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 INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS” mentioning the Department of Interior was published in the Senate section on pages S12506-S12509 on Nov. 12, 1997.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. HARKIN:
S. 1522. A bill to authorize the Secretary of Agriculture to provide assistance to rural cooperatives; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
The Rural Cooperative Act
Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce the Rural Cooperative Act, a measure proposed by the administration. Under current law, the Rural Business--Cooperative Services within the Rural Development Administration provides a wide variety of services for farm cooperatives. They conduct economic analysis, provide advice on how to form and best operate cooperatives and a wide variety of other services for farm cooperatives, including how to deal with the complex laws under which cooperatives operate.
Farm cooperatives are very important in rural America. They allow farmers to come together to purchase goods, to sell their products, and to process their agricultural commodities under farmer ownership. Some cooperatives only perform one of those functions. Some do two or three of them. In all cases, they allow farmers to come together and more effectively bargain for a fair price.
Funding for cooperative services within the Department of Agriculture has been under considerable constraint in recent years and it is now difficult for the Department to provide the full range of services allowed by law to farm cooperatives. I do not want to see those services reduced. But, I do agree with the administration, that cooperative services should also be available to those in rural areas, in addition to farmers who want to form cooperatives. Therefore, I am introducing the administration-proposed bill to broaden the responsibilities of the Department in this area. I do so, requesting that the administration increase its request for funding to carry out these additional responsibilities and will be urging that the Appropriations Committee appropriately increase funding in this area.
The bill provides that rural residents who are considering forming a cooperative for one of a number of purposes or who have formed a cooperative may receive a variety of kinds of assistance from USDA.
The types of cooperatives that would benefit would include those purchasing consumer goods, business products or services, health care, utilities, communications, child and day care, housing, credit, insurance, or other goods or services. It would also include cooperatives that market goods made by members or goods made by the cooperative.
The Department could provide advice for such cooperatives including conducting economic surveys and analysis of proposed cooperative activities. It would also conduct surveys of cooperatives and issue reports about them as well as promote rural cooperative principles and practices.
The bill authorizes such sums as might be necessary to carry out the purposes of the act.
I urge that the Congress consider and pass this bill in the coming year.
______
By Mr. MURKOWSKI (for himself and Mr. Stevens):
S. 1523. A bill to allow for the investment of joint Federal and State funds from the civil settlement of damages from the Exxon Valdez oilspill; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
INVESTMENT OF ``EXXON VALDEZ'' TRUST FUNDS LEGISLATION
Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I rise to introduce legislation that will allow more sensible investment of the funds jointly received by the Federal Government and the State of Alaska from the civil settlement of damages arising from the Exxon Valdez oilspill.
The settlement provided for Exxon to pay the Federal and State governments a total of $900 million over a 10-year period ending in 2001. Approximately $280 million remains to be paid under this agreement. Under the consent decree, the money is to be used for the recovery of damaged resources, and is to be managed as a joint Federal-
State trust fund, administered by the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council, which includes representatives of three Federal and three State agencies. Under the consent decree, moneys not immediately expended are to be placed with the U.S. District Court, Fifth Circuit Court Registry Investment System.
Recently, the trustees requested that Congress adopt measures to allow them to invest this money outside the Court Registry Investment System, in which earnings are limited to approximately 5 percent, and are further reduced by fees of 10 percent of the earnings. In the opinion of the trustees, even extremely conservative investment outside the court registry could yield an additional $20 to $30 million by 2002, which could greatly enhance continuing restoration projects.
This bill responds to the trustees' request. It will allow investment outside the court registry system. Let me emphasize, however, that this authority is entirely discretionary. The trustees may use it to reinvest settlement moneys or not, as they deem appropriate. Further, Mr. President, as an added protection, the district court must approve any reinvestment.
The bill also directs that the earnings on the new investment be used for marine research and monitoring, and for community and fishing industry economic restoration. This provision is needed to ensure attention to these important areas.
Here again, let me make sure I am absolutely clear. The bill I am offering does not prevent the purchase of land or easements. It simply directs that the earnings--and only the earnings--on new investment go to other, equally valid purposes.
The trustee council has already spent a large part of the money received from Exxon on land acquisition and easements that limit the use of land it has not purchased outright. To date, the total is about 424,000 acres, and the trustees' intention is to purchase or restrict as much as 750,000 acres.
The Federal Government already owns 248 million acres of Alaska--more than the eastern seaboard from Maine to Florida, which is home to one-
third of the entire population of the United States. Inside the spill area, there already are 20 different parcels of protected State and Federal lands, including the Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge, Katmai National Park and Preserve, and the Chugach National Forest and Copper River Delta Critical Habitat Area.
Many of the trustees' additional land acquisitions have been for the purpose of habitat protection, and are valuable to the trustees' restoration mission, but some have included the purchase of land that has already been logged or land on which public access is restricted despite being purchased by public funds. These purchases are not so easy to justify.
The trustees have already published plans to spend almost all of the
$900 million. By the time Exxon makes its last payment, the only money not already spent will be the 12 percent the council is tucking away in a restoration reserve.
After inflation-proofing, interest on this account could provide about $2.1 million annually for long-term research and economic reconstruction projects--or could vanish in more land acquisitions.
Finally, Mr. President, my bill also provides for the new investment authority to sunset in 2002 unless the trustees bring to Congress their thoughts on how an independent board might be created to administer the funds remaining after 2002. Personally, I'd like to see them recommend an independent, scientifically-oriented group to guide a long-term research program--a board that would call for proposals, arrange for scientific peer review, publish findings, and so forth, without the appearance of conflict that exists when the trustees are funding projects in which their own agencies are involved.
This is a responsible approach to a difficult issue. It gives the trustees the additional investment authority they want without prohibiting them from spending principal or the earnings from investments that remain in the court registry system however they choose, including more land acquisition. It does, however, encourage them to look at some areas that are equally important to the task of once again making whole both the resources and the people affected by the oil spill.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent for the text of the bill to be printed in the Record. I hope that we can take it up early next year, and urge my colleagues' support.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 1523
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, Notwithstanding any other provision of law, upon the joint motion of the United States and the State of Alaska and the issuance of an appropriate order by the United States District Court for the District of Alaska, the joint trust funds or any portion thereof, including any interest accrued thereon, previously received or to be received by the United States and the State of Alaska pursuant to the Agreement and consent decree issued in United States v. Exxon Corporation, et al. (No. A91-082 CIV) and State of Alaska v. Exxon Corporation, et al. (No. A91-083 CIV) (hereafter referred to as the ``Consent Decree''), may be deposited in appropriate accounts outside the Court Registry, including the Natural Resource Damage Assessment and Restoration Fund (hereafter referred to as the ``Fund'') established in title I of the Department of the Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1992 (Pub. L. 102-154, 43 U.S.C. 1474b) and such accounts outside the United States Treasury consisting of income-producing obligations and other instruments or securities of a type or class that have been determined unanimously by the federal and state natural resource trustees for the Exxon Valdez oil spill to have a high degree of reliability and security: Provided, That any joint trust funds in the Fund and any such outside accounts that have been approved unanimously by the trustees for expenditure by or through a state or federal agency shall be transferred promptly from the Fund and such outside accounts to the State or United States upon the joint request of the governments: Provided further, that the transfer of joint trust funds outside the Court Registry shall not affect the supervisory jurisdiction of such District Court under the Consent Decree or the Memorandum of Agreement and Consent Decree in United States v. State of Alaska (No. A91-081-CIV) over all expenditures of the joint trust funds: Provided further, That nothing herein shall affect the requirement of section 207 of the Dire Emergency Supplemental Appropriations and Transfers for Relief From the Effects of Natural Disasters, for Other Urgent Needs, and for the Incremental Cost of ``Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm'' Act of 1992
(Pub. L. 102-229, 43 U.S.C. 1474b note) that amounts received by the United States and designated by the trustees for the expenditure by or through a federal agency must be deposited into the Fund, Provided further, That any interest accrued under the authority in this section may be used only for grants for marine research and monitoring (including applied fisheries research) and for community and economic restoration projects (including projects proposed by the fishing industry and facilities), Provided further, That the federal trustees are hereby authorized to administer such grants: Provided further, That the authority provided in this section shall expire on September 30, 2002, unless by September 30, 2001 the trustees have submitted to the Congress a proposal to authorize in federal statute a board to administer funds invested, interest received, and grants awarded from such interest.
______
By Mr. HARKIN:
S. 1524. A bill require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to conduct an ongoing study of the health consequences of nuclear weapons tests; to the Committee on Labor and Human Resources.
NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE HEALTH STUDY LEGISLATION
Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I rise to introduce a bill requiring studies of the health effects of nuclear weapons testing. This would build upon the study by the National Cancer Institute that was released October 1 of this year.
On October 1, following some major news coverage, the NCI testified before the Senate Labor, HHS, and Education Appropriations Subcommittee on their efforts to connect nuclear weapons testing with thyroid cancer. The NCI testimony and the report released that day were startling. Atomic bomb tests in Nevada during the 1950's exposed millions of Americans--particularly children--to large amounts of radioactive iodine-131. The levels of radioactive iodine exposure is far worse than previously reported by the Government. Hot spots where the iodine-131 fallout was greatest includes many counties far away from Nevada, including New York, Massachusetts, and Iowa.
Hot spots were identified as receiving as high as 5-16 rads of exposure of iodine-131, with children being exposed to a risk up to 10 times higher. Iodine-131, which accumulates in the thyroid gland, has been linked to thyroid cancer. To give some understanding of the enormity of the U.S. atomic tests in Nevada, 116 million curies of iodine-131 were released in the United States above ground tests. This compares to 7.3 million from Chernobyl disaster the former Soviet Union. The NCI report clearly shows that the U.S. atomic tests exposed a lot of people to risks now considered unacceptable.
The topic hits very close to home for me. During the 1950's, I was living in the small town of Cumming located in south-central Iowa. Along with many Iowans, I lived in the hot spots detailed by the NCI study. Further, like many of my neighbors, I drank milk from the cows kept on our farm. This increased the risk faced by myself and my family because radioactive iodine accumulates in milk.
The NCI report has attracted a lot of attention. Much of this stems from the history of nuclear weapons testing. As we all know, the U.S. Government was fairly cavalier with its nuclear weapons program during the early days of the cold war. Historians can argue about the reasons, but most people recognize the terrible toll suffered by the American public because of our nuclear weapons program. Only recently has the extent of exposure to radiation and other hazards to the ``down winders'' living near nuclear weapons sites such as the Nevada test site, Hanford in Washington State, and the Marshall Islanders in the South Pacific.
So it is no surprise that a report detailing exposure to millions of Americans would attract attention. However, we need to continue the research into the health impact of nuclear weapons testing. That is why I am introducing this bill to require further study by the Department of Health and Human Services.
The HHS study will build upon the NCI study. There is strong evidence that exposure to other radioactive isotopes that were spread by nuclear weapons tests such as strontium 90, cesium 137 and barium 140 could lead to bone cancer, leukemia, higher infant mortality, and a host of other illnesses. This needs to be examined. So do the nuclear weapons tests that took place not only at the Nevada test site, but at other places as well. For example, the NCI report did not examine the nuclear weapons testing conducted by the United States in Mississippi, Alaska, New Mexico, Colorado, or the South Pacific. The studies should research not only the United States nuclear weapons program, but also tests by foreign nations including the Soviet Union and its successor states, France, China, India, and Great Britain.
I also believe that such studies should be conducted in an open manner. For example, this bill will require that the studies fall under the review authority of the Advisory Committee on Energy Related Studies and other entities established by the Federal Government to ensure public accountability over health related studies pertaining to nuclear weapon research, production, and testing. The bill also requires that HHS report to Congress within 90 days of passage as to its plan for completing the studies, as well as report to Congress each year on its progress.
This is a simple bill that seeks some understanding of the health consequences of our nuclear weapons testing program. I would ask my fellow colleagues to review and support this important legislation.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 1524
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. ONGOING STUDY ON HEALTH CONSEQUENCES OF NUCLEAR
WEAPONS TESTS.
(a) Requirement.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary of Health and Human Services shall conduct an ongoing study of the health consequences of nuclear weapons tests.
(2) Covered tests.--In conducting the study, the Secretary shall, to the maximum extent practicable, consider nuclear weapons tests (including above ground tests and below ground tests) by the United States, France, Great Britain, India, the People's Republic of China, the Soviet Union and its successor states, and any other foreign nation that has conducted nuclear weapons tests.
(3) Particular exposures.--In conducting the study, the Secretary shall consider, in particular, the following:
(A) The health consequences of exposure to plutonium, strontium-90, iodine-131, radioactive cesium, and any other radioactive element produced by a nuclear weapon test.
(B) The health consequences of exposure to such elements for high-risk populations and for the general population.
(4) Review.--The Secretary shall provide on an-going basis for guidance and review of the conduct of the study, and review of the results of the study, by the Advisory Committee on Energy-Related Epidemiologic Research of the Department of Health and Human Services and by such other entities engaged in the review of governmental studies relating to nuclear weapons activities as the Secretary considers appropriate.
(b) Reports.--
(1) Preliminary plan.--Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report setting forth the Secretary's plan for the conduct of the study under this section. The report shall set forth an estimate of the annual costs of the study.
(2) Annual reports.--Not later than one year after the date of the submittal of the report under paragraph (1), and annually thereafter, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report on the results of the study during the one-year period preceding the date of the report.
(c) Funding.--The Secretary of Energy shall transfer to the Secretary of Health and Human Services each fiscal year, from amounts appropriated for the Department of Energy for such fiscal year for weapons activities, such amounts as the Secretary of Energy and the Secretary of Health and Human Services jointly determine appropriate to permit the Secretary of Health and Human Services to conduct activities relating to the study under this section during such fiscal year.
______
By Mr. SPECTER (for himself and Mr. Biden):
S. 1525. A bill to provide financial assistance for higher education to the dependents of Federal, State, and local public safety officers who are killed or permanently and totally disabled as the result of a traumatic injury sustained in the line of duty; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
the public safety officers educational assistance act of 1998
Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I seek recognition today to join Senator Biden in introducing the Public Safety Officers Educational Assistance Act of 1998. The purpose of this bill is to build on legislation we passed last Congress and provide education benefits to the families of slain or disabled State and local public safety officers.
Last year, Congress passed the Federal Law Enforcement Dependents Assistance Act. This law provides for the education of the spouse and dependent children of Federal law enforcement officers who die or are totally disabled in the line of duty.
I was moved to introduce last year's legislation after meeting with the widow of Mr. Bill Degan, the U.S. marshal who was killed in the tragic incident at Ruby Ridge. Mrs. Karen Degan, his widow, brought to my attention the fact that the families of slain Federal law enforcement officers were not eligible to receive the educational benefits which the Government gives to the families of slain soldiers in our armed services. My legislation eliminated this disparity.
The program we created last year, however, is only available to the children of Federal law enforcement officers. Yet the idea behind the law applies equally to all public safety officers, Federal, State, or local. When someone gives his or her life protecting the safety and well-being of the general public, it is the very least we can do to ensure that the officer's children and/or spouse can continue on the educational path they would have followed had their parent or spouse not been killed in the line of duty.
Today we seek to remedy this disparity between Federal and non-
Federal officers by introducing the Public Safety Officers Educational Assistance Act of 1998. This legislation will extend these same educational benefits to the dependents of all public safety officers--
Federal, State, county and local law enforcement officers, correctional officers, and fire and rescue personnel--who have given their lives in the line of duty.
Under this bill, the Attorney General will administer a program which will provide up to $4,485 per child, per year to attend a 4-year college. This is the same amount of educational assistance the Federal Government provides to the dependents of slain or disabled veterans and Federal law enforcement officers. I would note that this program is subject to appropriations and does not constitute an entitlement.
I would prefer that we did not have to worry about death and disabling injuries for public safety officials, but it is a fact of life that every year there are tragic losses. We are obligated to remember the families of those officers who have paid the ultimate price to keep our streets and homes safe.
Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, last year the Senate passed the Federal Law Enforcement Dependents Assistance Act. A law which provides for the education of the spouse and dependent children of Federal law enforcement officers who die or are totally disabled in the line of duty.
The purpose of the legislation was to remove a significant financial burden from the families of these deceased officers and to allow them to continue on the educational path they would have followed had their parent or spouse not been killed in the line of duty.
This fall, several young men and women were able to go to college under this program. Unfortunately, this program is only available to the children of Federal law enforcement officers.
Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Public Safety Officers Educational Assistance Act of 1998. This legislation will extend these same educational benefits to the dependents of all public safety officers--Federal, State, county, and local law enforcement officers, correctional officers, and fire and rescue personnel--who have given their lives in the line of duty.
Under my bill, the Attorney General will administer a program which will provide up to $4,485 per child, per year to attend a 4-year college. This is the same amount of educational assistance the Federal Government provides to veterans.
It is critical that we remember the families of those officers who have made the ultimate sacrifice to keep our streets and homes safe. This bill is intended to allow the dependents of public safety officers to continue with their education as they would have been able to do had their parent not been killed or totally disabled in the line of duty.
I have long been concerned about the plight of families of public safety officers killed in the line of duty--this summer, I introduced an amendment to the Budget Reconciliation Act which provides for the favorable tax treatment of survivor death benefits paid to the families of fallen officers. In that vein, this legislation offers assurance to those in the public safety profession--and even to those considering service as public safety officers--that their loved ones will be able to attain their educational goals in their absence.
____________________
