The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“STATEMENTS ON SUBMITTED RESOLUTIONS” mentioning the Federal Reserve System was published in the Senate section on pages S3196-S3202 on March 5, 2003.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
STATEMENTS ON SUBMITTED RESOLUTIONS
______
SENATE RESOLUTION 74--TO AMEND RULE XLII OF THE STANDING RULES ON THE
SENATE TO PROHIBIT EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION IN THE SENATE BASED ON
SEXUAL ORIENTATION
Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself, Mr. Smith, Mr. Daschle, Ms. Landrieu, Mr. Breaux, Mr. Akaka, Mr. Biden, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Bayh, Mr. Durbin, Ms. Stabenow, Mr. Levin, Mr. Wyden, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Jeffords, Mr. Feingold, Mr. Lautenberg, Ms. Collins, Mr. Chafee, Mr. Harkin, Mr. Bingaman, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Sarbanes, Mr. Corzine, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Lieberman, Mr. Reed, Mr. Dayton, Mr. Nelson of Florida, Mr. Schumer, and Mrs. Clinton) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration:
Resolved,
SECTION 1. AMENDMENT TO THE STANDING RULES OF THE SENATE.
Paragraph 1 of rule XLII of the Standing Rules of the Senate is amended by striking ``or state of physical handicap'' and inserting ``state of physical handicap, or sexual orientation''.
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today to submit a resolution to prohibit employment discrimination in the Senate based on sexual orientation.
I would like to thank the Senator from Oregon, Mr. Smith, as well as my other colleagues who join me in introducing this resolution.
The resolution would amend the Standing Rules of the Senate by adding
``sexual orientation'' to ``race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, or state of physical handicap'' in the antidiscrimination provision of rule 42, which governs the Senate's employment practices.
By amending the current rule, it would forbid any Senate Member, officer, or employee from terminating, refusing to hire, or otherwise discriminating against an individual with respect to promotion, compensation, or any other privilege of employment, on the basis of that individual's sexual orientation.
Senate employees currently have no recourse available to them should they become a victim of this type of employment discrimination.
If the rules are amended, any Senate employee that encountered discrimination based on their sexual orientation would have the option of reporting it to the Senate Ethics Committee. The Ethics Committee could then investigate the claim and recommend discipline for any Senate Member, officer, or employee found to have violated the rule.
Unfortunately, the Senate is already well behind other establishments of the U.S. Government in this area of antidiscrimination.
By 1996, at least 13 Cabinet level agencies, including the Departments of Justice, Agriculture, Transportation, Health and Human Services, Interior, Housing and Urban Development, Labor, and Energy, in addition to the General Accounting Office, General Services Administration, Internal Revenue Service, the Federal Reserve System, Office of Personnel Management, and the White House had already issued policy statements forbidding sexual orientation discrimination.
In 1998, Executive Order 13087 was issued to prohibit sexual orientation discrimination in the Federal executive branch, including civilian employees of the military departments and sundry other governmental entities.
That Executive order now covers approximately 2 million Federal civilian workers. Yet more than 4 years later, there are still employees of the Senate that are unprotected.
In taking this step toward addressing discrimination, the Senate would join not only the executive branch, but also 308 Fortune 500 companies, 23 State governments and 262 local governments that have already prohibited workplace discrimination based on sexual orientation.
Currently, 65 Senators have already adopted written policies for their congressional offices indicating that sexual orientation is not a factor in their employment decisions.
Now, I urge my colleagues to join me by making this policy universal for the Senate, rather than relying on a patchwork of protection that only covers some of the Senate's employees.
Mr. SMITH. Mr. President, I rise today to join my colleague, Senator Feinstein in introducing a resolution to prohibit employment discrimination in the Senate based on sexual orientation.
Senate rules currently prohibit employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, or state of physical handicap. I believe that it is time for us to add sexual orientation to that list.
As a cosponsor of the Employment Nondiscrimination Act, I have stood behind the principle that employment discrimination against any person is hurtful to society as a whole, and if I am going to hold the private sector accountable for its actions, I should certainly promote the same principles in the U.S. Senate.
It is important to note that the Senate is lagging behind the rest of the Federal Government in prohibiting employment discrimination based on sexual orientation. Since 1996, 13 Cabinet level agencies and the White House have had anti-discrimination policies, and in 1998, President Clinton issued an executive order prohibiting sexual orientation discrimination in the Federal Executive Branch, including civilians in the military. That executive order now covers 2 million Federal employees, but people who work in the Senate do not enjoy those same protections.
Many of my colleagues already have written policies indicating that sexual orientation is not a factor in their employment decisions, and it is past time that we make this non-discrimination policy a part of the Standing Rules of the Senate. I want to thank my friend and colleague, Senator Feinstein, for her leadership in this issue, and urge my colleagues to support this important resolution.
______
SENATE RESOLUTION 75--COMMEMORATING AND ACKNOWLEDGING THE DEDICATION AND SACRIFICE MADE BY THE MEN AND WOMEN WHO HAVE LOST THEIR LIVES WHILE
SERVING AS LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS
Mr. CAMPBELL (for himself, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Allard, Mr. Biden, Mr. Miller, Mr. Gregg, Mr. Dorgan, Mr. Lott, Mr. Daschle, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Nickles, Mr. Dayton, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Inhofe, Mr. Jeffords, Mr. Fitzgerald, Ms. Landrieu, and Mr. Durbin) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary:
S. Res. 75
Whereas the well-being of all citizens of the United States is preserved and enhanced as a direct result of the vigilance and dedication of law enforcement personnel;
Whereas more than 700,000 men and women, at great risk to their personal safety, presently serve their fellow citizens as guardians of peace;
Whereas peace officers are on the front line in preserving the right of the children of the United States to receive an education in a crime-free environment, a right that is all too often threatened by the insidious fear caused by violence in schools;
Whereas more than 145 peace officers across the Nation were killed in the line of duty during 2002, well below the decade-long average of 165 deaths annually, and a major drop from 2001 when 230 officers were killed, including 72 officers in the September 11th terrorist attacks;
Whereas a number of factors contributed to this reduction in deaths, including better equipment and the increased use of bullet-resistant vests, improved training, longer prison terms for violent offenders, and advanced emergency medical care;
Whereas every year, 1 out of every 9 peace officers is assaulted, 1 out of every 25 peace officers is injured, and 1 out of every 4,400 peace officers is killed in the line of duty somewhere in America every other day; and
Whereas on May 15, 2003, more than 15,000 peace officers are expected to gather in Washington, D.C. to join with the families of their recently fallen comrades to honor those comrades and all others who went before them: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) recognizes May 15, 2003, as Peace Officers Memorial Day, in honor of Federal, State, and local officers killed or disabled in the line of duty; and
(2) calls upon the people of the United States to observe this day with appropriate ceremonies and respect.
Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, today I am joined by the chairman and ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Senators Hatch and Leahy, along with 16 other Senators, in introducing this resolution to keep alive in the memory of all Americans the sacrifice and commitment of those law enforcement officers who lost their lives serving their communities. Specifically, this resolution would designate May 15, 2003, as National Peace Officers Memorial Day.
As a former deputy sheriff, I know first-hand the risks which law enforcement officers face every day on the frontlines protecting our communities. Currently, more than 850,000 men and women who serve this Nation as our guardians of law and order do so at a great risk. Every year, about 1 in 15 officers is assaulted, 1 in 46 officers is injured, and 1 in 5,255 officers is killed in the line of duty somewhere in America every other day. There are few communities in this country that have not been impacted by the words: ``officer down.''
On September 11, 2001, 72 peace officers died at the World Trade Center in New York City as a result of a cowardly act of terrorism. This single act of terrorism resulted in the highest number of peace officers ever killed in a single incident in the history of this country. Before this event, the greatest loss of law enforcement in a single incident occurred in 1917, when nine Milwaukee police officers were killed in a bomb blast at their police station.
In 2002, more than 145 Federal, State, and local law enforcement officers gave their lives in the line of duty, well below the decade-
long average of 165 deaths annually, and a major drop from 2001 when a total of 230 officers were killed. A number of factors contributed to this reduction including better equipment and the increased use of bullet-resistant vests, improved training, longer prison terms for violent offenders, and advanced emergency medical care. And, in total, more than 15,000 men and women have made the supreme sacrifice.
The chairman of the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund, Craig W. Floyd, reminds us that ``a police officer is killed in the line of duty somewhere in America nearly every other day. More than 800,000 officers put their lives at risk each and every day for our safety and protection. National Police Week and Peace Officers Memorial Day provide our Nation with an important opportunity to recognize and honor that extraordinary service and sacrifice.''
On May 15, 2003, more than 15,000 peace officers are expected to gather in our Nation's Capital to join with the families of their fallen comrades who by their faithful and loyal devotion to their responsibilities have rendered a dedicated service to their communities. In doing so, these heroes have established for themselves an enviable and enduring reputation for preserving the rights and security of all citizens. This resolution is a fitting tribute for this special and solemn occasion.
I urge my colleagues to join us in supporting passage of this important resolution.
______
SENATE RESOLUTION 76--EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF THE SENATE THAT THE
POLICY OF PREEMPTION, COMBINED WITH A POLICY OF FIRST USE OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS, CREATES AN INCENTIVE FOR THE PROLIFERATION OF WEAPONS OF MASS
DESTRUCTION, ESPECIALLY NUCLEAR WEAPONS, AND IS CONSISTENT WITH THE
LONG-TERM SECURITY OF THE UNITED STATES
Mr. DURBIN submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations:
S. Res. 76
Whereas press reports show that the December 31, 2001 Nuclear Posture Review states that the United States might use nuclear weapons to dissuade adversaries from undertaking military programs or operations that could threaten United States interests;
Whereas the Nuclear Posture Review, according to such reports, goes on to state that nuclear weapons could be employed against targets capable of withstanding non-nuclear attack;
Whereas the Nuclear Posture Review is further reported to state that, in setting requirements for nuclear strike capabilities, North Korea, Iraq, Iran, Syria, and Libya are among the countries that could be involved in immediate, potential, or unexpected contingencies;
Whereas the September 17, 2002 National Security Strategy of the United States of America states that ``[a]s a matter of common sense and self-defense, America will act against such emerging threats before they are fully formed,'' and that ``[t]o forestall or prevent such hostile acts by our adversaries, the United States will, if necessary, act preemptively'';
Whereas the December 2002 National Strategy to Combat Weapons of Mass Destruction states that ``[t]he United States will continue to make clear that it reserves the right to respond with overwhelming force--including through resort to all of our options--to the use of [weapons of mass destruction] against the United States, our forces abroad, and friends and allies'';
Whereas United States nuclear policy, outlined in 1978 and restated in 1995 and 2002, includes, in the context of gaining other nations' support for the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, a ``negative security assurance'' that the United States would not use its nuclear force against a country that does not possess nuclear weapons unless that country was allied with a nuclear weapons possessor;
Whereas the Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, John Bolton, recently announced the Administration's abandonment of the so-called ``negative security assurance'' pledge to refrain from using nuclear weapons against non-nuclear nations;
Whereas reports about the Stockpile Stewardship Conference Planning Meeting of the Department of Defense, held on January 10, 2003, indicate that the United States is engaged in the expansion of research and development of new types of nuclear weapons;
Whereas this expansion of nuclear weapons research covers new forms of nuclear weaponry that threaten the limitations on nuclear weapons testing that are established by the unratified, but previously respected, Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty;
Whereas these policies and actions threaten to make nuclear weapons appear to be useful, legitimate, first-strike offensive weapons, rather than a force for deterrence, and therefore undermine an essential tenet of nonproliferation; and
Whereas the cumulative effect of the policies announced by the President is to redefine the concept of preemption, which had been understood to mean the right of every state to anticipatory self-defense in the face of imminent attack, and to broaden the concept to justify a preventive war initiated by the United States, even without evidence of an imminent attack, in which the United States might use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that the President's policy of preemption, combined with a policy of first use of nuclear weapons, creates an incentive for proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, especially nuclear weapons, and is inconsistent with the long-term security of the United States.
______
SENATE RESOLUTION 77--EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF THE SENATE THAT ONE OF THE MOST GRAVE THREATS FACING THE UNITED STATES IS THE PROLIFERATION OF WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION, TO UNDERSCORE THE NEED FOR A COMPREHENSIVE STRATEGY FOR DEALING WITH THIS THREAT, AND TO SET FORTH BASIC
PRINCIPLES THAT SHOULD UNDERPIN THIS STRATEGY
Mr. DASCHLE (for himself, Mr. Lieberman, Mr. Biden, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Durbin, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Reid, Mr. Akaka, Mr. Dorgan, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Carper, Mr. Feingold, Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. Reed, Mr. Rockefeller, Ms. Landrieu, Mr. Kennedy, and Mrs. Murray, Mr. Dayton, Mr. Nelson of Nebraska, Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Corzine, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Harkin, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Wyden, Mr. Kohl, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Jeffords, and Ms. Cantwell) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations:
S. Res. 77
Whereas on September 17, 2002, President Bush stated that
``[t]he gravest danger our Nation faces lies at the crossroads of radicalism and technology. Our enemies have openly declared that they are seeking weapons of mass destruction, and evidence indicates that they are doing so with determination'';
Whereas on February 11, 2003, before the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate, George Tenet, the Director of Central Intelligence, testified that ``[w]e've entered a new world of proliferation . . . Additional countries may decide to seek nuclear weapons as it becomes clear their neighbors and regional rivals are already doing so. The domino theory of the 21st century may well be nuclear'';
Whereas Robert S. Mueller, III, the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, stated on February 11, 2003, that
``[m]y greatest concern is that our enemies are trying to acquire dangerous new capabilities with which to harm Americans. Terrorists worldwide have ready access to information on chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear weapons via the internet'';
Whereas the Treaty on Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms, with Annexes, Protocols, and Memorandum of Understanding, signed at Moscow on July 31, 1991 (START Treaty) addresses a narrow aspect of the threat posed by weapons of mass destruction--deployed strategic nuclear weapons--and fails to address other aspects of the nuclear threat as well as the threat posed by biological or chemical weapons or materials;
Whereas in a recent bipartisan report, former Senators Warren Rudman and Gary Hart concluded that ``America remains dangerously unprepared to prevent and respond to a catastrophic terrorist attack on U.S. soil'';
Whereas the United States Government last month raised the terrorist threat level and, according to the Director of Central Intelligence, did so in part ``because of threat reporting from multiple sources with strong al Qaeda ties . .
.and to plots that could include the use of radiological dispersion devices as well as poisons and chemicals'';
Whereas shortly before the inauguration of President George W. Bush, a bipartisan task force chaired by former Majority Leader of the Senate Howard Baker and former White House Counsel Lloyd Cutler reported that ``the most urgent unmet national security threat to the United States today is the danger that weapons of mass destruction or weapons-usable material in Russia could be stolen and sold to terrorists or hostile nation states and used against American troops abroad or citizens at home'';
Whereas other states of concern continue their drive to acquire a weapons of mass destruction (WMD) capability as evidenced by the observation of the Director of Central Intelligence, in testimony before the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate, that the intelligence community has ``renewed concern over Libya's interest in WMD'';
Whereas the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has been told by Iran that it will not accept the strengthened safeguard protocol of the Agency and is committed to acquiring the ability to independently produce enriched uranium;
Whereas the Bush Administration has failed to begin direct talks with North Korea in spite of the assessment of the United States Government that North Korea may produce sufficient additional nuclear material for six to eight nuclear weapons within six months and the decision of North Korea to expel IAEA inspectors from the Yongbyon complex, to restart its nuclear reactor, to begin moving formerly secure spent nuclear fuel rods, to leave the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, done at Washington, London, and Moscow, July 1, 1968 (Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty or NPT), and to test a new cruise missile;
Whereas the December 2002 National Strategy to Combat Weapons Of Mass Destruction states that ``[w]eapons of mass destruction represent a threat not just to the United States, but also to our friends and allies and the broader international community. For this reason, it is vital that we work closely with like-minded countries on all elements of our comprehensive proliferation strategy.'';
Whereas newspaper accounts of the December 2001 Nuclear Posture Review state that the review concludes the United States might use nuclear weapons to dissuade adversaries from undertaking military programs or operations that could threaten United States interests, that nuclear weapons could be employed against targets able to withstand non-nuclear attack, and that in setting requirements for nuclear strike capabilities, North Korea, Iraq, Iran, Syria, and Libya are among the countries that could be involved in immediate, potential, or unexpected contingencies;
Whereas the September 17, 2002, National Security Strategy of the United States states that ``[a]s a matter of common sense and self-defense, America will act against such emerging threats before they are fully formed'' and ``[t]o forestall or prevent such hostile acts by our adversaries, the United States will, if necessary, act preemptively'';
Whereas General John Shalikashvili, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has stated that ``[a]ny activities that erode the firebreak between nuclear and conventional weapons or that encourage the use of nuclear weapons for purposes that are not strategic and deterrent in nature would undermine the advantage that we derive from overwhelming conventional superiority'';
Whereas the Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security implied the abandonment by the Bush Administration of the so-called ``negative security assurance'' pledge to refrain from using nuclear weapons against any non-nuclear nation unless that state was allied with a possessor of nuclear weapons, a policy that had been in place for 25 years and endorsed by successive Republican and Democratic Administrations;
Whereas documents recently made public from the Stockpile Stewardship Conference Planning Meeting of the Department of Defense held on January 10, 2003, indicate that the United States is moving toward expansion of research and development of new types of nuclear weapons and has sought repeal of the ban on research and development of new low-yield nuclear weapons;
Whereas the United States remains dangerously vulnerable to future terrorist attacks, and Bush the Administration has failed to spend homeland security funds provided by Congress and has repeatedly opposed efforts to increase funding for such homeland security activities as State and local first responders, border security, and food and water safety;
Whereas the Bush Administration has repeatedly failed to meet the funding benchmarks recommended by former Majority Leader of the Senate Howard Baker and former White House Counsel Lloyd Cutler for the nonproliferation programs of the Department of Energy;
Whereas notwithstanding the transformation of the strategic environment after the tragic events of September 11, 2001, a policy that moves toward the goal of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, and away from the increased reliance on and the importance of nuclear weapons, will serve to further the United States goal of preventing the proliferation of nuclear weapons; and
Whereas in a discussion of the grave threat posed the United States by weapons of mass destruction, President Bush has stated that ``[h]istory will judge harshly those who saw this coming danger but failed to act'': Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that the grave threat posed by the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction demands that the United States develop a comprehensive and robust nonproliferation strategy, including--
(1) the establishment of a broad international coalition against proliferation;
(2) the prevention of the theft or diversion of chemical weapons from existing stockpiles--
(A) by greatly accelerating efforts to destroy such weapons under the terms of the Chemical Weapons Convention in the United States, Russia, and other nations; and
(B) by strengthening and enforcing existing treaties and agreements on the elimination or limitation of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons;
(3) the termination of the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and the systems to deliver such weapons, by the reinforcement of the international system of export controls and by the immediate commencement of negotiations on a protocol to interdict shipments of such weapons and delivery systems;
(4) an engagement in direct and immediate talks with North Korea, coordinated with United States regional allies, to secure the peaceful end to the nuclear programs and long-range missile programs of North Korea;
(5) the elimination of excess nuclear weapons in Russia, and the security of nuclear materials in Russia and the states of the former Soviet Union, by the end of the decade in order to prevent the theft or sale of such weapons or materials to terrorist groups or hostile states, including for that purpose--
(A) the provision of levels of funding for the nonproliferation programs of the Department of Energy as called for in the report of former Majority Leader of the Senate Howard Baker and former White House Counsel Lloyd Cutler; and
(B) the provision of increased funding for the Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) program of the Department of Defense;
(6) the expansion of the Cooperative Threat Reduction program to include additional states willing to engage in bilateral efforts to reduce their nuclear stockpiles;
(7) the provision of adequate funds for homeland security, including the provision of funds to State, local, and tribal governments to hire, equip, and train the first responders required by such governments; and
(8) the enhancement of the capability of the United States and other nations to detect nuclear weapons activity by the pursuit of transparency measures.
______
SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 13--CONDEMNING THE SELECTION OF LIBYA TO
CHAIR THE UNITED NATIONS COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS, AND FOR OTHER
PURPOSES
Mr. LAUTENBERG (for himself, Mr. Smith, Mr. Kennedy, Mrs. Feinstein, and Mr. Corzine) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was ordered held at the desk:
S. Con. Res. 13
Whereas on January 20, 2003, Libya, a gross violator of human rights and State sponsor of terrorism, was elected to chair the United Nations Commission on Human Rights (the
``Commission''), a body charged with the responsibility of promoting universal respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms for all;
Whereas according to the rotation system that governs the selection of the Executive Board of the Commission, 2003 was designated as the year for the Africa Group to chair the Commission, and the Africa Group selected Libya as its candidate;
Whereas South Africa's Democratic Alliance spokeswoman, Dene Smuts, was quoted by the British Broadcasting Corporation as saying that the Government of South Africa's decision to support the election of Libya was an insult to human rights and that African countries ``should have supported a candidate of whom all Africans could be proud'';
Whereas Amnesty International has repeatedly documented that the human rights situation in Libya continues to seriously deteriorate, with systematic occurrences of gross human rights violations, including the extrajudicial execution of government opponents and the routine torture, and occasional resulting death, of political detainees during interrogation;
Whereas Human Rights Watch recently declared that ``[o]ver the past three decades, Libya's human rights record has been appalling'' and that ``Libya has been a closed country for United Nations and nongovernmental human rights investigators'';
Whereas Human Rights Watch further asserted that ``Libya's election poses a real test for the Commission,'' observing that ``[r]epressive governments must not be allowed to hijack the United Nations human rights system'';
Whereas the Lawyers Committee for Human Rights urged that
``the Government of Libya should not be entrusted by the United Nations to lead its international effort to promote human rights around the world'';
Whereas Freedom House declared that ``[a] country [such as Libya] with such a gross record of human rights abuses should not direct the proceedings of the United Nation's main human rights monitoring body'' because it would ``undermine the United Nation's moral authority and send a strong and clear message to fellow rights violators that they are in the clear'';
Whereas on November 13, 2001, a German court convicted a Libyan national for the 1986 bombing of the La Belle disco club in Berlin which killed two United States servicemen, and the court further declared that there was clear evidence of responsibility of the Government of Libya for the bombing;
Whereas Libya was responsible for the December 21, 1988, explosion of Pan American World Airways Flight 103 (``Pan Am Flight 103'') en route from London to New York City that crashed in Lockerbie, Scotland, killing 259 passengers and crew and 11 other people on the ground;
Whereas a French court convicted 6 Libyan government officials in absentia for the bombing of UTA Flight 772 over Niger in 1989;
Whereas, in response to Libya's complicity in international terrorism, United Nations Security Council Resolution 748 of March 31, 1992, imposed an arms and air embargo on Libya and established a United Nations Security Council sanctions committee to address measures against Libya;
Whereas United Nations Security Council Resolution 883 of November 11, 1993, tightened sanctions on Libya, including the freezing of Libyan funds and financial resources in other countries, and banned the provision to Libya of equipment for oil refining and transportation;
Whereas United Nations Security Council Resolution 1192 of August 27, 1998, reaffirmed that the measures set forth in previous resolutions remain in effect and binding on all Member States, and further expressed the intention of the United Nations to consider additional measures if the individuals charged in connection with the bombings of Pan Am Flight 103 and UTA Flight 772 had not promptly arrived or appeared for trial on those charges in accordance with paragraph (8) of that Resolution;
Whereas in January 2001, a three-judge Scottish court sitting in the Netherlands found Libyan Abdel Basset al-Megrahi guilty of the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103, sentenced him to life imprisonment, and said the court accepted evidence that he was a member of Libya's Jamahariya Security Organization, and in March 2002, a five-judge Scottish appeals court sitting in the Netherlands upheld the conviction;
Whereas United Nations Security Council Resolutions 731, 748, 883, and 1192 demanded that the Government of Libya provide appropriate compensation to the families of the victims, accept responsibility for the actions of Libyan officials in the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103, provide a full accounting of its involvement in that terrorist act, and cease all support for terrorism;
Whereas Libya remains on the Department of State's list of state-sponsors of terrorism;
Whereas the United States found the selection of Libya to chair the Commission to be an affront to international human rights efforts and, in particular, to victims of Libya's repression and Libyan-sponsored terrorism, and therefore broke with precedent and called for a recorded vote among Commission members on Libya's chairmanship;
Whereas Canada and one other country joined the United States in voting against Libya, with 17 countries abstaining from the recorded vote among Commission members on Libya's chairmanship of the Commission;
Whereas the common position of the members of the European Union was to abstain from the recorded vote on the selection of Libya as chair of the Commission;
Whereas 33 countries ignored Libya's record on human rights and status as a country subject to United Nations sanctions for the terrorist bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 and voted for Libya to lead the Commission;
Whereas the majority of the countries that voted for Libya are recipients of United States foreign aid;
Whereas the selection of Libya to chair the Commission is only the most recent example of a malaise plaguing the Commission that has called into question the Commission's credibility as the membership ranks of the Commission have swelled in recent years with countries that have a history of egregious human rights violations;
Whereas the challenge by the United States to the selection of Libya is part of a broader effort to reform the Commission, reclaim it from the oppressors, and ensure that it fulfills its mandate;
Whereas on January 20, 2003, Ambassador Kevin Moley, United States Permanent Representative to the United Nations and Other International Organizations in Geneva, emphasized that the United States ``seek[s] to actively engage and strengthen the moral authority of the Commission on Human Rights, so that it once again proves itself a forceful advocate for those in need of having their human rights protected'' and that ``[w]e are convinced that the best way for the Commission to ensure the ideals of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights over the long-term is to have a membership comprised of countries with strong human rights records at home'';
Whereas a majority of the 53 member states of the Commission are participants in the Community of Democracies and signed the Community of Democracies Statement on Terrorism (the ``Statement on Terrorism'') on November 12, 2002, at the Second Ministerial Conference of the Community of Democracies held in Seoul, South Korea (the ``Seoul Ministerial''), calling upon democratic nations to work together to uphold the principles of democracy, freedom, good governance, and accountability in international organizations;
Whereas the Seoul Ministerial participants declared in the Statement on Terrorism that they ``strongly denounced terrorism as a grave threat to democratic societies and the values they embrace[,] . . . reaffirmed that terrorism constitutes a threat to international peace and security as well as to humanity in general and indeed to the very foundation on which democracies are built[,]'' and stated that ``[t]he most recent terrorist attacks confirm that international cooperation against terrorism will remain a long-term effort and requires a sustained universal commitment'';
Whereas the United Nations sanctions against Libya, though suspended, remain in effect; and
Whereas Libya's continued status as an international outlaw nation and its continued unwillingness to accept responsibility for its terrorist actions provide ample justification for barring Libya from consideration as a candidate for membership in the United Nations Security Council or any other United Nations entity or affiliated agency: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), That Congress--
(1) strongly condemns the selection of Libya to chair the United Nations Commission on Human Rights (the
``Commission'');
(2) commends the President for the principled position of the United States in objecting to and calling for a vote on Libya's chairmanship of the Commission;
(3) commends countries that joined the United States in objecting to Libya's selection as chair of the Commission;
(4) expresses its dismay at the European Union countries' common position of abstention on the critical vote over Libya's chairmanship;
(5) expresses its shock and dismay over the support provided to Libya in its efforts to lead the Commission;
(6) highlights its grave concern over the continuing efforts of countries violating human rights and terrorist countries to use international fora--
(A) to legitimize their regimes; and
(B) to continue to act with impunity;
(7) calls on the President to raise United States objections to such efforts during bilateral and multilateral discussions and to direct pertinent members of the President's Cabinet to do the same;
(8) calls on countries at various stages of democratization to--
(A) demonstrate their commitment to human rights, democracy, peace and security; and
(B) support efforts to reform the Commission;
(9) calls on the President to instruct the Secretary of State to consult with the appropriate congressional committees, within 60 calendar days after the adoption of this resolution, regarding the priorities and strategy of the United States for the 59th session of the Commission on Human Rights and its strategy and proposals for reform of the Commission;
(10) calls on the President to issue an objection to the continued suspension of United Nations sanctions against Libya until the Government of Libya--
(A) publicly accepts responsibility for the bombing of Pan American World Airways Flight 103;
(B) provides appropriate compensation to the victims of the bombing; and
(C) fully complies with all of the other requirements of the United Nations sanctions imposed as a result of Libya's orchestration of the terrorist attack on Pan American World Airways Flight 103; and
(11) calls on the Secretary of State to engage Member States of the United Nations to support efforts to ensure that states that are gross violators of human rights, sponsors of terrorist activities, or subjects of United Nations sanctions are not elected to--
(A) leadership positions in the United Nations General Assembly; or
(B) membership or leadership positions on the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, the United Nations Security Council, or any other United Nations entity or affiliate.
Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a resolution condemning the recent selection of Libya to chair the 59th session of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights. If it was not so tragic, this selection would be a joke. That session begins in just a few days, on March 17.
Joining me as cosponsors are Senators Smith, Kennedy, Feinstein, and Corzine.
The reason I say it would almost be a joke is that it is unconscionable that a human rights abuser such as Libya, and a country that has been the subject of United Nations sanctions because of its links to terrorist activities, would be selected to lead an international human rights organization. Talk about the fox in the chicken coop, this is an exact replication of what that old saw is. Libya has not even complied with the Commission's own recommendations on how to improve its own dismal human rights record.
We are talking about a country that was responsible for downing a passenger airliner and the bombing of a discotheque in Europe.
Libya's selection to the chairmanship undermines the credibility of this Commission and threatens the international community's responsibility to protect human rights. How can the Commission retain any credibility with Libya at the helm?
I want to review Libya's human rights record over the past three decades, which Human Rights Watch characterizes as ``appalling.'' This record includes the abduction, forced disappearance, and assassination of political opponents. In Libya today, hundreds of people remain arbitrarily detained, and some have been so for over a decade. Human rights monitors have registered concern about the use of physical and psychological torture in detainment, leading to the deaths of some detainees.
Additionally, the Libyan Government restricts freedom of speech, press, assembly, association, and religion.
Does a government with such a record merit the chair of a Commission that was established in 1946, in the wake of the atrocities of World War II, specifically to protect the Universal Declaration of Human Rights? Libya should not chair this Commission. If anything, it should be under investigation by it.
In 2000, after years of investigations and appeals, two Libyan intelligence officers were found guilty by Scottish judges in the attack on Pan Am flight 103, which killed 270 people, including 38 from New Jersey and citizens from over 20 other countries.
Just as the international community was finally sentencing the Libyans responsible for this 1988 tragedy, and beginning to bring them to justice, General Qadhafi was planning Libya's ascent to lead the Commission on Human Rights. He gained the African nomination for chair against the wishes of many fellow African leaders, some of whom are making genuine strides toward improving their countries' human rights records.
At the time, a spokeswoman from South Africa's opposition group, the Democratic Alliance, said:
African countries should have supported a candidate of whom all Africans could be proud.
For the first time in the history of the Commission on Human Rights, the United States--appalled by the African Union's nomination of Libya--called for a vote. On January 20 of this year, only Canada and one other country joined the United States in voting against Libya's chairmanship. Many of the 33 countries that voted in favor of Libya are recipients of United States direct foreign assistance. Imagine, we are giving them aid, and these countries are supporting the chairmanship of a country that is an abuser of human rights of the first order. Many of our European allies abstained from the vote.
The resolution I am introducing with my colleagues, Senators Smith, Kennedy, Feinstein, and Corzine, condemns Libya's selection as chair. It asserts that the manipulation of the Commission by a gross human rights violator undermines the credibility of the body while legitimizing regimes that continue their oppressive activities.
This resolution calls on countries throughout the world to renew their commitment to human rights. The resolution also calls on the President and the Secretary of State to object strongly to the United Nations' current suspension of its sanctions against Libya. These sanctions should remain in place until Libya complies with the requirements of multiple U.N. resolutions, one of which calls on Libyan leader Muammar Qadhafi to acknowledge responsibility for the 1988 Pan Am terrorism attack--something he has refused to do so far, despite the incontrovertible evidence.
Finally, in this resolution, I call on the Secretary of State to work with other members of the United Nations to reform that Commission and to ensure that governments that violate human rights, sponsor terrorist activities, and are subject to U.N. sanctions cannot be elected to leadership positions in the Commission and other U.N. bodies in the future.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, it is a privilege to join with my colleague from New Jersey, Senator Lautenberg in expressing our deepest concern that Libya will chair the next session of the United Nations Human Rights Commission.
We know that Libya has supported, trained, and harbored some of the most notorious terrorists in the world. Libya is on the Department of State's list of nations that sponsor terrorism. To allow Libya to chair the UN Human Rights Commission is a serious and shameful mistake.
At this difficult time, the United Nations needs the highest possible credibility as it struggles to deal effectively with so many vital issues affecting nations throughout the world.
In fact, Libya continues to be in violation of multiple United Nations resolutions. It still has not complied with Security Council Resolution 748 to `'accept complete responsibility for the actions of Libyan officials.''
Libya still has not complied with the resolution to ``commit itself definitively to cease all forms of terrorist action and all assistance to terrorist groups and promptly, by concrete actions, demonstrate its renunciation of terrorism.'' We have received nothing concrete renouncing terrorism.
The international community is still waiting for Libya to accept responsibility for the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103, a bombing that murdered 270 innocent persons, including 89 Americans and 13 from Massachusetts. Until September 11th, the Pan Am bombing had killed more Americans than any other terrorist atrocity in our history.
Clearly, Libya should not have been appointed to chair an international human rights commission. Yet, in a secret ballot, 33 countries voted in favor of Libya, 17 abstained, and only the United States and Canada voted against Libya.
Fourteen years later, the families and the world community are still trying to find justice. We are still trying to hold Libya accountable for this atrocity, and we are still asking Libya to renounce terrorism and pay appropriate compensation to the victims' families.
Colonel Qadhafi still has not acknowledged that he ordered the attack. The victims still have not been compensated. The Libyans are still demanding that international economic sanctions be lifted, and that the Libyan government receive a clean bill of health on terrorism before it provides compensation to the families.
This choice of Libya should be a wakeup call for this administration. It shows the need for our own genuine participation in the UN--not the arrogant attitude the administration so often uses in its relations with other nations. We cannot expect to have good ties, even with our allies, if we do not treat them with respect.
I urge the Senate to support this proposal that requests President Bush and Secretary of State Powell to object strongly to the UN's current suspension of sanctions against Libya and to work with other members of the UN to reform the Human Rights Commission. Terrorism deserves no support from any nation.
______
SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 14--EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF CONGRESS
REGARDING THE EDUCATION CURRICULUM IN THE KINDGOM OF SAUDI ARABIA
Mr. SMITH (for himself, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Corzine, Mr. Ensign, Mr. Feingold, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Santorum, Mr. Voinovich, and Mr. Wyden) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations:
S. Con. Res. 14
Whereas the terrorist attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001, were carried out by 19 hijackers, including 15 Saudi Arabian nationals;
Whereas the Government of Saudi Arabia controls and regulates all forms of education in public and private schools at all levels;
Whereas Islamic religious education is compulsory in public and private schools at all levels in Saudi Arabia;
Whereas the religious curriculum is written, monitored, and taught by followers of the Wahhabi interpretation of Islam, the only religious doctrine that the Government of Saudi Arabia allows to be taught;
Whereas rote memorization of religious texts continues to be a central feature of much of the educational system of Saudi Arabia, leaving thousands of students unprepared to function in the global economy of the 21st century;
Whereas the Government of Saudi Arabia has tolerated elements within its education system that promote and encourage extremism;
Whereas some of the textbooks used in schools in Saudi Arabia foster a combination of intolerance, ignorance, and anti-Semitic, anti-American, and anti-Western views;
Whereas these intolerant views make students in whom they are instilled prime recruiting targets of extremist groups;
Whereas extremism endangers the stability of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the Middle East region and threatens global security;
Whereas the events of September 11, 2001, have created an urgent need to promote moderate voices in the Islamic world as an effective way to combat extremism; and
Whereas the Government of Saudi Arabia is currently conducting a review of its education curriculum: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), That the Congress--
(1) supports the review by the Government of Saudi Arabia of its education curriculum;
(2) calls on the Government of Saudi Arabia to ensure that such review is thorough, objective, and public;
(3) requests the United States Representative to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
(UNESCO) to--
(A) address the issue of the educational curriculum reform at the 2003 session of the UNESCO General Conference; and
(B) encourage UNESCO to examine the educational system in Saudi Arabia and monitor the progress of the efforts to reform the curriculum; and
(4) urges the Government of Saudi Arabia to reform its education curriculum in a manner that promotes tolerance, develops civil society, and encourages functionality in the global economy.
Mr. SMITH. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce an important resolution on behalf of myself and Mr. Schumer that brings to light pervasive messages of intolerance in Saudi Arabia's education curriculum and the need for reform of that curriculum. We are joined in this effort by Mr. Corzine, Mr. Ensign, Mr. Feingold, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Santorum, Mr. Voinovich, and Mr. Wyden.
There have been recent studies that reveal that school textbooks in Saudi Arabia often foster anti-Semitic, anti-American, and anti-Western views. We might all recall that 15 of the 19 hijackers responsible for the September 11 terrorist attacks were Saudi Arabian nationals. It is absolutely critical that we and others in the United States work to ensure that radical doctrines and messages of hate are not present in any child's education, and that the values taught in Saudi Arabia's schools in particular do not turn innocent children into prime candidates to commit terrorist acts as adults.
There is no question of who is responsible for any messages of hate that might appear in Saudi textbooks. The Saudi Arabian Government controls and regulates all forms of education in public as well as in private schools. The religious curriculum is written, monitored, and taught by followers of the Wahhabi interpretation of Islam--the only religious doctrine the Government of Saudi Arabia allows to be taught.
Our important resolution calls for Saudi Arabia to thoroughly review its education curriculum and to reform it in a manner that promotes tolerance, develops civil society, and encourages functionality in the global economy. It is in the interest of security and peace that we end any educational malpractice in Saudi Arabia that might lead to more tragedy and terror.
Finally, the resolution also calls upon the United States Representative to UNESCO to urge that the U.N. body take up the textbook issue and monitor reform of the education curriculum in Saudi Arabia.
Mr. President, I also urge my respected colleagues to join us in supporting this important legislation.
______
SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 15--COMMEMORATING THE 140TH ANNIVERSARY OF
THE ISSUANCE OF THE EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATION
Mr. ALLEN submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary:
S. Con. Res. 15
Whereas Abraham Lincoln, the sixteenth President of the United States, issued a proclamation on September 22, 1862, declaring that on the first day of January, 1863, ``all persons held as slaves within any State or designated part of a State the people whereof shall then be in rebellion against the United States shall be then, thenceforward, and forever free'';
Whereas the proclamation declared ``all persons held slaves within the insurgent States''--with the exception of Tennessee, southern Louisiana, and parts of Virginia, then within Union lines--``are free'';
Whereas, for two and half years, Texas slaves were held in bondage after the Emancipation Proclamation became official and only after Major General Gordon Granger and his soldiers arrived in Galveston, Texas, on June 19, 1865, were African-American slaves in that State set free;
Whereas slavery was a horrendous practice and trade in human trafficking that continued until the passage of the Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution ending slavery on December 18, 1865;
Whereas the Emancipation Proclamation is historically significant and history is regarded as a means of understanding the past and solving the challenges of the future;
Whereas one hundred and forty years after President Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation, African Americans have integrated into various levels of society; and
Whereas commemorating the 140th anniversary of the Emancipation Proclamation highlights and reflects the suffering and progress of the faith and strength of character shown by slaves and their descendants as an example for all people of the United States, regardless of background, religion, or race: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), That Congress--
(1) recognizes the historical significance of the 140th anniversary of the Emancipation Proclamation as an important period in the Nation's history; and
(2) encourages its celebration in accordance with the spirit, strength, and legacy of freedom, justice, and equality for all people of America and to provide an opportunity for all people of the United States to learn more about the past and to better understand the experiences that have shaped the Nation.
______
SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 16--HONORING THE LIFE AND WORK OF MR. FRED
McFEELY ROGERS
Mr. SANTORUM submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was considered and agreed to:
S. Con. Res. 16
Whereas Fred Rogers was born in Latrobe, Pennsylvania, in 1928;
Whereas Fred Rogers earned a degree in music composition, studied child development at the University of Pittsburgh, attended Pittsburgh Theological Seminary, and was ordained a Presbyterian minister;
Whereas Fred Rogers created ``Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood'' in 1966, and hosted the program through the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) from 1968 through 2000;
Whereas ``Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood'' is the longest-running program on PBS;
Whereas ``Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood'' was created and filmed in Fred Rogers' hometown of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania;
Whereas Fred Rogers' caring, genuine spirit reflects the values shared by the people of southwestern Pennsylvania and by so many neighborhoods throughout the country;
Whereas ``Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood'' continues to be a nurturing, educational program for children emphasizing the value of every individual and helping children understand how they fit into their families, communities, and country;
Whereas Fred Rogers was appointed Chairman of the Forum on Mass Media and Child Development of the White House Conference on Youth in 1968;
Whereas ``Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood'' won 4 Emmy Awards,
``Lifetime Achievement'' Awards, and 2 George Foster Peabody Awards;
Whereas Fred Rogers won every major award in television for which he was eligible;
Whereas Fred Rogers was inducted into the Television Hall of Fame in 1999;
Whereas President George W. Bush awarded Mr. Rogers the Presidential Medal of Honor in 2002;
Whereas Fred Rogers was also a prolific songwriter and author; and
Whereas Fred Rogers was presented with over 40 honorary degrees from colleges and universities: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), That the Congress recognizes and honors Mr. Fred McFeely Rogers for--
(1) dedicating his career to the educational and imaginative children's program ``Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood'';
(2) the accomplishments of this influential program and the emphasis it places on the value of each individual within his or her community; and
(3) the compassionate, moral example he set for millions of American children for over 30 years.
SEC. 2. TRANSMISSION OF ENROLLED RESOLUTION.
The Secretary of the Senate shall transmit an enrolled copy of this concurrent resolution to Mrs. Joanne Rogers.
______
SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 17--ESTABLISHING A SPECIAL TASK FORCE TO RECOMMEND AN APPROPRIATE RECOGNITION FOR THE SLAVE LABORERS WHO WORKED
ON THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE UNITED STATES CAPITOL
Mr. SANTORUM submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration:
S. Con. Res. 17
Whereas the United States Capitol stands as a symbol of democracy, equality, and freedom to the entire world;
Whereas the year 2003 marks the 203d anniversary of the opening of this historic structure for the first session of Congress to be held in the new Capital City;
Whereas slavery was not prohibited throughout the United States until the ratification of the 13th amendment to the Constitution in 1865;
Whereas prior to that date, African American slave labor was both legal and common in the District of Columbia and the adjoining States of Maryland and Virginia;
Whereas public records attest to the fact that African American slave labor was used in the construction of the United States Capitol;
Whereas public records further attest to the fact that the five-dollar-per-month payment for that African American slave labor was made directly to slave owners and not to the laborer; and
Whereas African Americans made significant contributions and fought bravely for freedom during the American Revolutionary War: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), That--
(1) the Majority Leader of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall establish a special task force to include the Historian of the Senate, the Historian of the House of Representatives, the Architect of the Capitol, and the Librarian of Congress, to study the history and contributions of these slave laborers in the construction of the United States Capitol; and
(2) such special task force shall produce a summary document of the contributions of slave laborers and available research for the public, and shall recommend to the Majority Leader of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives an appropriate recognition for these slave laborers which could be displayed in a prominent location in, or near, the United States Capitol.
____________________
