was powerful, and I hope, too, that we will get a very, very strong, resounding vote. I yield my time.

Mr. WELLSTONE. I ask unanimous consent that I may speak for 1 minute.

Mr. WELLSTONE. I want to thank Debra Ladner, and I ask unanimous consent she be allowed on the floor for the remainder of the debate.

Mr. WELLSTONE. How much time remains?

Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I have never heard the Senator from Delaware speak for only 2 minutes. But if that is all he desires, if this will be a miracle, I might just be able to see it.

Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, let me say to Senator Feingold that I appreciate his remarks. I also love working with him on a lot of issues. I hope we can do a lot of human rights work together. He has been such a very strong voice on human rights in the Senate. Mr. President, one more time, this is an important statement by the Senate. Sometimes these kinds of votes really matter. I think this is one of those times. I hope the President and the administration will pay attention to what I hope will be a very strong vote. I believe they will. I certainly hope so. I hope that our Government will move on a resolution condemning human rights violations in China. I hope that the administration will do everything possible to exact concession here on behalf of human rights for people in China. I think it is also very important to a whole lot of people in China who are involved in this struggle and a whole lot of people in Tibet. Sometimes I look at things differently and sometimes what I worry the most about is the effect of inaction over action, noncommitment over commitment on such a question for people who are imprisoned. I have heard stories from my friends in a lot of the human rights organizations, men and women, who have said that the only thing that kept them going while they were in prison was resolutions of this kind. The only thing that kept them going was when our country, our Government, under a President like President Jimmy Carter, who was so focused on human rights, it meant so much to these people. I think this is a terribly important resolution. I have often thought to myself when I finish on this, whether it be China or whether it be other countries--and the focus can be and should be and must be on China--I have often wondered and I think I might have the courage to challenge a repressive government if I thought that at worst I could be imprisoned. I don't even know if I would have that courage. But I don't know what I would do if I thought maybe my child could be rounded up and my child could be hurt or my wife could be hurt. There are people throughout the world who stand up to these governments. They stand up to these governments even when they know that this might happen. I marvel at their courage. They inspire me as a U.S. Senator. China is a very large country and a very big country. But that does not mean that China should not be held accountable. This is a very important vote we are about to have. I will yield back the rest of my time. I thank my colleague from Florida for his leadership and tell him it has been an honor to work with him on this.

Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I reserve the remainder of my time.

Mr. WELLSTONE. I thank the Chair. I would like to reserve some time. I ask the Senator from Delaware whether he wants to speak on this resolution and, if he does--I just quoted him--I would love to yield some time to him.

Mr. WELLSTONE. Let me also thank Charlotte Oldhom-Moore who works for me and has been doing just a tremendous amount of work on this piece of legislation. I also thank Ellen Bork who works with Senator Helms, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, for all of her fine work. Let me list Human Rights Watch, RFK Center for Human Rights, Lawyers Committee for Human Rights, Minnesota Advocates, International Campaign for Tibet, and Amnesty International for all of their fine work. Their organizing work has been terribly important, and it is an honor for me as a U.S. Senator from Minnesota--and we have a very strong human rights community--to be working with these organizations. Mr. President, I will be brief. There may be debate on the other side, and I want to reserve some time to respond and I know there are others who will want to speak. I know Senator Feingold is anxious to get to the floor. If he does not, let me just say that Senator Feingold has been very, very vocal about this and has been a very strong supporter. The 16-to-1 vote that Senator Mack spoke about in the Foreign Relations Committee represented full enclosure because several months ago, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hosted a coffee and Wei Jingsheng came. He came up to several of us. I was one of the Senators who he approached. He asked us to please try and adopt a resolution on the floor of the Senate that will call on the administration and our Government at the U.N. Commission on Human Rights to please move forward with a resolution condemning the human rights violations in China. What Wei and others said to me and Senator Mack was, ``Look, you may not always understand, but what you do on the floor of the Senate is watched, especially internationally. If the Senate doesn't speak on this and if the United States Government remains silent, it would be devastating to so many people in China who have had the courage to stand up for human rights, people who face persecution for their religious and political beliefs.'' I felt then, and I feel even more so now, when someone like Wei is speaking to you, someone who spent 18 years in prison--I read his book, ``The Courage to Stand Alone,'' someone whom I hope will get the Nobel Peace Prize--and makes such a request, it really feels good to be able to honor that request. We have worked hard on this. We wanted to get this on the floor. I thank the majority leader, Senator Lott, for absolutely living up to his personal commitment to us that we would get this on the floor before the U.N. Commission on Human Rights meets. I will just say to colleagues that I think Senator Biden in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee said it best the other day. He said, ``Look, we have disagreement about whether or not you link human rights concerns and issues to trade policy, but that is not what this is about. If there ever was a place and there ever was a time for our Government to speak up for human rights, and ever since Tiananmen Square a large part of the focus has been about China, it is at this United Nations Commission on Human Rights that convenes in Geneva March 16.'' We are now on the floor of the Senate--what is today's date?--March 12. We may not be back in session until Monday or Tuesday. It is terribly important that this vote takes place. I say to the Chair and I say to all colleagues, Democrats and Republicans alike, I hope we can get a vote that mirrors the vote in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. The stronger the vote, the stronger the message. I say to my colleague from Florida, since we have worked so closely on this, it is interesting that today the State Department announced that China has agreed to an international covenant on civil and political rights. I say great. When I mentioned this to Senator Mack earlier, he said, ``That's tremendous, let's just make sure now we have a good strong vote to make it crystal clear that we intend to keep pushing forward with the pressure and with a voice in behalf of those women and men who have the courage to speak up in China for what they believe in.'' I spoke with Sandy Berger last night. I know he is working very hard on this. This is not a bashing amendment, but this is an amendment that says to our Government that to go to Geneva and to not make the effort to push forward this resolution which speaks to the violations of human rights in China, we think it would be silence, we think it would go against the very best of what our country stands for. So, I hope there will be a very, very strong vote for this resolution. Mr. President, I ask how much time I have.

Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, let me just say to my colleagues, Senator Hutchinson and Senator Mack, it is a labor of love working with them. We do not always agree on all issues. That might be the understatement of the year. But I think we are doing the right thing, and I certainly hope we get a huge vote as well. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, if the Senator from Arkansas is ready, I am pleased to yield time to the Senator from Arkansas. I ask my colleague, will 10 minutes be all right?

Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I know the Chair, Senator Hutchinson of Arkansas, wishes to speak. I will be brief. I am anxious to hear from him. Let me, first of all, thank Senator Mack. I have really enjoyed working with him on this. I think it is extremely important. Sometimes when you speak on the floor of the Senate, you do not know whether or not what you are doing is going to crucially affect the lives of people. You hope it will. This resolution does. I had a chance to meet with Wei Jingsheng last week, and I have met with a number of other courageous men and women from China, and they all have said the same thing. Mr. President, could I have order in the Chamber?

Mr. WELLSTONE

Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to add my voice to those of my colleagues in support of S. 1173, the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) II. This bill is tremendously important to the residents of the state of Minnesota. I want to thank the Manager of the bill for his excellent work in bringing this important legislation to the floor. ISTEA represented a comprehensive package to address all transportation needs. I am proud to be able to say that I will support S. 1173 the ISTEA reauthorization bill. This is a good piece of legislation. It continues the fundamental goal of the original ISTEA, which is to afford state and local governments greater flexibility in allocating transportation dollars. Investing in our transportation infrastructure is essential if we are to remain economically competitive. Today, our highways and transit systems need continued support in order to meet our commercial and personal transportation requirements. In addition to the ``traditional highway advocates''--the city, county and state officials, engineers and contractors--I have been working closely with community organizers, architects, preservationists, bicyclers and community activists. All of these people support ISTEA. I want to thank all of the county commissioners, city and state officials, as well as transit advocates, community organizers and others who have educated me along the way on transportation issues. I am pleased to say that the Senate will be passing a very good bill today that will provide a much higher level of funding for the transportation infrastructure and investment in Minnesota. This bill will make over $2 billion available to the state of Minnesota over six years. With this funding a continued federal investment will be made in maintaining and expanding Minnesota's highways, transit and other transportation related programs. Not only was the Senate able to increase funding for the traditional highway programs, including bridges, but this bill will also authorize additional funding for transit programs. I am pleased that several transit projects have been proposed in Minnesota including the Twin Cities Transitway. Improving existing transit and building new transit will be crucial as we see our population in the state continue to grow. It is clear that as our region continues to grow we will need alternatives to the traditional car and driver commuting. I am also pleased that this bill continues the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) program. The DBE program, which was first authorized in 1982, has been very successful in my home state of Minnesota. Through the DBE program minority and women owned businesses have grown. Businesses that in the past had been cut out from important highway construction dollars have been able to compete and get contracts to build and maintain our nation's interstate highway system. Transportation is critical to our daily lives. We cannot separate how people and goods are transported from the many other parts of their social and economic lives. It is important to work together to ensure that we have a fully integrated, safe and environmentally sound intermodal transportation system in the state of Minnesota and the country. ISTEA does this through the MPO, ATP and STIP process. The planning provisions of the bill put the decision making back at the local level. I am pleased that the Senate bill includes language that I authored to require MPO's to provide meaningful public participation in the MPO process. While the MPO process has worked well, this new language will make the process that much more responsive to the communities that are most impacted by their decisions. Again, I am pleased to add my support to this important bill.

Mr. WELLSTONE

Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, in honor of International Women's Day, I am submitting, along with my colleague Senator Feinstein, legislation to curb a horrific practice: the forced or coerced trafficking of women and girls for the purposes of sexual exploitation. This resolution will effectively put Congress on record as opposing trafficking for forced prostitution and domestic servitude, and acting to check it before the lives of more women and girls are shattered. One of the fastest growing international trafficking businesses is the trade in women. Women and girls seeking a better life, a good marriage, or a lucrative job abroad, unexpectedly find themselves forced to work as prostitutes, or in sweat shops. Seeking this better life, they are lured by local advertisements for good jobs in foreign countries at wages they could never imagine at home. Every year, the trafficking of human beings for the sex trade affects hundreds of thousands of women throughout the world. Women and children whose lives have been disrupted by civil wars, or fundamental changes in political geography, such as the disintegration of the Soviet Union, have fallen prey to traffickers. The International Organization for Migration has said that as many as 500,000 women are annually trafficked into Western Europe alone. Upon arrival in countries far from their homes, these women are often stripped of their passports, held against their will in slave-like conditions, and sexually abused. Rape, intimidation, and violence are commonly employed by traffickers to control their victims and to prevent them from seeking help. Through physical isolation and psychological trauma, traffickers and brothel owners imprison women in a world of economic and sexual exploitation that imposes a constant fear of arrest and deportation, as well as of violent reprisals by the traffickers themselves, to whom the women must pay off ever-growing debts. Many brothel owners actually prefer foreign women--women who are far from help and home, and who do not speak the language--precisely because of the ease of controlling them. Most of these women never imagined that they would enter such a hellish world, having traveled abroad to find better jobs or to see the world. Many in their naivete, believed that nothing bad could happen to them in the rich and comfortable countries such as Switzerland, Germany, or the United States. Others, who are less naive but desperate for money and opportunity, are no less hurt by the trafficker's brutal grip. One of the most disturbing trends in trafficking is the growing number of young women and children. For various reasons, including the AIDS epidemic, virgins are increasingly in demand and can fetch some of the highest prices in the international sex market. In the most extreme cases, criminals buy and sell children as if these children were mere objects or animals. Trafficking rings are run by criminals often operating through nominally reputable agencies. Through entertainment companies, employment or marriage agencies, these criminals mislead and manipulate women. Lack of awareness of complacency among government officials, such as border and consular officers, contribute to the problem. Further, traffickers are rarely punished as official policies inhibit women from testifying against their traffickers, making forced prostitution highly profitable, low risk business ventures. Last year, according to a report in the Washington Post, the FBI raided a massage parlor in downtown Bethesda, right next to Congress, right next to Washington, DC. The massage parlor was involved in the trafficking of Russian women into the United States. The eight Russian women who worked there, lived at the massage parlor, sleeping on the massage tables at night. They were charged $150 a week for ``housing'' and were not paid any salary, only receiving a portion of their tips. Gillian Caldwell and her organization, Global Survival Network (GSN), conducted an extraordinary two-year investigation of the growing international transport of Russian women for prostitution. GSN found that trafficking networks in Russia charge women anywhere from $1,500 to $30,000 for their ``services'' in facilitating documentation, jobs, and transportation. A relationship of debt-bondage is created that the woman can never defeat. Fortunately, the global trade in women and children is receiving greater attention by governments and NGOs following the UN World Conference on Women in Beijing. The United Nations General Assembly has called upon all governments to criminalize trafficking, to punish its offenders, while not penalizing its victims. The President's Interagency Council on Women is working hard to mobilize a response to this problem. But, much, much more must be done. Recognizing this worldwide problem, my resolution calls upon the State Department and the Department of Justice to increase their efforts to investigate and take action against international sex trafficking, and to report to Congress about their finding and steps taken to curb this problem. Further, it seeks to reduce incidences of trafficking and forced prostitution by making information available to warn at risk women and girls of the potential dangers they may face. Finally, it provides for training of consular officials, incentives for victims to testify against traffickers, and services for victims of trafficking. This resolution strengthens the work of the President's Interagency Council on Women, and has the support of a broad array of organizations: Human Rights Watch, Global Survival Network, Ayuda, National Network on Behalf of Battered Immigrant Women, International Human Rights Law Group, Program for Appropriate Technology in Health, and the National Council on International Health. I would like to thank the above organizations and agencies who helped craft this legislation. We must commit ourselves to ending the trafficking of women and girls and to building a world in which such exploitation is relegated to the dark past. I urge my colleagues to cosponsor this resolution, and I urge its timely passage. The President tomorrow will sign an Executive order which will also deal with this problem. We will work on passing the resolution, and also to make sure that this translates into legislative action. Mr. President, it is absolutely unconscionable that this goes on in the world, including our country. I will come to the floor later on with a blown-up map. But this is a sample of routes used to traffic women for prostitution from the Newly Independent States in the former Soviet Union, and all over the world. But also you see an arrow coming to the United States and to a lot of the European countries. It is just unconscionable that this is happening to women and to girls and essentially the international community has turned its gaze away from it. It is important that we have cosponsors for this resolution and that we pass this concurrent resolution with an overwhelming vote. I look forward to the Senate and the House of Representatives working with the President on this matter. I hope that we will get a strong vote for this resolution by the end of the week, an up-or-down vote, which, if we have a commitment to do so, I hope the administration will take the action on. Finally, Mr. President, let me just thank Senator Feinstein for working with me on this resolution. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record excerpts from this book entitled ``Crime and Servitude: An Expose of the Traffic in Women for Prostitution from the Newly Independent States, A report by the Global Survival Network, In Collaboration with the International League for Human Rights.'' Mr. President, I want these excerpts printed in the Record because I want history to show that for the first time the U.S. Senate is going to take a position on this issue. I want this included in the Record because I want history to show that for the first time the U.S. Senate is going to make it clear that we are not going to be silent when it comes to the most brutal treatment of women and girls throughout the world. These are all God's children, and we intend to take a strong position, and we intend to put the resolution into legislation and do everything we can to try to provide the protection for these women and these children.

Mr. WELLSTONE

Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, today is the 39th anniversary of the Tibetan Uprising Day. On March 10, 1959, the Tibetans instigated a massive uprising against the Chinese in Lhasa, the Tibetan capital. It was ruthlessly suppressed by military force. An estimated 80,000 Tibetans were killed, and the Dalai Lama was forced to flee, seeking refuge in India. Every year, on March 10, the Tibetans in exile gather to commemorate the anniversary of this unfortunate day and to protest the continued occupation of Tibet. Mr. President, there are demonstrations all across the country which commemorate this day, March 10, 1959. And I would like to bring to the attention of my colleagues the meaning of today to the people in Tibet and to make a linkage to what we are doing on the floor--again, with Senator Mack from Florida, with Senator Hutchinson from Arkansas, with Senator Feingold from Wisconsin. By the end of this week, because of the personal commitment of the majority leader, we will have an up-or-down vote on a resolution, or an amendment to a bill, which will call on the President to put the full force of the United States authority behind the resolution which will be critical of or condemn human rights violations in China before the International Commission on Human Rights, which is going to start meeting on March 16. I have a letter which was translated into English--but I am going to keep this forever, because I think it is such a great thing--from Wei Jingsheng, which he wrote out in my office on Friday. This is an appeal by Wei, who spent 18 years in prison and had the courage to stand up for what he believes in. He will be nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize. This is the request to the U.S. Senate to please go on record this week, before the International Commission on Human Rights meets, strongly behind a resolution calling on the President to do what the President has promised to do, calling on the administration to do what they promised to do, which is to move forward on a resolution at this Human Rights Commission in Geneva which will be critical of, or condemn, the human rights in China, including the crushing of the culture and history and the people in Tibet. Mr. President, silence on our part would be betrayal. It would be unconscionable. Our country is a great country because we support human rights. We support the freedoms of people. We support the idea that people should not be persecuted because of their religious practices. They should not be persecuted because they have the courage to challenge governments if one of those governments is left, or right, or center. I said it yesterday, but I will say it one more time today. I hope we will work with the President. We are going to get a strong vote for this resolution. I hope the President and the administration will do the right thing. I have myself been calling the State Department. I think Secretary Albright wants to move forward on this. I have not had a chance to talk to her. She is, of course, abroad, working on another very important question about what is happening to people in Kosovo-- and rightfully so--trying to lead an international effort and making it clear to Milosevic that Serbia cannot with impunity do this to the people in Kosovo. I believe she is a strong advocate on human rights. I talked to Strobe Talbott and to Sandy Berger. I have been putting calls in to their offices, and I think it is important that this week the administration come out with a clear position which would be a reasonable position, doing just what the President has said we ought to do. We don't link it to trade agreements, though I think we should. But this is the right place--at this U.N. Human Rights Commission--to be talking about these human rights violations. Mr. President, I yield the floor. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. WELLSTONE

Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be able to move on and talk about one related matter for 5 additional minutes.

Mr. WELLSTONE. I wonder if I may have 10 minutes to speak out of order.

Mr. WELLSTONE

Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I am not quite sure what our schedule will be this week, whether we will finish up on the ISTEA highway bill or not, and that is an important piece of legislation. I think all of us know that people in our States anxiously await the Senate to move forward on this business. It sounds like the next piece of legislation we may have will be a piece of legislation introduced by Senator Coverdell from Georgia which deals with education and children. I won't get into all of the specifics. We will have plenty of debate on that matter. I wanted to just mention to colleagues that there are several amendments that I want to bring to the floor that I think are very relevant to what we need to do by way of responding to the concerns and circumstances of children. Let me preface this by saying to colleagues that I think one of the things we have to start doing as legislators, as Senators, one of the things we have to start doing on the floor of the Senate, is to have more of a focus on children. We have given enough speeches to deafen all the gods, and there have been enough reports. The question is, what are we going to do by way of movement forward with positive action that will help children in our country--all of the children in our country? I find myself, as I speak on the floor of the Senate today, critical of, I guess, both of our parties. One would think from the pronouncements we hear all the time that everybody is doing great in the United States of America today, that everything is humming along just fine, everybody is happy, everybody is satisfied. Yet, when I travel the country--and I go into a lot of different communities--I don't find that at all. I am glad that the economy is doing well in the aggregate. I am glad unemployment is at record low levels, though it doesn't tell us what jobs and what wages. I am glad the GDP looks good and that the business cycle is up. But can I raise the question, since we are going to move to education and children, how do we explain the fact that during this business cycle, with Republicans and Democrats talking about how great things are, we have one out of every four children under the age of 3 growing up poor in America, and one out of every two children of color under the age of 3 growing up poor in America? And we are now saying that these early years are the most important years for these children in determining whether or not they are going to have the opportunity to reach their full potential. We have our work cut out for us, and I hope we will respond. So far we haven't. So when this legislation comes out, I want to just mention a couple of amendments that I am thinking about. One of them speaks to the question I just raised indirectly, but I think it's important. As I travel the country, I am amazed--and I was speaking with a gathering of community college students who have focused on this as well--that in the name of ``welfare reform,'' we are now saying to many single parents--most of them women, and many of them in our community colleges--they have to leave school and take a job. In other words, this is the bitter irony: They are on the path to economic self-sufficiency and yet we are telling many of these parents, these women, ``You have to leave college; you can't complete your education; you must take this job, because these are the work force participation requirements.'' It may be a $6-an hour-job with no benefits; and a year from now they are without health care coverage, they are worse off than they are now, as are their children. That is outrageous. So I am going to have an amendment for student exemption for these adults who are in school trying to complete their education so they can reach economic self-sufficiency, so that any State that wants to can at least say, look, we want to exclude these parents who are in school from the work force participation requirement. That makes a lot of sense if we are interested in these mothers and children being able to do better. The second question I want to raise for colleagues is--and I don't know if this will be an amendment on this bill or not, but as long as we are talking about education, which is what we are going to do with the Coverdell bill, and trying to do better for children--how come we cut food stamp benefits by 20 percent? The majority of the beneficiaries are children from families making under $7,500 a year. As I travel around the country, it all has to do with the questions you ask. It all has to do with whether you are willing to listen. It all has to do with what communities you are willing to visit. I find a lot of teachers telling me that a lot of their students can't do well because they come to school hungry. Why in the world did we cut the major safety net program for the working poor, the primary recipients, by 20 percent by the year 2002? I think we need to revisit that question. Mr. President, there is another issue that I want to raise that may be an amendment, or may not be, which is that it is impossible to focus on education and children doing well without focusing on the adults or the adult. The two variables--to wear a kind of political science hat for a moment--that have had the greatest impact, or the two primary causes of whether a child does well in school or not, the two most important factors--that is the word I am struggling for--are the educational attainment and the income status of the parent or parents. Well, if that is the case, I think we ought to start asking the question, if we are looking at the learning gap in our country and what children do well and what children don't do well, what about so many of these communities--and William Julius Wilson, a great sociologist, has written about this in his book called ``The Disappearance of Work''-- what about these communities where there are no jobs, even with the economy humming along as it is? What about many of the ghettos and barrios in rural areas where there are no jobs, and the parents or parent can't find employment, can't find a job at a decent wage? What is the connection between the economic status, the job status of the parent or parents, and the educational achievement of the children? I think that, at the very minimum, we ought to ask labor and the Department of Education to do a study of this and come back and provide us with some evidence. I will tell you that I think we will find a very strong correlation. And I will tell you that I am all for work. In fact, I think the most important policy goal is to make sure that when people in America work full-time, 40 hours a week, 52 weeks a year, they are not poor. I can think of a variety of different things we ought to do to make sure that happens. We also ought to look in a lot of communities where people live where there are no jobs at all, nor is there transportation to get into the suburbs where those jobs do exist. I say to my colleagues, this is not just an urban issue; this is a big rural issue as well. I look forward to when the Coverdell bill comes out to the floor. I look forward to the debate and discussion. I see my colleague from Missouri on the floor. I don't want to take any more time. Before Senator Ashcroft takes the floor, I was talking about the importance of getting a resolution on China, urging the administration and the U.N. Commission on Human Rights that we ought to take a position on the violation of human rights in China. I know my colleague is a strong supporter. I say to my colleague that we are going to have tremendous support on an up-or-down vote. I am urging the administration today to please move forward. That was the other agenda item for me. I yield the floor. Mr. ASHCROFT addressed the Chair.

Mr. WELLSTONE

Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent I be able to speak for 10 minutes.

Mr. WELLSTONE. We are in morning business?

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

Mr. WELLSTONE

Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I want to bring to the attention of my colleagues a matter before we go back to the ISTEA, or the transportation bill. It concerns a resolution that I think is extremely important. This will be a sense-of-the-Senate resolution that we will have a vote on this week, an up-or-down vote, which says that the Senate strongly urges the President, acting through the current representatives of the United States, to make all efforts necessary to pass a resolution criticizing the People's Republic of China for its human rights abuses in China and Tibet at the annual meeting of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, which convenes March 16. Mr. President, last week, on Friday, I was able to discuss this with the majority leader, and he made a commitment--and his word is good, I know that--that on this resolution we will have a separate up-or-down vote. I believe we will have a very strong vote for this. Mr. President, I started out working with Senator Mack from Florida. The resolution was a Mack-Wellstone resolution. I know he will be a very strong supporter, as well as Senator Hutchinson from Arkansas, Senator Feingold from Wisconsin, and I think this resolution will receive broad bipartisan support. I come to the floor of the Senate to speak for two reasons. One, to again thank the majority leader for his commitment that we will have an up-or-down vote on this specific resolution, and second of all, to make an all-out appeal to the administration, to the President, to the Secretary of State, to Sandy Berger and others. The Washington Post had an editorial last week, and I will read relevant paragraphs. The immediate issue is whether to sponsor a resolution at the United Nations Commission . . . in Geneva next month [actually this week.] You wouldn't think this would be a tough call. Such a resolution would moderately criticize China's record and call for improvements; it would impose no penalty beyond well-deserved embarrassment. Democracy advocate Wei Jingsheng nevertheless calls the resolution ``a matter of life and death'' for reform in China. President Clinton explicitly promised, back when he delinked trade and human rights in 1994, that the administration ``would step up its efforts'' to get such a resolution approved. China's regime remains as oppressive today as it was then. Mr. President, I come to the floor to make an appeal to the President, to make an appeal to the administration. I think when we have an up-or-down vote on this resolution, which calls on our country to be a part of an effort to introduce a resolution at this Human Rights Commission meeting on human rights dealing with abuses of human rights in China, we will get a strong vote on the Senate floor-- Republicans and Democrats, Democrats and Republicans. We want to work with the administration. I call on the President today to please make a commitment for the United States to play a critically important role. I consider one of the finest hours I have spent as a U.S. Senator to be Friday morning with Wei Jingsheng. Wei Jingsheng --I think many Senators and the Presiding Officer knows about Wei Jingsheng--spent 18 years in prison in China for the courage to speak out for democracy, for human rights. Because of tremendous international pressure, he was released from prison--in poor health. But he can never go back to his country again or he would be imprisoned. Wei Jingsheng has been nominated by a number of people for the Nobel Peace Prize. He deserves it. He wrote a wonderful book called ``The Courage to Stand Alone.'' That is what he has done. He came to my office and met with a lot of different human rights organizations on Friday. I asked him to please write a letter that I could distribute to colleagues this week about the importance of an up- or-down vote on this resolution specifically dealing with China--which the majority leader has made clear we will be able to do this week. I will just quote from a little bit of the letter he wrote, which has been translated. I strongly support the passage of a resolution that solely condemns the human rights situation in the People's Republic of China. And he lists a variety of reasons; I will read a couple. If we want to target more than ten countries at the same time, we not only dilute our force, but also strengthen the solidarity of the anti-human-rights alliance and simultaneously increase resistance to our effort. Continuing: Based on these considerations, I urge those in the Senate who support human rights to take a strategy that stands in opposition to those friends of the Chinese dictatorship. In unity, we can strike against the real leader and supporter of the alliance of anti-human-rights forces--the Chinese Communist government. As long as we persist we will succeed--it is simply a matter of time. I know because our endeavor is just. Respectfully, Your friend, Wei Jingsheng. It is the least we can do, I say to the President, I say to the White House, the least we can do. Whether or not Senators agree or disagree about whether human rights concerns should be linked to trade or not is a separate question from this question. This question is simple. The right place to do this is at the U.N. Commission on Human Rights in Geneva. It is the right time. The President has made a commitment to do so. Now we must follow through on our commitment. I urge Senators to please support this resolution. We will have an up-or-down vote on it. I also urge Senators: please, don't dilute this. If we want to pass a resolution calling for respect for human rights in all sorts of other countries--yes, I won't oppose that. As a matter of fact, many of those countries are already on the list and it will be brought up in Geneva. But we also need to have a separate resolution dealing with what is happening in China. Mr. President, the administration has already indicated that it will strongly support action on Colombia, Afghanistan, Cambodia, Nigeria, Iran, Iraq, Sudan and many other countries. Significantly, the administration has also publicly supported an international investigation of the situation in Algeria. But the administration has remained undecided on China. Like many of you, I support any call for greater action on all governments committing human rights violations. Yes, let's do that. But there are also compelling reasons for the Congress and the administration to issue a stand-alone declaration on China. This resolution that I will be introducing on the floor of the Senate with bipartisan support is a stand-alone resolution declaration on China. That has been the focuses of the past several meetings of the Human Rights Commission in Geneva. We cannot move away from that focus. This is a compelling moral issue. Our country ought to be there speaking out for human rights for people in China and other countries as well. But this resolution will be the key up-or-down vote. Finally, Mr. President, the U.N. Human Rights Commission is the only major international body which oversees the human rights conditions of all the nations. There is no dispute that the credibility of the commission process hinges on whether or not there will be at least a debate on China's human rights record. Few countries have so brazenly challenged the legitimacy of international human rights scrutiny or so openly challenged the universality of human rights as China. It would be shocking, I say to the President, for the United States to respond to this challenge with silence. Would it be shocking, I say to the President, the administration, and my colleagues, for us to respond to this challenge with silence? When I meet with somebody like Wei Jingsheng, who has exhibited such courage-- and he just asked us to go on record supporting this simple resolution, and I believe it is the very least that we can do. Colleagues, we are going to have a vote on it this week, and I hope that we have an overwhelming, strong, bipartisan voice and message to the President and the administration that the United States will be courageous, that we will live up to our own best selves as to who we are as a Nation, and we will take the lead in Geneva. If we let the U.N. Commission on Human Rights meet in Geneva and we are silent and there is not any discussion about religious persecution, the persecution of people because they had the courage to speak out, the crushing of the people in Tibet, and all of the rest, if there isn't even any discussion, it will be devastating for so many courageous people in China that have stood up for human rights. We can't let that happen. Therefore, we will have this up-or-down vote.

Mr. WELLSTONE

Mr. WELLSTONE. I thank the Chair. Mr. President, I will be really very brief. I have been involved in negotiations, as all of us are, on this legislation, all of us trying to use our leverage to fight for what we think is right. I have been very focused on a sense-of-the-Senate resolution amendment which I think will command widespread support from both Democrats and Republicans. I know, for example, that this resolution was initially something I did with Senator Mack, who still strongly supports it--Senator Hutchinson, and many, I hope the Chair. This is just a sense-of-the-Senate resolution--could be amendment; I hope it would be a separate resolution, but one way or the other--that, basically, strongly urges the President, acting through the permanent representatives of the United States--and I am just looking at this; I will quote his record--``to make all efforts necessary to pass a resolution criticizing the People's Republic of China for its human rights abuses in China, Tibet at the annual meeting of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights.'' Mr. President, the point is that I am not going to get into any sharp debate or attack people who are not here right now, but I think the point of this resolution, the amendment, is to make sure that we take some action before the United Nations Commission on Human Rights convenes in Geneva, which would be on March 16. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee will take up this resolution, I think, on Thursday, but my concern, as a U.S. Senator who feels strongly about this, about human rights questions and has worked closely with a number of really great people in these human rights organizations--and I tell you, in some ways, one of the biggest thrills of my life has been to have a chance to work with Wei Jingsheng, who was just in the office and who is very focused in on this. In any case, what I wanted to make sure of is--and I think many Republicans agree with us--that the Foreign Relations Committee meets, but that still does not guarantee that we have a resolution or amendment on the floor by the end of next week or as soon as possible. And really next week is the critical timeframe that we are talking about. We have gone back and forth on other resolutions that were going to be introduced. I know Senator Specter has one he wants to do on Iraq. My position is, well, then there ought to be one on China. In any case, I think it is no longer necessary for me to do anything on the floor of the Senate. I have a commitment by the Senate majority leader, Senator Lott. It is a personal commitment, not an official, formal commitment. I think it is all I need. I think most of us know, if he gives his word, his word is good. So, I feel very confident that we, indeed, will be able to deal with this resolution in this timeframe, which is so important that really the voice of the Senate be heard, the voice of the Congress be heard. And certainly I hope the voice of the President and the administration will be heard before the Human Rights Commission convenes in Geneva. So I thank colleagues for working with me. I certainly thank the majority leader for being sensitive and working this out. Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

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