February 4, 1985 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS

EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS 1697

TERRORISM STRIKES AGAIN IN EUROPE

HON. WM. S. BROOMFIELD OF MICHIGAN

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, February 4, 1985 e Mr. BROOMFIELD. Mr. Speaker, now more than ever, our Government must continue to do all that it can to counter the growing threat of terror­ism in the world. Again, the specter of mindless terrorism is raising its ugly head in Europe.

Leftist terrorists groups have launched a series of attacks on NATO and American targets in Italy, Germa­ny, Belgium, and France. NATO tar­gets, defense firms, and government facilities have been hit and some have been damaged.

For the first time, the French terror­ist group "Direct Action" and the German group "Red Army Faction" recently announced their fusion into one group. The newly formed group has declared war against NATO and U.S. influence in Europe.

The level of terrorist violence has also escalated. French Gen. Rene Audran was shot and killed last week as he returned home from work. The general was a high-ranking French De­fense Ministry official. Direct Action claimed responsibility for the crime. Never before has the terrorist group resorted to murder. In past years, their attacks have been mostly sym­bolic. Just this week, a leftist terrorist group fired mortar rounds at NATO warships anchored in Lisbon harbor. The Popular Forces of April 25, an ex­tremist Communist group, took credit for the unsuccessful attack. The same group mortared the U.S. Embassy in Lisbon in November, and attacked NATO's Iberian headquarters in Por­tugal a month later. Italian antiterror­ist forces foiled an Islamic Jihad plan to attack the American Embassy in Rome in recent months.

Terrorist groups in Europe are also increasing their level of cooperation. According to available intelligence, there are links between Direct Action and Basque terrorists, as well as con­tact between Direct Action and the Fighting Communist cells, a new left­ist terrorist group from Belgium.

Terrorism is not confined to West­ern Europe. Last year brought a number of devastating terrorist at­tacks in the Middle East, and terrorist operations continue in Central and South America. Already, our Govern­ment is making plans to increase secu­rity here in the United States in an-

ticipation of possible terrorist activi­ties in Washington and in other cities.

I commend the administration for its continuing support of antiterrorism legislation, and its strong interest in this critical issue. During the last ses­sion, the Congress passed H.R. 6311 giving over $350 million to the Depart­ment of State for antiterrorism pro­grams and physical security projects at our missions around the world. Much more must be done, both in the area of enhancing Embassy security and in improving our intelligence col­lecting capabilities.

Terrorism is a form of political war. It is low level warfare directed against the United States and other democra­cies in the West. As long as the United States represents certain values in the world, there will be groups which will seek to intimidate us and force us to change our policies by directing vio­lence at us and at our interests. Our battle against terrorism has just begun with the first step in a journey of many, many miles. Finding the cour­age to speak out about terrorism is surely the first step toward the defeat of those who would destroy our free­dom and our world.

I strongly commend the following article on terrorism in Europe from the Christian Science Monitor to my colleagues in the Congress. [From the Christian Science Monitor, Jan.

25, 1985] EUROTERRORISM IN THE 1980's-UNITED

STATES AND W. EuROPEAN MILITARY, POLIT­ICAL INSTITUTIONS BECOME TARGETS FOR NEW WAVE OF TERRORIST ATTACKS

<By Gary Yerkey) BRussELs.-Urban terrorism has returned

to Western Europe, with its perpetrators this time taking aim at new targets and pledging to strengthen cross-border coop­eration.

National government and NATO officials are not panicking. "We'll cope," says one in­vestigator here.

But concern clearly runs deep in govern­ment and military circles, as well as among the public at large.

Today's terrorists, mostly claiming to fight for leftist causes, have struck where their forerunners caused havoc a decade ago, mainly in West Germany and Italy. But they have also hit out in countries previously spared organized terror, such as France and Belgium.

The newest target: the Western world's defense community, specifically installa­tions, personnel, and suppliers connected with the Brussels-based North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

The number of attacks against NATO tar­gets has increased dramatically over the past four months. Earlier this month, two well-known guerrilla groups-Direct Action in France and the Red Army Faction <Baader-Meinhof Gang> in West Germany­announced that they were forming a politi-

cal-military front in Western Europe with NATO as its main target.

This disturbing sign of stepped-up coop­eration among terrorist groups in different countries was followed by news this week that the explosives used by Direct Action in a failed attack in Paris last summer were of the same type as those employed by the Red Army Faction in the attempted bomb­ing of a NATO officers' school in West Ger­many on Dec. 18.

This same type of explosive had also been used in six bomb attacks against NATO fuel pipelines in Belgium nine days earlier by the newest self-proclaimed leftist group to appear on the terrorist scene, the Fighting Communist Cells. All the explosives were re­portedly stolen in southern Belgium last June.

"It's the first piece of concrete evidence we've had in a long time that the different groups are working together," says one in­vestigator. He notes that previous reports of links between various guerrilla groups in Western Europe were based more on suspi­cion than fact.

New evidence of closer links also came this month when the Fighting Communist Cells, which launched a series of bomb attacks against NATO-related targets in Belgium last October, said in a communique:

"We dedicate our attack [against the ad­ministrative headquarters of the US mili­tary in Belgium on Jan. 15] to the fighters of the Red Army Faction who struggle today in a collective hunger strike against their conditions of detention/extermination in special prisons."

Nearly 40 suspected and convicted Red Army Faction <RAF> terrorists have been on hunger strike in West German jails since last month.

Since mid-December more than 40 bomb and arson incidents have been investigated by West German police-at least 20 of them strongly believed to have been the work of the RAF, including seven against US instal­lations. The rest were directed at French diplomatic buildings, British barracks, and large West German industrial plants.

Security authorities reportedly have tight­ened security around likely human targets such as senior NATO officers, judges, law­yers, and leading businessmen.

Unlike the terrorist groups of the 1970s, however, the born-again violence-wreakers of the mid-1980s so far have been content for the most part to wreck property and to leave human beings alone. The RAF's pred­ecessor, the Baader-Mainhof Gang, claimed responsibility for killing a number of vic­tims, including West German business leader Hanns-Martin Schleyer and Dresdner Bank chief Jurgen Ponto.

The exception to the current tendency to avoid k1lling people is Italy, where attacks against human life by both the extreme left and extreme right have continued almost unabated since the days of the now-infa­mous Red Brigades in the late 1960s and 1970s.

France's Direct Action group came to prominence in 1980 with a series of bomb at­tacks against government buildings. It has also struck out against rightists and Israelis.

e This "bullet" symbol identifies statements or insertions which are not spoken by the Member on the floor.

1698 Last year, Direct Action indicated that it

could be making a change in tactics when it tried <unsuccessfully) to bomb the Paris of­fices of the Western European Union <WEU>-a long-moribund organization of several European countries now being brought to life as a forum for discussing the strengthening of West European defense.

Announcing the formation of a joint "po­litical-military front" earlier this month, the RAF and Direct Action said specifically that they had joined forces in order to more effectively fight "NATO's new politics" and other Western defense-related activities, in­cluding the deployment of new US cruise and Pershing II nuclear missiles in Western Europe.

From the start, the Fighting Communist Cells, which has carried out bomb attacks in Belgium on nine separate occasions since it first became known last October, has left no doubt that its main goal would be to terror­ize NATO-related targets.

It singled out Belgium for an "armed po­litical-military struggle." It said this was be­cause Belgium has a "limited but central place" in the "imperialist military ma­chine," as evidenced by NATO's decision to locate both its political and military head­quarters on Belgian soil.

Until its latest attack, on Jan. 15, the Bel­gian group avoided tactics such as kidnap­pings and bombings, which have the poten­tial of injuring or killing human beings. All its work was done in pre-dawn hours or far from populated areas. But now the Fighting Communist Cells has vowed to change that.

A communique signed by the group and found after the Jan. 15 bombing of the ad­ministrative headquarters of the US mili­tary in Brussels warned that future actions could "kill Yankee military and their ac­complices. . . . Human life is not an abso­lute in itself, a mysterious value. It holds no sacred character for us."

The group's latest bombing, in fact, which caused an estimated $500,000 in property damage, did slightly injure a US military po­liceman guarding the building and appeared calculated to kill him and his fellow guard on duty the night of the bombing.

We're taking this new threat very serious­ly, said a Belgian Justice Ministry official.

The difficulty, if not impossibility, of tracking down small bands of terrorists who strike and then disappear underground until their next attack has been under­scored by Belgium's failure to turn up con­crete leads <except those stolen explosives used by the Fighting Communist Cells and groups in France and West Germany) since the Belgian group surfaced for the first time nearly four months ago.

Even NATO security officials here have become impatient with the Belgian police, who protect the perimeter of the organiza­tion's sprawling headquarters just outside Brussels.

"We'd feel a little more comfortable if we had more information," said one official.

After the Fighting Communist Cells' first bombing last October, the Belgian Justice Ministry beefed up the country's antiterror­ist squad. Some 250 policemen will be hired this year to help fight terrorism. But Jus­tice Minister Jean Gol has been left empty­handed in the struggle, issuing statements calling for greater cooperation among Euro­pean countries to fight terrorism but having little to show as an example of how to do it.

A grim reminder that terrorism in West­ern Europe is not limited to left-wing, or even right-wing, groups but can cover the whole spectrum of causes and ideas-anti-

EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS British <IRA>, anti-Semitic, anti-Palestinian, anti-Spanish <Basques), anti-Turk <Armeni­ans>-came earlier this month when Bel­gium's intelligence services learned that a possible suicide bomb attack was being planned by the Islamic fundamentalist group, Islamic Jihad, against undisclosed targets in Belgium.

Some 1,500 police were put on full alert for nearly a week, and security was tight­ened at Western and some Middle Eastern embassies, NATO headquarters, and most government installations.

The plot, which was apparently foiled, was also a reminder that isolated acts of ter­rorism can be prevented.

Perhaps the best example of that came only last month when Swiss and Italian an­titerrorist squads joined forces to squash a plan to destroy the US Embassy in Rome-a plot also reportedly being hatched by the Is­lamic Jihad.

The combined counter-terrorist operation began when Swiss police found several ex­plosive devices in the suitcase of a Lebanese national changing planes in Zurich on his way to Rome.

The Swiss police alerted the Italian secret service. As a result, in a predawn raid on two apartments northwest of Rome, the Italian security services were able to round up seven young Lebanese students.

US officials found out about the plot only after the raid had taken place. Later, the American Ambassador to Italy, Maxwell Rabb, paid a call on Rome's police chief to express his gratitude. "Your country," he said, "has again demonstrated that it is in the vanguard of the fight against subversive elements that stain the world with blood."

SIX-MONTH TALLY OF EuROTERRORISM

June 1984: Explosives stolen from Ecaus­sines quarry near Brussels.

July 14: French Ministry of Industry bombed.

Aug. 2: European Space Agency headquar­ters in Paris bombed.

Aug. 14: West German helicopter carrying federal prosecutor fired on.

Aug. 23: Unexploded car-bomb discovered outside Western European Union in Paris.

Oct. 3: Brussels office of Litton Industries bombed.

Oct. 4: Brussels subsidiary of West German M.A.N./Volkswagen plant bombed.

Oct. 8: Brussels office of Honeywell bombed.

Oct. 15: Brussels study center of Belgian Liberal Party bombed.

Oct. 15: Ghent, Belgium, offices of Flem­ish Social Christian Party bombed.

Oct. 18: School bombed in Kassel, West Germany.

Nov. 5: Car-bomb defused outside Brussels police station.

Nov. 26: Communications pylons blown up outside air base near Brussels.

Nov. 27: Plot foiled to blow up U.S. Em­bassy in Rome.

Dec. 11: Six bomb attacks on NATO fuel pipelines in Belgium.

Dec. 18: Bomb defused at NATO officers' school in Oberammergau, West Germany.

Dec. 23: Bombing of Rome-Milan express train.

Dec. 29: Bomb defused outside U.S. Air Force base in Wiesbaden, West Germany.

Dec. 30: Bomb damages U.S. Army intelli­gence building in DUsseldorf, West Germa­ny.

Dec. 31: French Embassy in Bonn bombed. Jan. 3, 1985: U.S. consul's home fire­

bombed in Frankfurt, West Germany.

February 4, 1985 Jan. 5: West Germany-bound train halted

near Amsterdam by 25 terrorists and spray­painted with slogans.

Jan. 7: Bomb explodes near NATO fuel pipeline in Karlsruhe, West Germany.

Jan. 9: Italian policeman killed in Tor Va­lancia, Italy.

Jan. 15: Car-bombing of U.S. Army com­munity center in Brussels.

Jan. 20: Stuttgart computer center bombed.e

HOMEMAKER EQUITY ACT

HON. MARCY KAPTUR OF OHIO

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, February 4, 1985 • Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I am in­troducing the Homemakers Equity Act-legislation to provide the same tax treatment to homemakers for con­tributions to an individual retirement account that is now available under current law to wage earners. Current­ly, our tax laws are biased against homemakers who wish to ensure that they will have sufficient funds to live their retirement years with the dignity and self-respect which is rightfully theirs. A marriage is both a social and economic partnership and this bill will allow homemakers the economic rec­ognition they deserve in anticipation of their retirement years.

Presently, workers outside the home are permitted to make tax-deductible contributions of 100 percent of com­pensation up to $2,000 each year to an IRA. Accordingly, if a married individ­ual and his spouse each receive com­pensation during a year, each may make separate deductible contribu­tions to his or her IRA of up to 100 percent of compensation up to $2,000 each year. If an individual receives no compensation during a year, the indi­vidual generally is not allowed to make a deductible IRA contribution for such year. A special rule applies to married couples with only one paid worker. It is referred to as a "spousal IRA." The worker may establish an IRA for the nonearner spouse, and make a maxi­mum combined contribution of $2,250 to the two IRA's-the worker's and the spouse's. The amount may be di­vided among the IRA's in any manner. but no more than $2,000 may be placed in either IRA.

The existing rules governing IRA's are unfair to homemakers who have not worked outside the--borne or who have temporarily interrupted their ca­reers or who have chosen to work part-time. The relatively minor allow­ances for a spousal IRA fail to recog­nize the important economic contribu­tions made by non-wage-earning spouses. Moreover, they are inconsist­ent with other rules of current law under which married couples are treated as an economic and taxpaying unit. A husband and wife who both

February .4, 1985 work and earn $10,000 each, for exam­ple, can make aggregate IRA contribu­tions of $4,000 under current law. A couple with the same joint income of $20,000, all of it earned by one spouse, can make aggregate IRA contributions of only $2,250. A third couple, with $20,000 of joint income, but with one spouse earning only $200, is limited even further to a $2,200 aggregate IRA contribution. These disparate results are inconsistent with the general prin­ciple of requiring similar tax treat­ment of similarly situated taxpayers.

In addition to considerations of simple fairness, the Homemakers Equity Act merits congressional sup­port for related compelling reasons. The legislation will contribute to an increase in the national pool of savings and encourage individuals to make adequate provisions for their retire­ment security. Incentives for savings are crucial for lowering interest rates, increasing capital formation and pro­moting productivity and economic growth.

Furthermore, financial security in retirement continues to be difficult to achieve for homemakers. It is notewor­thy that the poorest members in our society are older women. IRA's are not and should not become a replacement for public and private pension pro­grams. For homemakers, however, they offer an important way to ensure supplementary financial security in re­tirement. In this respect, IRA tax ex­emptions for homemakers are even more crucial than they are for wage earners.

While it would be preferable to re­dress the inequitable treatment of homemakers by immediately raising the aggregate limit to $4,000 this year, the historic Federal budget deficit calls for a more prudent phase-in. This legislation would phase in the increase over a 7-year period beginning in 1986 according to the following schedule: For the taxable years be- The applicable

ginning in: amount is: 1986 and 1987 ......................................... $2,750 1988 and 1989 ......................................... 3,250 1990 and 1991 ......................................... 3,750 1992 and thereafter............................... 4,000

I hope the House will give the Homemakers Equity Act full and timely consideration. It is time to give the American homemaker equitable treatment in providing for financial security in retirement.e

AN OVERVIEW OF THE 1985 FARM BILL, PART l-IS THERE STILL ROOM FOR THE AMERI­CAN DREAM?

HON. STEVE GUNDERSON OF WISCONSIN

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, February 4, 1985 e Mr. GUNDERSON. Mr. Speaker, one of our most cherished national

EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS hymns begins, "Oh beautiful for spa­cious skies, for amber waves of grain; For purple mountains' majesty, above the fruited plains • • •." The mere mention of this phrase cannot help but produce an image of farmers har­vesting their crops in the fall as one soars high above the ground.

Yet, until recently, it had been a long time since any of us truly felt the meaning of these inspirational words. Years of Vietnam, Watergate, stagfla­tion, and hostage crises had numbed our senses to the greatness which is America.

The events of the last 4 years have done much to reverse the national malaise of the 1970's and create ana­tional renaissance in its place. As a whole, Americans are feeling good about themselves again.

Perhaps the most significant of the changes has occurred in our general economy where, by working together, in 4 short years we have been able to reduce inflation to its lowest levels in 20 years, cut the prime interest rate in half, and produce the single largest annual increase in GNP in 30 years.

Regrettably, this recovery has not been consistent throughout the vari­ous sectors of our economy. In fact, for most American farmers-be they dairy, livestock, or cash crop farmers­the economic situation is getting worse, not better. Total farm debt now exceeds $200 billion.

For those farmers with debt to asset ratios in excess of 70 percent, it is simply too late. For others with debt asset ratios of between 40 and 70 per­cent, it may only be a matter of time unless a dramatic turnaround occurs. Thus, some States face losing between 10 and 20 percent of their farm popu­lation to liquidation in the next 5 years unless we act-and act immedi­ately.

The crisis facing American agricul­ture is not new in 1985-it has been with us ever since the 1980 grain em­bargo.

The decade of the 1970's was a time of high inflation. That inflation led to increased land values as real estate was used as a hedge against inflation. As a result, farmers watched their net worth accelerate because of outside forces. As net worth increased, credit became easier to obtain and many farmers expanded their operations in response to the nationwide call to plant fence row to fence row.

This brief boom in agriculture ended abruptly when President Carter im­posed a grain embargo on the Rus­sians. Not only did American farmers lose Russian sales, but our reputation as a reliable supplier was damaged. At the same time, competitors in the Southern Hemisphere prospered and took over our markets.

As a result, our agricultural econo­my was plagued with huge commodity surpluses and low prices. And, with an

1699 incredible sense of timing, interest rates soared higher than at any previ­ous time in history. This meant that net income was reduced not only by low prices, but by increased costs as well.

After 5 years, major newspapers and periodicals have finally realized that those of us who represent the 3 per­cent of the American population who feed our country are not crying "wolf" when we warn that, without concerted efforts, the structure of American ag­riculture will be irretrievably altered.

Clearly, the entire Congress-not just a few rural legislators-must be concerned about the prospect that the amber waves will no longer be tended by our network of family farmers, for the demise of the family farm will also threaten those businesses which depend upon a large rural constituen­cy as well as create new problems for our cities as former farmers seek em­ployment elsewhere.

As producers become insolvent and leave their farms, the small businesses that depend on their patronage will soon close their doors. Schools, churches, and hospitals whose day-to­day existence depends on volume of people served cannot survive when their population base is eroding rapid­ly. Banks will recover only a small per­centage of outstanding loans under these depressed conditions and will not remain open for long. In short, we are facing the fundamental destruc­tion of rural society.

Even if, for some reason, that de­struction does not concern our urban brethren, we must all remember that, while only a few of us represent pro­ducers, we all represent consumers. For years, American consumers have benefited, rightly or wrongly, from a cheap food policy. That policy will not long endure with the agricultural pro­ductive capacity of our country in the hands of a relatively small number of large corporate farms who can demand-and receive-whatever com­pensation they choose for their ef­forts. The result will be an unprece­dented consumer revolt as food prices soar.

As such, the future of American ag­riculture is justifiably the concern of every Member of the House of Repre­sentatives. Thus, we must take every opportunity to craft legislation that will reverse those economic conditions forcing producers off their land.

FEDERAL LEGISLATION

Of course, the landmark agricultural legislation we will consider this year will be the 1985 farm bill. Yet, we will need much more than a good farm bill to revive the agricultural sector of our economy.

Even before we report the farm bill from committee, we must produce in­terim credit legislation to meet the im­mediate needs of the hundreds of good

1700 producers who, without some type of extraordinary help, will not get a crop into the ground this spring.

Further, we must be aware of the fact that virtually every bill we pass in Congress has an impact on the farm sector of the economy.

Since interest payments constitute the largest portion of any farmer's current expenses while depressed com­modity prices are often related to de­clining exports, Clayton Yuetter, president of the Chicago Merchantile Exchange, and others have suggested that what we do in the areas of fiscal, monetary, and trade policy will impact more greatly on farmers than the farm bill, itself.

Accordingly, as we consider the budget and the appropriations bills that follow, we must be ever-mindful of the need for deficit reduction so as to relieve pressure on interest rates and decrease the strength of the U.S. dollar. Both actions would enhance net farm income in the long run.

THE IMPORTANCE OF THE 1985 FARM BILL

At the same time, the importance of the 1985 farm bill should not be un­deremphasized for it is the single greatest combination of Federal farm programs that comes before Congress at any one time and the quickest way to affect prices in the short run. While we will begin working on this legisla­tion in the Agriculture Committee in the upcoming week, it probably will not emerge from committee until late spring or early summer.

During that time, I intend to publish a series of articles in this section of the REcoRD calling the attention of my colleagues to the various issues sur­rounding the drafting of the farm bill in hopes of providing continuing infor­mation on these important topics.

Virtually everyone from the Secre­tary of Agriculture on down have so often repeated that American agricul­ture is at a crossroads that the expres­sion is becoming trite. Regardless, the facts are that agriculture faces a bigger challenge today than at any time in the past 50 years. And, quite frankly, how we respond to that chal­lenge will determine the structure of the American farm economy not only until the end of the decade, but well into the 21st century.

We can ill-afford to bury our heads in the sand and make mere cosmetic changes in old laws. We need to re­spond creatively to this challenge with new thoughts and ideas, not mere rep­etition of what has come before.

At the outset, we must consider going to a longer farm bill-perhaps as much as 6 years-that will permit us to address both the short-term needs of our individual producers and the long-term market goals of the industry as a whole. In this way, we not only preserve the American dream of our farmers in the present, but protect it from the future as well.

EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS Additionally, an authorization for 6

years would move consideration of the next farm bill into the middle of the first term of the next administration­where it belongs in the first place. This has the dual benefit of providing producers with 6 years of future infor­mation for planning purposes and allows the next President time to get his team in place before taking on a major reauthorization of farm pro­grams. Accordingly, serious attention should be given to a 6-year farm bill.

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I would simply say that I look forward to working with all of my colleagues in the 99th Congress on solutions to the grave problems facing our farm com­munities. Our work will be long and difficult, but our reward will be a sound agricultural economy that will continue to feed not only our Nation, but the hungry of the world. We should work to achieve nothing less.e

GILLIS LONG REMEMBERED

HON.UNDY(MRS.HALE)BOGGS OF LOUISIANA

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, February 4, 1985 • Mrs. BOGGS. Mr. Speaker, recently this House paused from its legislative schedule so that a number of its Mem­bers could honor and remember our late friend and colleague, Gillis Long. I would like to share the editorial and commentary that appeared in the New Orleans Times-Picayune-States-Item the week of Gillis' death.

The editorial and commentary follow:

[From the New Orleans Times-Picayune/ States-Item Editorial, Jan. 23, 19851

GILLIS W. LoNG

Gillis W. Long, who died Sunday at the age of 61, will be remembered by his col­leagues in the U.S. House of Representa­tives for his efforts to define new policies for his faltering Democratic Party. But those who knew him best in Louisiana will remember him mainly for the consistency of his political convictions throughout his public career.

Many would call Mr. Long, who represent­ed Louisiana's 8th Congressional District for 12 years and ran unsuccessfully for gover­nor twice, a liberal. He was impatient with the term, preferring to be known simply as someone with compassion for the less fortu­nate of our society.

Yet the term "liberal" was not inappropri­ate. Many of the positions in which he served, as well as his voting record in Con­gress, reflected his devotion to such classical liberal concerns as the welfare of the poor and minorities. He earned high marks from the National Association for the Advance­ment of Colored People and Americans for Democratic Action, a liberal monitoring group.

Yet Mr. Long, whose varied district reached all the way from Alexandria in cen­tral Louisiana to St. John the Baptist Parish in the south, had his conservative side as well. He was a financial lawyer spe­cializing in investment banking between his

February 4-, 1985 congressional stints, and he voted conserv­atively on such economic issues as oil policy and water projects that were of special in­terest in Louisiana.

There is no doubt, however, of the direc­tion of Mr. Long's basic political instincts. He was a champion of civil rights in the 1960s, a time when it took courage for a white Southern politician to support public­ly the issues of most concern to blacks. Mindful of Mr. Long's commitment, Presi­dent Lyndon Johnson named him the first assistant director of the Office of Economic Opportunity, the federal anti-poverty agency, in 1965. Mr. Long had lost his con­gressional seat the year before to his cousin Speedy Long, who argued that Gillis Long was too liberal on civil rights issues.

Faithful to his convictions, Rep. Long was the only member of Louisiana's 10-member congressional delegation to back Walter Mondale for the Democratic presidential nomination before last year's Democratic convention.

Among his colleagues, conservatives as well as liberals, Rep. Long was respected for his hard work and leadership abilities. He was a key figure on several important House committees, including the Rules Committee. He was also a driving force in the House Democratic caucus, a group dedicated to producing new policies for the Democratic Party.

Gillis Long stuck by his convictions and earned the respect of political friend and foe alike, and it was a fitting tribute that President Reagan, before beginning his in­augural address Monday, called the nation's attention to his passing and asked for a moment of silence in his honor.

THE LITTLE MAN: A CHAMPION OF THE LITTLE FELLow

[From the New Orleans Times-Picayune/ States Item, Jan. 23, 19851

<By Jack Wardlaw> f"In the old Long tradition, Gillis Long

was always the little man's public offi­ciaL "-Gov. Edwin W. Edwards.)

Edwin Edwards has it right; Gillis Long was the quintessential modem Louisiana populist, the friend of the little guy.

Long died this week at the age of 61, the victim of a heart that wouldn't stand up to the massive workload he imposed upon him­self. If it can be truly said of anyone that he worked himself to death, here is the exam­ple.

The last time I saw Gillis, he turned up a couple of months ago at a luncheon of the Baton Rouge Press Club, which happens to meet in his district. He wasn't the speaker, he just showed up to say hello. He looked terrible.

I'd known Gillis since the early 1960s, and when I asked how he was feeling it wasn't a pleasantry, and he knew it. But he brushed the inquiry aside and launched into a lengthy litany of what he was up to in Washington-the Rules Committee was doing this, the Louisiana delegation was doing that, the Joint Economic Committee was doing the other. The Democratic Party was about to undertake something or other, and Common Cause was pushing a reform bill with his name on it. Whatever it was, Gillis Long was in the thick of it.

Gillis Long, only a distant cousin of Huey, Earl and Russell Long, came on the political scene in 1962, getting elected to Congress from the old 8th District, when it was locat­ed in North Louisiana. That district has since migrated south along with the popula-

February 4, 1985 tion, and is now dominated by the River Parishes and reaches into the New Orleans area to include St. John the Baptist.

Soon-perhaps too soon-he became a statewide political figure and plunged into the 1963 governor's race. At that time, he was a "new face" up against such old ones as Chep Morrison, Bob Kennon and Shelby Jackson. But there was another "new face" in the race, that of one John J. McKeithen.

Gillis couldn't unite the Long faction behind him and McKeithen <the other Long faction candidate> edged him out of second place and went on to upset Morrison in the runoff.

Factional disputes run deep in Louisiana, and Gillis had earned the enmity of the McKeithen people. Thus in 1964, with McKeithen in the Mansion, Gillis was chal­lenged for his congressional seat by another distant cousin, Speedy 0. Long on Jena. Speedy won, and Long was out of public office for eight years.

But he remained active politically, and in 1971 was ready for his big push for the gov­ernorship. McKeithen was retiring and Gillis, though no longer a "new face," fig­ured he could take the measure of the front runners, former Gov. Jimmie H. Davis and longtime Lt. Gov. C.C. "Taddy" Aycock.

That he might have done, but as it turned out, the race was dominated by two new­comers-a young congressman named Edwin Edwards, and a state senator from Shreve­port named J. Bennett Johnston.

Johnston came out of nowhere to edge Gillis out of second place, and came within an eyelash of whipping Edwards in the runoff. Edwards then polished off one David C. Treen in the general election.

This time, however, Gillis wasn't out in the cold. He had taken the precaution of en­dorsing Edwards against Johnston in the runoff, and when it came time to remap the state's congressional districts, a grateful Ed­wards saw to it that the 8th District was structured to Gillis' liking. He returned to Congress in 1974.

Packing Gillis off to Congress kept him out of Edwards' hair, but it was like throw­ing Br'er Rabbit into the briarpatch. He became a leader among Democratic con­gressmen and, had his health held up, he might someday have been House speaker. Or he might have returned to Louisiana as governor.

But he was felled by a heart attack in 1979 and passed up that year's governor's race, in which he arguably might have beaten Treen. He recovered and went back to a frantic pace in Congress.

He compiled an unusual voting record for a Louisiana congressman, championing the cause of minorities, women and the "little man." Even his critics will agree that he chalked up a distinguished career.

Now it's over, but he won't be soon forgot­ten. The heart that failed him in the end was big enough to assure that.

[From the New Orleans Times-Picayune/ States-Item, Jan. 24, 19851

REMEMBERING THE LATE GILLIS LoNG, WITH FONDNESS

<By Iris Kelso> Gillis Long, more than any politician I

ever knew, was motivated by a sense of re­sponsibility. That and a driving intellect.

Intellect, not ego, although he was not short of ego. He wanted to look after people, to see that things ran right.

I first noticed this in 1963, when Long was running for governor. He, his wife Cathy and some staff members had been cam-

EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS paigning through the state, flying from city to city in a private plane. I was with them.

When we landed at the New Orleans Lake­front Airport, several of us were going to different places. Most politicians, when they get off an airplane, start looking for photog­raphers. Or they march off looking very im­portant, their wives and staff members flap­ping along behind them.

Not Gillis Long. He headed straight for the luggage, which had been placed on the runway. He stood there over the luggage cart, separating the bags, checking with each of us to see that our bags were there and not headed for the wrong destination.

Long was like this whether he was dealing with national legislation, the national Democratic Party, the Louisiana Democrat­ic Party, a political campaign or a luncheon with friends. He wanted everybody to reach their destination, and he accepted responsi­bility for the system for getting them there.

He treasured his friends and kept up with friends all over the country.

Kathy Vick, Louisiana's national Demo­cratic committeewoman, recalls that she once asked Long if he would help her in her campaign to get elected head of the Nation­al Association of Democratic State Chairs, an organization of state Democratic leaders. She got involved in her campaign and forgot all about asking Long for help. She picked up the telephone one day and it was Long, asking, "How you coming, Kathy?" He was there to help.

Bob D'Hemecourt, Gov. Edwin W. Ed­wards' executive assistant in New Orleans, says Long often called him Just to see how he and his family were doing. "He didn't want me to do anything. He just wanted to see how we were," says D'Hemecourt.

John Mmahat, a New Orleans business­man, was one of Long's closest friends in New Orleans. Long was best man in his wed­ding.

"I always knew that I could call Gillis any time of the night or day if I needed any­thing. He would do it if it was legal and right," Mmahat says.

D'Hemecourt says Long knew after his heart surgery in 1981 that he was living on borrowed time. "He had only 35 percent of his heart capacity working," says D'Heme­court.

Yet Long continued his work in Congress as if he were fully recovered. It was typical of him-pragmatic, efficient, concerned about details-that he would have been making plans for his funeral two weeks before his death. He specified that he wanted women and blacks included among his pallbearers.

Long was a true populist, in that he cared deeply about the fate of ordinary people, es­pecially the poor.

He had been poor himself. His father owned a restaurant in the little town of Tannehill, near Winnfield, La., and lost ev­erything in the Depression. Long often said that he would never have been able to go to college if he had not had the GI bill after his service in World War II.

Long met Cathy while attending Louisi­ana State University and they were married shortly afterward. The two had a 38-year ro­mance and partnership.

They were best friends, in a way that other political couples envied. Most politi­cians are quick to say that their wives are "supportive." But Gillis Long was "support­ive" of Cathy, too.

Some years ago, she decided to go to work as a "Kelly girl," filling temporary jobs in Washington. Many congressmen would have

1701 . been embarrassed to have their wives work­ing in such jobs. But Long backed Cathy in her decision, knowing that she needed an in­terest of her own.

More than any other Louisiana politician, Long was interested in the state's Democrat­ic Party. He was a close friend of Jesse Bankston, the party's longtime chairman, and the two worked together to try to devel­op a real party organization.

Although he ran twice for governor, Long never realized his dream of being governor. I think it was because he didn't look right to the anti-Long forces and he didn't sound right to the Long people.

In sum, Gillis Long was one of the best human beings I ever met, that rare breed, a man of unselfish motivations.e

HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES BY NICARAGUAN "CONTRAS"

HON. GEORGE MILLER OF CALIFORNIA

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, February 4, 1985

• Mr. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, the decision to fund or not fund the efforts of the anti-Sandinista "Contra" rebels will soon be once again before this House. I wish to bring to the attention of my col­leagues an incident which took place on January 8, 1985, involving the kid­napping by the Contras of an Ameri­can Maryknoll Sister. Sister Nancy Donovan was released by her captors unharmed. But 14 civilians were killed near the town of Limay where she worked, on that same day. According to Sister Donovan, almost 40 civilians were killed in 1 month from the town of Limay alone. She reports that the Contra attacks have been made on ci­vilian, and not military targets.

It is becoming increasingly difficult for this administration to put a good face on the Contra war. Covert action against Nicaragua has come to mean the destruction of economic infra­structure, the publication of manuals urging the assassination of Sandinista officials, the terrorizing of civilians and the kidnapping of American citi­zens. On January 4 of this year the Contras described their goal on the clandestine Radio 15th of September: "to defeat the Sandinistas militarily."

I urge you to read Sister Donovan's statement, and consider carefully the evidence she presents during our delib­erations over funding for the covert war later in this session. PREss STATEMENT OF SISTER NANCY DONOVAN

My name is Sister Nancy Donovan from Waterbury, Connecticut and I have been a Maryknoll Sister for thirty-five years. I have served as a missionary in Central America for twenty-nine years and my most recent mission assignment is to the parish of San Juan de Limay, in the Diocese of Esteli, in Nicaragua where I have been a pastoral worker for three years. I wish to relate to you to the details of the events that occurred on Tuesday, January 8, 1985 in that same town.

1702 At approximately 6 a.m. I left the town of

Limay to go to Esteli in order to attend the Clergy meeting of the Diocese of Esteli which had been called by my Bishop Ruben Lopez Ardon. I had to search for a ride in a private vehicle since the town's only bus had been burnt by counterrevolutionary forces on December 9th and now there is no public transportation. I found a ride with a refugee family which had been displaced by a counterrevolutionary attack on a village on the outskirts of Limay on December 27th. This family was transporting their few belongings to Esteli. An 18 year old boy also had asked to be taken in the same pick-up truck. All were civilians and unarmed.

About six kilometers outside of Limay, just before the tum-off onto the new road to Esteli, we spotted a tractor parked in the middle of the road. Five armed men in blue counter-revolutionary uniforms with FDN marked on their uniforms came from behind the tractor and stopped our truck. They made us leave the vehicle and we joined about twenty-five civilians who were being held in a gully by the side of the road. After about ten minutes they told us we could continue on our way. I do not know what eventually happened to the other civil­ians who were being held by the side of the road.

We continued on down the new road to Esteli. I began to be fearful for the safety of those being held on the road, and others who would leave Limay and would be stopped by the counter-revolutionary forces. I also feared for the safety of the passen­gers in our car since I believed there were probably more forces on the road ahead. I felt the most important thing I could do to prevent danger to travelers was to try to return to Limay as quickly as possible to inform departing vehicles about the danger on the road. After traveling another four kilometers we came to a small village called El Pedernal. I asked the driver to leave me there and he continued in the direction of Esteli. I went to four houses to search for a horse to ride back but there was none. So I set out walking on a small back road which I knew from my pastoral visits to the zone would lead me to Platanares and then to Limay. I walked about two kilometers and passed the houses of Pozo Colorado. Shortly after that I was stopped on the path by two armed men in FDN uniforms. They asked me where I was going and I told them to Limay. They spoke on walkie-talkies for some moments and then told me I could go no further and must stay in their custody. They directed me to a stone wall where there were more armed, uniformed men, about twenty in all. I estimate that this was about 7 or 7:30 a.m.-I had no watch. I was held there for approximately three hours. During that time three or four peasants and a woman and child also were stopped on the path and held with me. At about 8 a.m. I heard some gunfire from the old road where we had initially been stopped. There was a long wait of over an hour. Then I heard very loud automatic machine-gun fire and heavy artillery coming from Lorna Atrave­sada which is further along the road to Esteli. I prayed for the lives of those who were involved.

A few minutes later, after talking on walkie-talkies, the counter-revolutionary forces lined us up between their own forces in single file and had us begin to walk. After a short distance the counter-revolutionary forces separated me from the rest of the ci­vilians and sent me with three armed men to wait at the top of the hill ahead. The

EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS other civilians never appeared again. They were left behind and I do not know what happened to them. The rest of the twenty armed men joined me and the three men guarding me and we continued the march for about one kilometer where we joined up with about twenty armed uniformed men of the FDN. We moved on for another one to two kilometers to Santa Ana. I told the counterrevolutionary forces I would leave them and cut back to Limay but they would not let me go. We then walked another kilo­meter on the path and then began marching over rough terrain, through rivers and hills for about four kilometers until we joined about twenty more armed, uniformed men making the total about sixty. We were there about an hour or so. During that time some of the men were boasting about the success they had had in the ambushes on the road.

I then again attempted to leave. They pre­vented me from doing so until the arrival of four of their FDN leaders who joined them. These four men began to interrogate me about my work and identity. They searched my belongings and began to read my ad­dress book. After some time of discussion among themselves and on the walkie-talkie they told me that I could go. I estimate that this was about 3:30 p.m.

I walked to the village of Santa Ana where a family gave me food and coffee since I had not eaten all day. A farmer took me on his horse as far as La Grecia which is about three to four kilometers from Limay. I walked the rest of the way to the town and it was close to 6 p.m. when I arrived there. I estimate that I walked about sixteen to eighteen kilometers that day.

Regarding my time with the counterrevo­lutionary forces I was never physically mis­treated by any of them. I received the most abrupt treatment from the FDN leaders. I observed that the sixty men were well armed and equipped. One of the men wore an arm patch which said "Soldier of For­tune, Second Convention". Another had "U.S. army" written on the front of his uni­form. They showed me their new knapsacks and told me they had received new equip­ment recently. They told me that their sup­plies are dropped by planes which "fly very quietly at night". They hoped that they would be receiving new supplies that night to replenish the ammunition they had used that day.

When I arrived in Limay I was greeted by a North American woman who is a member of Witness for Peace, who has been present with me in Limay for a few weeks. I Quickly found out that fourteen civilians had been killed by the FDN forces in different am­bushes along the roads to Limay that same day. Nine were construction workers am­bushed in Lorna Atravesada, two workers from the Ministry of Natural Resources, two young coffee pickers and a tractor driver were killed along the road to Pueblo Nuevo. I saw four tractors which were de­stroyed. At least ten persons were kid­napped, but there may be more. I also found out that the original vehicle in which I had been traveling had been stopped again by the FDN forces after I had left it to walk to Limay. The eighteen year old youth, Freddy Castellon, had been kidnapped.

We spent that night and the next day washing the bodies of the dead, comforting families and praying with them, and bury­ing the dead from Limay. The bodies of the eleven people who were from other places were transported the next day to Estell. It was very difficult to communicate all that had happened because the telephone and

February 4., 1985 telegraph lines were destroyed by the counter-revolutionaries about one month ago.

Yesterday, January lOth, I traveled from Limay to Esteli in our jeep accompanied by the Witness for Peace member and a small child who was ill. I went immediately to inform Bishop Lopez of all that happened and then I came to Managua late last night.

To conclude I want to say that I feel grateful to God for my own safety but that I am much more concerned for those who were killed on the same day in Limay and for the thousands of innocent people who have been killed over the past four years as a result of the counterrevolutionary attacks. Just in Limay, almost forty civilians have been killed in the past month. The attacks have been made on civilian, not military, targets and they are increasing. As a Chris­tian and as a U.S. citizen I am deeply pained by the fact that my government has been responsible for arming and training these forces which have caused the deaths of so many. I continue to join my voice and my prayer to that of the U.S. Catholic Bishops, and of the churches and faithful across the U.S. who have protested the U.S. govern­ment's covert war against Nicaragua, and who are calling for a peaceful solution to the conflict. I express my deep gratitude for the messages of love and concern I have re­ceived. I will return to my pastoral work in Limay this week.

QUESTIONS

Question. When you described these people as civilians, do we assume that they were unarmed, that there was no combat? When you say civilians, what do you mean?

Answer. I meant that they were not mem­bers of the armed forces, as far as I know. I was not there at the time of the attack. I do not know what really happened, but they were not members of the armed forces, they were road workers, coffee pickers, tractor drivers, workers of the Natural Resources Institute.

Question. Sister, why do you think you were released? Sometimes captives are not released. Why do you think that you were released?

Answer. I think that I was released be­cause I was not much help to them, and I could have caused them problems. I was not much help because captives are kept to carry burdens or to cook. I'm not much good for either of these.

Question. Did they know that you were a Catholic sister?

Answer. Yes, some of the people recog­nized me.

Question. The way you described it you implied that the reason that they held you for a time was so that you would not be able to inform the people that there was an ambush in the area. Is that a correct inter­pretation?

Answer. That's the way that I felt the sit­uation. Yes.

Question. What were the words that they used when they were boasting about the ambush? Do you remember what they said?

Answer. They came back and told the group-because apparently of the group of 60, only about 20 of them, I understood, had been in the ambush of Lorna Atravesada­and they came back and said that there were so many vehicles and so many dead, and they just seemed to be in such a happy mood about the situation.

Question. Were all the counterrevolution­aries Nicas as far as you could see, or were there people of other nationalities?

February 4, 1985 Answer. The ones that I talked to seemed

to be Nicaraguans. I'm not sure whether the others were Nicaraguans or not.

Question. Don't you fear after those clear words that you have said about the counter revolution in this press conference that next time they get you they will kill you?

Answer. I don't know. I think that their orientation changes from time to time. Right now their orientation seems to be to terrorize and to kill civilians. I hope not, and I know that every mother who sees her sons going out in the morning and everyone who has to travel this road has the same fear. Fear is present. We may be killed at any time. I may be killed, the boy down the street may be killed, a woman with a child may be kidnapped to cook for them. So this is part of it.

Question. What do you mean by abrupt? <Referring to the questioning by the counter-revolutionary leaders.)

Answer. He seemed very much in charge of the situation, demanding my papers, de­manding to search my things without any type of discussion going on there. He defi­nitely was in command of the situation. At one time, he grabbed my bag and started going through it.

Question. What did you say to the Con­tras when you asked to leave? What did you say to convince them to let you go?

Answer. When I was first stopped, they told me that they would let me go as soon as the action was over. And they kept promis­ing to let me go, but then the chain of com­mand seemed to get higher and higher. They would always have to check with someone further up and then someone fur­ther up would say: "No, not yet, bring her." So I kept being brought further. When we got to Santa Ana, I said that this was the place to let me go so that I wouldn't have to walk further and then go back because I was beginning to wonder if they meant it or not. "No," they said, "keep on walking." So when we finally got to Los Encuentros, I said, "I'd like to talk to your h ighest in com­mand." And I reminded him that this could cause more repercussions if he didn't let me go. I think that by this time, he was aware of who I was. I don't think that in the be­ginning he was aware that I was a North American. He said, "They didn't let me know. They didn't give me good informa­tion." However, I think that the important thing is that whoever is kidnapped runs this risk of being let go or not.

Question. How many of the dead did you know? Do you know the names of the FDN leaders?

Answer. Some of the people who were killed and their families, I know very well. They were friends of mine. They were right from Limay. Some of the road workers I probably knew but they were burned so badly that I didn't even look at them, I don't know, I didn't even see those people. I do not know the names of the FDN men. I wasn't interested in finding out.e

MARION WADE DOYLE

HON. CLAUDE PEPPER OF FLORIDA

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, February 4, 1985

e Mr. PEPPER. Mr. Speaker, I am privileged to insert at this point in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD the Washing­ton Post's tribute to the late Mrs.

EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS Henry Grattan Doyle. A woman of ex­traordinary depth, Marion Wade Doyle's selfless life was an inspiration to the many whose lives she influ­enced. In her biography in "Who's Who in America," the final statement reflects Mrs. Doyle's 90 years of life: "Let no day pass without doing some­thing for somebody else."

Marion Wade Doyle received her Phi Beta Kappa key on the occasion of the 60th anniversary of her graduation from Radcliffe College when she led the commencement procession at Har­vard University in 1984. Mrs. Doyle graced my 84th birthday celebration as an honored octogenarian on Octo­ber 4, 1984.

It is my honor to share with my dis­tinguished colleagues and all who read this RECORD Mrs. Doyle's profound achievements and her unwavering faith of a lifetime by inserting the fol­lowing account of her dedicated life, as well as the Washington Post's editori­al, in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD.

[From the Washington Post, Jan. 9, 19851 ACTIVIST MARION W. DOYLE DIES AT 90

<By J.Y. Smith> Marion Wade Doyle, 90, a member of the

D.C. school board from 1928 until she re­signed in 1949, and its president from 1935 until the end of her service, died of a heart ailment Jan. 8 at her home in Washington.

Mrs. Doyle's service on the school board was the longest and most visible facet of a career in civic and public works that includ­ed a term as executive vice president of the national League of Women Voters and the chairmanship of the D.C. commission for the 1960 White House Conference on Chil­dren and Youth. As a young woman, she marched in behalf of women's suffrage.

When she announed that she was leaving the school board, The Washington Post said in an editorial that she had "worked tire­lessly to improve not merely the schools in this city, but also the full area of education­al activity .... No single person knows Washington better than she, and none has done more valiant work to build a better city."

Mrs. Doyle, a teacher by training, was fond of noting that in 1805, Thomas Jeffer­son became the first president of the first board of trustees of the Washington school system and that he took the post out of a commitment to education. In her day, mem­bers of the board were appointed by the judges of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The board members elected one of their own number to be presi­dent. Mrs. Doyle was the first woman to hold the post.

During her years on the board, Mrs. Doyle was guided by her conviction that teachers are more important than buildings and that teachers and school buildings exist to serve students.

To this end, she worked to improve teach­er salaries and benefits and to persuade Congress, which then had sole responsibility for the D.C. budget, to provide money for classrooms to house a steadily growing school population. When she was appointed to the board in 1928, the system had 73,157 students, of whom 48,585 were white and 24,772 were black. When she resigned, there were 91,219 students, of whom 47,955 were white and 43,264 were black.

1703 Although the schools here were segregat­

ed by law, Mrs. Doyle was known as an op­ponent of segregation and as an advocate of imprcved opportunities for blacks.

On matters of curriculum, she took the Jeffersonian view that a well-informed citi­zenry is the best guarantee of democracy. Thus, in 1935, she opposed a "red rider" clause in the school appropriations bill that required teachers to sign a statement each payday declaring that they had not taught or advocated communism.

"No American is in favor of 'advocating' communism, but to 'teach' it in the sense of explaining to students what communism is should be a part of any educational pro­gram," she wrote in an article for the Rad­cliffe Quarterly that was excerpted in The Post. "Fear ruled the teachers in the history classes and, of course, many of them skipped over any mention of communism. In effect, the Congress of the United States was writing a history course for the pupils of Washington."

In 1937, Congress repealed the clause. Mrs. Doyle was born in Cambridge, Mass.

She graduated from Radcliffe College and then taught in the Cambridge schools. In an interview with The Post in 1968, when she had returned to Radcliffe for a reunion, she recalled marching in a suffrage parade in Boston. That was in 1915, and to take part in the parade she passed up a chance to attend a Harvard-Brown football game with a young Harvard instructor named Henry Grattan Doyle.

"Principle prevailed," she said. "But I am a woman of ·determination and, in those days, fleet of foot, and I chased that young man until I caught him, and he was my hus­band for 47 years."

The Doyles moved to Washington in 1917. Dr. Doyle taught at George Washington University and became dean of its Colum­bian College. He died in 1964.

Mrs. Doyle became active in the League of Women Voters and was president of the Washington chapter in the late 1920s. She also held national office in the organization. During World War II, she was president of the D.C. Commissioners' War Hospitality Committee. In the 1950s, she chaired the Advisory Commission to the D.C. Juvenile Court.

Her numerous honors included the Na­tional Brotherhood Award of the National Conference of Christians and Jews in 1956. Radcliffe designated her a distinguished alumna and in 1984, on the 60th anniversa­ry of her own graduation, she led the com­mencement procession at Harvard Universi­ty.

Survivors include a son, Robert Carr Doyle of CheVY Chase; a daughter, Marion Wade Campbell of Richmond; eight grand­children, and three great-grandchildren.

MARION WADE DOYLE

Though it may strike some of today's readers as extraordinarily lavish praise, The Post's editorial in 1949-when Marion Wade Doyle resigned after more than 20 years of remarkable service on the D.C. School Board-was meant to be just that. "No single person knows Washington better than she," it said, "and none has done more valiant work to build a better city." Mrs. Doyle, who died here Tuesday at the age of 90, knew firsthand the many worlds of Washington-from the well-heeled white es­tablishment to the strictly segregated blacks of the city and the other urban underclasses that depended on understanding and gener-

1704 osity to survive. And out of this deep love of people in general and young people in par­ticular came a tireless devotion to the bet­terment of public education and the impor­tance of brotherhood. ·

Mrs. Doyle's service on the school board­including 15 years as its president-may have been the most visible and lasting of her many contributions to life in this city. But her commitment to civil liberties and rights came earlier, in her home town of Cambridge, Mass. It was there, this Rad­cliffe College graduate would recall in an interview, that she marched in a suffrage parade, passing up a chance to attend the 1915 Harvard-Brown football game with a young Harvard instructor named Henry Grattan Doyle. "Principle prevaled," she said, "but I am a woman of determina­tion. . . . I chased that young man until I caught him, and he was my husband for 47 years."

In Washington, where the Doyles moved in 1917, she became active in the League of Women Voters, eventually serving as presi­dent of the local chapter and a national of­ficer. On the school board, Mrs. Doyle fought for better teacher salaries and stood up annually before Congress to argue for more school money in the D.C. budget for classrooms and supplies needed desperately by a growing school population. And she made no bones about her strong opposition to the racial segregation that divided the schools then and well afterward, until the Brown decision.

Another courageous battle was Mrs. Doyle's vigorous opposition in 1935 to a "Red rider" clause in the school appropria­tions bill that required teachers to sign a statement each payday declaring that they had not taught or advocated communism. It was repealed two years later.

To those who know a different Washing­ton today, maybe much of this seems as rou­tine as it is right. But for a woman to speak out as she did when she did took exception­al courage and a true sense of justice. And that which is different and better about Washington today is living tribute to Marion Doyle's presence among us.e

THE BELLS OF BASTOGNE

HON. ROBERT G. TORRICELU OF NEW JERSEY

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, February 4, 1985 e Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. Speaker, this past holiday season I was inspired by an article I read concerning the ac­tions taken by Mr. Alden Todd of Leonia, NJ in the name 6f peace and brotherhood. Forty years ago Mr. Todd, than a rifleman with the 101st Airborne Division, fought gallantly beside his comrades to defend the Bel­gian town of Bastogne from a brutal German assault. The Battle of the Bulge, as we know it today, lives on in our memories as one of the bloodiest batties of the Second World War, but for Mr. Todd, its legacy is one of hope rather than despair.

Mr. Todd recently returned to Bas­togne and found a town grateful for its freedom but mindful of its cost. I have chosen to share the story of Mr. Todd's journey so that we may learn

EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS from his insights and appreciate the magnitude of sacrifice shown on that fateful day 40 years ago.

THE BELLS OF BASTOGNE

<By Alden Todd) Since Christmas Eve, the bells of Saint­

Pierre, the central church of Bastogne in the Belgian Ardennes, have rung out with a new sound-one of gratitude for deliverance and the hope for peace. To the ringing of the three bells that have long hung in this 12th century church have been added the sound of three new bells that commemorate the 40th anniversary of Bastogne's deepest agony and of her rescue.

During World War II, the name Bastogne became well-known to Americans. When the Germans launched their final, desperate of­fensive against the Allied forces on Dec. 16, 1944, they swept through southern Belgium and northern Luxembourg. By the time they were finally halted and driven back to the German frontier, the Battle of the Bulge had taken its place in history. Within that battle, the defense of Bastogne de­serves a special place.

The Germans encircled Bastogne, where the lOlst Airborne Division, along with sev­eral other scattered military units, held out for nearly a week against heavy odds until the first armored units broke through the siege lines on Dec. 26. When the German commander told the Americans to surren­der, Gen. Anthony McAuliffe gave his clas­sic defiant reply, "Nuts!"

Those of us who were under McAuliffe's command at the time revere his memory. We knew we could depend on him, and he knew he could count on us. The ammunition and food were short, but the morale was high.

What is often overlooked when stories of battles are told is the agony of the civilian population. The shelling and bombings brought devastation and death to Bastogne and its neighboring villages. Where the Ger­mans took possession, the SS slaughtered men and boys in senseless, brutal reprisal.

As the 40th anniversary of the Battle of Bastogne approached, there were discussion in the town about the 1984 commemoration. Active among those planning the events was the senior priest of Bastogne, the Abbe Georges Galand, pastor of Saint-Pierre.

In mid-December, when I visited him in his study, he told me of the role that his church would play. Three bells would be added to its belfry, one of them dedicated to the Americans of 1944-45.

Installed shortly before Christmas, the American bell is inscribed to the "76,890 Americans killed, wounded, or missing in the Battle of the Bulge. May their sacrifice contribute to lasting peace. Noel1984."

The second new bell was given by the as­sociation of Belgian veterans, inscribed with the message of hope for a world without war. The third was contributed by a group of Germans who wanted to add their voice to the call for peace.

For Americans, the bells have a particular significance. The six together sound the notes: do, re, mi, sol, la, and do of the major scale. On the half-hour, the bells sound the first six notes of our national anthem. On the hour, they play the first 22 notes of the largo movement of Dvorak's symphony "From the New World."

Although he was at first reluctant to dis­cuss the matter, I found from the Abbe Galand that the new American bell cost 450,000 Belgian francs-about $7,300. This is a large sum for the Bastognois to raise but a fairly modest amount for Americans.

February #-, 1985 Those in the United States who feel

touched by this gesture of gratitude to us by the people of Bastogne may wish to show their support to the Abbe Galand and his associates. Charles Boggess of Austin, TX, commander of the lead tank that broke through the ring around Bastogne in 1944 and who returned for the 40th anniversary, has already pledged his support. Who will follow?

<Alden Todd of Leonia was a rifleman and interpreter during the Battle of Bastogne.)e

TEACHER WARRANTY ACT OF 1985

HON. RON WYDEN OF OREGON

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, February 4, 1985

• Mr. WYDEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Teacher War­ranty Act of 1985.

The word is out-in the next few years we are going to have a teacher shortage in this country. The pendu­lum has swung back and the glut of the past few years has disappeared. We have crossed the demographic divide: There are more students enter­ing the classrooms while fewer people are choosing to enter the teaching pro­fession.

The National Center for Education Statistics has found that by the fall of this year there will be a shortage of 11,000 teachers in the profession. By 1992, we will be 72,000 people short of the needed number of teachers to in­struct our children.

The reasons for this shortage are fairly obvious. More and more young people are attracted to business, medi­cine, and the law-for the money and prestige that those professions offer. The close scrutiny and criticism that the teaching profession has received lately, combined with low teacher sala­ries, will cause a teacher shortage.

In the 98th Congress, I introduced the Talented Teacher Act to take the first step to reverse this trend. The Talented Teacher Fellowships and the Carl D. Perkins Scholarship Program were authorized by the Congress and signed into law by the President. Once the appropriations are secured, these programs will attract more young people to the profession and provide incentives for excellent teachers to stay in the classroom.

But, what do we do to help the new teacher in the first year in the class­room? How do we assure that person that it isn't "sink or swim" in the first year of teaching?

I recently visited Oregon State Uni­versity School of Education and learned more about an excellent new program that has been implemented to provide support for the new teach­er. This program has been established at several other teacher-training col­leges around the country, as well.

February .q., 1985 The idea is basic: Education schools are held accounta­

ble for the in-classroom teaching abili­ties of their graduates during their first 2 years of teaching.

If new teachers are evaluated by a school system and found deficient in a particular area, they may return to the education school for "re-tooling" at no cost.

A professor of education at Purdue University said of their new warranty program, "There is no way we could afford this kind of guarantee if we didn't have confidence in the quality of our graduates." This plan holds the university responsible for the quality of their graduates.

That is the key to the success of the program. The schools that have insti­tuted this warranty are confident that they are providing a high-quality teacher-training program and that few of their graduates will need further help. But, the help is there for those teachers who may need a little extra attention.

This is not a gimmick-the schools do not stamp "satisfaction guaran­teed" on the foreheads of their gradu­ates, nor do they send out a Maytag repairman if there are problems. The schools are backing up their graduates with the knowledge that help is avail­able, and they are instilling that essen­tial ingredient-confidence-in the new teacher.

Teacher warranty programs are just getting off the ground in several schools across the country. In a recent conversation with Robert Barr, dean of education at Oregon State Universi­ty, I learned that in the 6 months that their teacher warranty program has been in existence, they have had only one student return for help.

This is testimony to the excellent teacher training program at that school and it is something that every education school in the country should do for their graduates.

Therefore, I am introducing the Teacher Warranty Act of 1985. It does the following:

It amends the Higher Education Act to require that schools of education that receive Federal funds will have to provide a 2-year warranty on the class­room performance of graduates who have received Federal financial aid.

It says, quite simply, that such grad­uates who receive an unsatisfactory evaluation during their first 2 years of teaching may return to that school of education for retraining to eliminate that deficiency.

This retraining will be provided at no cost to the graduate as long as it does not exceed the amount of Federal assistance received by the student while at the education school. Dean Barr believes that schools of education can easily provide these basic follow up services for graduates within exist­ing budgets.

EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS Retraining or refresher courses may

be provided through correspondence programs, summer programs, or courses provided through reciprocal agreements with other institutions of higher education.

This bill does not tie the hands of in­dividual schools. It leaves universities plenty of room to design unique, inno­vative approaches within their own programs.

The warranty bill establishes a part­nership between the education school and the new teacher which is essential if we are to have excellent teachers in the classroom. Eventually, the warran­ty program can become obsolete-be­cause teachers will be so well prepared that they will not need retraining.

I have spoken with the staffs of the American Federation of Teachers and the National Education Association and they feel that this idea is a strong step in the right direction. I ask that you join them in their quest for im­provements in teacher education and support this innovative legislation.

The legislation follows: H.R. 937

A bill to amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to require that schools of education provide warranties for the teachers such schools train with Federal student assist­ance Be it enacted by the Senate and House of

Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled. That this Act may be cited as the "Teacher Warranty Act of 1985".

SEC. 2. Section 487<a> of the Higher Edu­cation Act of 1975 <20 U.S.C. 1094), relating to the program participation agreements re­quired for student assistance programs, is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new paragraph:

"<7> In the case of a school of education <as that term is defined in section 533(d) of this Act>, the institution will, for any gradu­ate thereof who receives an unsatisfactory evaluation after the first or second year as a teacher, provide such training or retraining as the graduate requires to eliminate the de­ficiency. The graduate shall only be charged that part of the cost of such training or re­training as exceeds the amount of the assist­ance received by the graduate under this title while in attendance at such institution. Such training or retraining may be provided through correspondence programs, summer programs, or programs provided through re­ciprocal agreements with other institutions of higher education.".

SEC. 3. The amendment made by section 2 of this Act shall only apply with respect to assistance made available under title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965 after the date of enactment of this Act.e

MOTHERS WERE MUZZLED: WHO WILL SPEAK OUT?

HON. BARNEY FRANK OF MASSACHUSETTS

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, February 4, 1985

e Mr. FRANK. Mr. Speaker, on Octo­ber 20, four Salvadoran women were

1705 supposed to receive the first Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Award here in Washington. Unfortunately, the date passed and no one was able to claim the award, because these women were denied visas. The State Depart­ment chose to invoke provisions of the 1952 McCarran-Walter Act, which en­ables consular officers to deny visas on political and ideological grounds. I am very disturbed by this latest denial of visas; I believe it is an embarassment to our foreign policy and an infringe­ment of the right of American citizens to hear from a broad range of views. This incident points up the need to reform our immigration laws. No one should be denied a visa because of the opinions he or she holds, however ab­horrent these may be; that person's expected behavior should be the basis for denying a visa.

Mr. Speaker, the Philadelphia In­quirer printed an excellent editorial on the subject, and I ask that it be re­printed here in the REcORD.

[From the Philadelphia Inquirer, Nov. 27, 1984]

MoTHERs WERE MuZZLED: WHo WILL SPEAK OuT?

Four mothers from El Salvador were denied entry into the United States last week. They were to receive the first Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Award at Georgetown University. They are members of CO-Madres, a group of 500 mostly poor and unschooled women whose brothers, sons and husbands have disappeared or been shot or dismembered in El Salvador's bloody civil strife.

The State Department said the women were wolves in sheep's clothing-that they had advocated violence, taken part in terror­ism, that their group had said some stridently anti-American and anti-Duarte things. They were a run-of-the-mill pressure group, the State Department said, who hid behind human rights rhetoric.

Perhaps, a department emissary hinted to the RFK awards staff, something could be done if the award were broadened to include mothers from other Latin American na­tions. Perhaps, if a speaking tour were cur­tailed; perhaps, then the visas might not be such a problem.

On the record, the course, and officially, the State Department said it would never stoop to negotiate a visa or to suggest re­strictions on the freedom to speak out or to dissent. And, in the end, one mother who was attending a conference in Argentina and who spent the day being vouched for by an English-speaking Catholic priest ob­tained a visa from the American Embassy in Argentina.

She was flanked by four empty chairs on the Georgetown University stage. She was, she said, no different from her fellow CO­Madres-a victim, not a subversive: She had been raped repeatedly, like many of the others; she had buried the bodyless head of a brother, like many of the others; she had catalogued horrors and protested and de­manded investigations. But her compatriots were denied entry-denied the forum to tell their story.

The public might be "prejudiced," the State Department said; U.S. security might be endangered. Such is the language of the 1952 McCarran Act-Section 212<a><28><f>-

1706 that stopped the mothers. Such is the shield of the immigration law's "ideological exclu­sion" provisions.

That U.S. security might be shaken by four mothers is an arguable proposition. But there is no doubt the American people might be "prejudiced" against certain Reagan administration policies in Central America were they to take the mothers' sto­ries to heart.

In fact, a large number-perhaps the ma­jority-of Americans already are disen­chanted with the trend of U.S. involvement on the isthmus. And there are even more who are appalled at El Salvador's death squads and Washington's continuing inabil­ity-despite the leverage of millions of dol­lars of military aid-to pressure Salvadoran courts to punish their leaders.

Has support worn so thin that the Reagan administration fears a visit by four mothers will rip it to shreds? Does it fear that four mothers will hoodwink the American people if Big Government does not step in to pro­tect them?

Or, and this is the most alarming, is the administration tinkering with Soviet-style information control, picking and choosing who will address the masses, granting the freedom to speak to those who toe the line, muzzling dissenting v<;>ices?

The McCarran Act's "ideological exclu­sion" provisions stand ready for abuse by the powers that be. They should be thor­oughly rewritten. but this administration has not only abused them, it has fine-tuned them.

A case in point is the turnabout on El Sal­vador's most infamous rightwing leader, Ro­berto D' Aubuisson. He was turned down for a U.S. visa last year, discrediting his presi­dential candidacy before the Salvadoran elections. But he was approved for one last summer to be feted by Sen. Jesse Helms <R., N.C.) after the Duarte government was safely in office.

Save for civil liberties groups, there is little outcry.

The government will be emboldened by the silence. If it can cut the shape of speech at the margins, why not go for its heart?

That is the clear and present danger to the health of America's democracy: Not that four mothers would speak, but that Big Brother has gagged them.e

TIME FOR US TO LOOK BEYOND VIETNAM WAR

HON. IKE SKELTON OF MISSOURI

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, February 4, 1985

e Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, Gen­eral Crittenberger, a retired U.S. Army major general and himself a veteran, has recently called my attention to an article about Vietnam veterans which appeared in USA Today. I agree with General Crittenberger and the author that, as so many veterans have already done, it is time to put away the fa­tigues and work toward building Amer­ica's future. I ask that the article be reprinted in the RECORD, and I com­mend it to my colleagues.

EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS [From the USA Today, Nov. 14, 19841

TIME FOR Us To LoOK BEYOND VIETNAM WAR-AN OPPOSING VIEW

<By John Wheeler> BETHESDA, Mn.-We can each take specific

steps to speed the national assimilation of the Vietnam War. One step is to lay aside the battle fatigues.

For Americans who were not in the mili­tary in the 1960s, that means abandoning the stereotype of the Vietnam veteran as someone who still, in his 30s, wears his boonie hat and old battle dress.

Working as chairman of the Vietnam Vet­erans Memorial Fund, I have watched the media coverage of activities on the Mall in Washington during Veterans Day and Me­morial Day in recent years. The nation is flooded with pictures of men in old fatigues.

But the overwhelming majority of Viet­nam veterans are not found in fatigues, even on patriotic holidays. They can be identified by their growing leadership in the nation's public and private life, not by the clothes they wear.

The men who do wear the fatigues should ask themselves, "Am I wearing the old uni­form in patriotism and celebration? Or is it that I feel better in the old times and am not fully ready to move on?"

The Vietnam Veterans Memorial is simul­taneously a stem and comforting place, which helps us answer these questions. In­creasingly, it is helping men shed their fa­tigues, to be saved for wear at times of reun­ion and remembrance.

But the most important step is to face up to the truth that the Vietnam War affects every citizen in complex ways.

The powerful movements during the Viet­nam era-the war, the war protest, and the hyperacceleration of the civil rights, women's, and environmental movements­were interconnected, and they shape our lives and attitudes.

The greatest effects are on the people who came of age politically and emotionally during that period-60 million of us who make up the Vietnam generation, the bulk of the World War II baby-boomers.

Important effects include division and guilt over choices made about the draft and politics during the war years, and separation of one interest group from another, includ­ing a sense of estrangement of white males from the leadership of the women's move­ment.

Foundations, universities, and leaders in government and churches should make study of the after effects of the war a top agenda item, with focus on the Vietnam generation. If we understand how our past shapes us, we can govern how it shapes us.

Meanwhile, it's time for all Americans to shed the fatigues of Vietnam. It's time for those veterans still in camouflage garb to get on with life. And it's time for non-veter­ans to reJect the perpetuation of this inac­curate stereotype; those who shared the Vietnam experience are in fact already building the America of tomorrow.e

THE ADOLESCENT PREGNANCY AND PARENTHOOD ACT OF 1985

HON. MICKEY LELAND OJ' TEXAS

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, February 4, 1985

February #,, 1985 both sides of the aisle, I am introduc­ing the Adolescent Pregnancy and Parenthood Act of 1985. Identical to H.R. 5534, which I introduced in the 98th Congress, this bill would amend title XX of the Public Health Service Act. The legislation does not create a new authority; it merely seeks to amend the current title XX, the Ado­lescent Family Life Demonstration Projects, to enact a service program designed to meet the pressing needs of children who bear children. It has been designed specifically to help those teenagers who have chosen to carry their pregnancies to term.

I certainly do not need to alert you to the seriousness of the problems of adolescent pregnancy and parenthood. I would, however, like to share some alarming statistics with you. Consider these facts:

During the last decade, the out-of­wedlock birth rate has risen every year among white teens, and has fallen only slightly among black teens.

In 1980, teens accounted for 16 per­cent of all U.S. births and 28 percent of all first births; among females aged 15 to 19, 8.3 percent of all whites, ap­proximately 691,200 girls, and 16.1 per­cent of nonwhites, approximately 335,645 girls, became pregnant.

In 1981, approximately 537,000 teen­agers became pregnant and chose to carry their pregnancies to term; 197,000 of these teenage births were to mothers under the age of 18.

In 1982, 190,000 adolescents under the age of 18 gave birth.

Babies born to teenage mothers are much more likely to die in the first year of life than those born to moth­ers over the age of 20. Maternal mor­tality and morbidity, and the risk of having a low-birth-weight infant are also considerably greater among teen­age mothers.

The adverse consequences of adoles­cent childbearing are far-reaching and long lasting; not only are the young mothers, fathers, and infants touched, but their families as well. The educa­tion and training of both young par­ents must often be curtailed, resulting in a limitation of opportunities for these teenagers to gain the basic skills necessary to compete in today's socie­ty; income is, on average, much lower. A high proportion of teenage parents live below the designated poverty level; many more are near poor and in danger of slipping beyond the so­called safety net.

Finally, the probability is high that a teenage mother will bring up her child alone. Even if young parents do marry, they are far more likely to become divorced, their babies far more likely to spend a large part of their childhood in a single-parent house­hold.

e Mr. LELAND. Mr. Speaker, today, Mr. Speaker, grantees under this leg­along with 52 of our colleagues from islation would provide pre- and post-

February #, 1985 natal care; well-child care for the infant; family planning services to pre­vent a repeat pregnancy; education, job, and other counseling services. The bill recognizes the critical role of the family, and thus stresses the impor­tance of family support and involve­ment. Finally, in view of the current fiscal realities, the Adolescent Preg­nancy and Parenthood Act focuses on the most vulnerable young people: those who give birth under the age of 18, have low income, or experience other barriers to services.

The adolescent family life demon­stration projects were authorized in 1981. For each of the past 4 years, the authority has been $30 million; actual program appropriations have been less than half of this amount.

Mr. Speaker, adolescent pregnancy and parenthood is a serious and criti­cal problem in our Nation today, and I believe the time has come to adopt a service program which will meet the pressing needs of these children who bear children.

The youth of our Nation is our future; for most, that future is bright, but, for some, that future holds little promise. This legislation will give teen­age parents and their babies a chance to participate in the future. It will give them a chance at life.e

HEROISM IN THE GLENCOE FLOOD

HON. JOHN P. MURTHA OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, February 4, 1985

• Mr. MURTHA. Mr. Speaker, I want to continue to recognize and honor in­dividuals who showed great acts of personal heroism in the Glencoe Flood which affected the area I represent.

Mr. Joseph F. McKenzie of Glencoe helped to save the life of Hulda Rau­pach when he carried her to high ground from the mounting flood water on his shoulders.

Mr. Dan Bell of Johnstown helped rescue Mr. Carl Raupach by grabbing him and tying him to a tree. In doing so, Mr. Bell endangered his own life, was momentarily swept away and had to be rescued himself.

I am also enclosing for the informa­tion of the House of Representatives a recent article citing individuals who aided, and I particularly join in com­mending Ms. Nila Cogan who helped avert further disaster by notifying the county emergency management agency of the growing disaster.

I certainly send my personal con­gratulations along to these individuals and enclose the attached article on the flood situation.

The article follows:

EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS [From the Somerset <PA>. Daily American,

Jan. 24, 19851 GLENCOE FLOOD WAS RARITY, SAY OFFICIALS

<By Vicki Rock> The August 13, 1984, flood in Glencoe and

Hyndman was one of the rare daytime killer floods, according to Dave Sisk of the Na­tional Weather Service in Pittsburgh.

Most floods which take lives happen after 11 p.m., Sisk said.

Five persons died in Somerset and Bed­ford counties. Charles Lee Merkel and Pamela Sue Phillippi drowned in Glencoe. Killed in Hyndman were Robert Gibner and Samuel Leydig Jr., both of Hyndman, and Clyde Burley Jr., Bel Air, Md.

Nila Cogan, who lives in Wittenberg, Meyersdale RD 4, at the time of the flood, was one of the first people to notify the county emergency management agency that a problem was developing in the lower wa­tershed, according to Sisk.

She recently received a special public serv­ice award from the NWS for her quick re­porting of the heavy rainfall.

"If we have an ample lead time to give warnings we are able to minimize the loss of life and property," Sisk said.

The United States Geological Survey Water Resources Division has estimated such a devastating flood won't happen again in Glencoe and Hyndman for more than 100 years.

Wills Creek, which has an average flow of 183 cubic feet per second at Hyndman, tore through its stream at an estimated 19,400 cubic feet per second, according to the De­cember issue of the "Pennsylvania Topo­graphic and Geological Survey."

That is more than 100 times the average flow following a severe rain storm.

The rain gauge at the Veri Bittner farm near the headwaters of Wills Creek meas­ured 7.5 inches of rain in a four-hour period, stated the survey, which is published by the state Department of Environmental Re­sources.

The storm was confined to the upper reaches of Wills Creek in Somerset County, according to the survey.

"It was characterized by a severe intensity acting over a small, sparsely populated area with an extremely high rate of stream ero­sion," it stated.

"The more populated downstream areas of Glencoe, Fairhope and Hyndman re­ceived very little precipitation, only 1.5 inches was recorded, but extremely heavy stream flow. Truck-sized boulders which hadn't budged much in 100 years were moved tens of feet or more downstream."

Lt. Gov. W111iam W. Scranton III has sent letters to 11 individuals and organizations in Somerset County commending them for their assistance during the flood.

According to the Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency, letters were sent to Nlla Cogan; Tom Villeneuve, Glencoe; Som­erset County Jeep Club; Sheriff Guy Davis; Merle D. Kimmel, American Red Cross rep­resentative; Somerset Community Hospital Paramedics; and the following volunteer fire departments: Meyersdale, Berlin, New Cen­terville and Rural, Windber and Hoovers­ville.•

1707 SOUTH AFRICAN LABOR RELA­

TIONS REFORM ACT AND PEN­SION PLAN SOUTH AFRICAN INVESTMENT REPORTING ACT

HON. AUGUSTUS F. HAWKINS OF CALIFORNIA

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, February 4, 1985

e Mr. HAWKINS. Mr. Speaker, I am today introducing two pieces of legisla­tion designed not only to focus the at­tention of this body on the policy of apartheid as practices by the Govern­ment of South Africa, but also, and I believe more importantly, to foster a reexamination of this country's invest­ment and labor policy toward South Africa, and hopefully to offer some positive alternatives to current policy.

The first bill I am introducing is en­titled the "Pension Plan South Afri­can Investments Reporting Act of 1985." This bill will amend the report­ing and disclosure requirements of the Employee Retirement Income Securi­ty Act of 197 4 [ERISA] to require, with specificity, that each employee pension benefit plan report to the Sec­retary of Labor describing the plan's investments in South Africa whether they are made directly or through the acquisition of a share or interest in a business enterprise in South Africa.

It should be understood that this proposal neither imposes a sanction against doing business in South Africa, nor does it prohibit private pension fund investment there. It does insure, however, that adequate and accurate information is available as to the extent of America's private pension fund investment in a country who's policies have incurred the condemna­tion of the overwhelming majority of world opinion.

This measure will allow us as a coun­try to determine, on the basis of the obtained factual information, whether investment is South Africa is an ap­propriate use of such funds, or wheth­er as a policy matter we wish, at some later date, to prohibit such invest­ment. In addition, I hope it will draw attenton to the fact that the issue of apartheid is not something remote, an issue of another country and another culture, but rather that it directly af­fects each of us to the extent that those are our pension dollars being so invested. There is some projected evi­dence that "foreign investment has ar­guably strenghtened rather than miti­gated apartheid." We are that "for­eign investment" and we must face facts and decide whether that is an ap­propriate position for a nation that prides itself on a policy of "freedom and equality."

While the debate will continue over whether private pension funds should be consciously used for "social invest­ment"; that is, to further the purpose

1708 of achieving specific and affirmative social goals, I believe we can ultimate­ly unite in our view that our pension dollars should not be used to enhance repugnant labor and social policies. With hundreds of billions of dollars now available in our private pension funds, we must decide whether we as a nation want to be a part of apartheid or whether we take the high and moral road and back that choice with our pension dollars-or the absence thereof.

Working in tandem and with con­comitant purpose, is the second piece of legislation that I have introduced today. It is entitled the "South Afri­can Labor Relations Reform Act of 1985." This measure directs the Secre­tary of Labor to investigate the labor practices and policies of South Africa, as compared to the internationally ac­cepted labor standards as set forth in the listed convention's of the Interna­tional Labor Organization. In addition, the Secretary is to investigate the extent to which the labor policies and practices of South Africa cause the export of capital and jobs from the United States.

Having made these findings, the Sec­retary is directed not only to report these findings to the Congress, but also to make specific recommendations on changes in U.S. policies and activi­ties that could better promote labor practices in South Africa that more nearly conform to the above described international labor standards. In making these recommendations, the Secretary must include an analysis of the following proposed statutory revi­sions:

First, revising the Employee Retire­ment Income Security Act of 1974 to prohibit investment of pension funds in South Africa;

Second, revising the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to apply mini­mum wage, equal pay, and child labor restrictions to the employees in South Africa of U.S. companies;

Third, revising the National Labor Relations Act to prevent sanctions from being imposed on employees for refusal to off-load shipments from South Africa;

Fourth, revising title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to apply to the em­ployees-or applicants for employ­ment-in South Africa of U.S. compa­nies; and

Fifth, revising Federal education statutes to increase the amount of as­sistance available to South African students who have been subject to a denial of the rights described in sec­tion 2(a).

The keystone in South Africa's system of apartheid is a repressive labor system. It operates to deprive the back population of free access to employment and training; it is the predicate by which South Africa's law and policy declares that a person's

EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS racial classification determines what education and training he will receive and what job he will be allowed to per­form and where. While we as a nation cannot directly force changes in South African labor law, we can by our acts, whether through government or as employers in South Africa or as buyers of its products, express our out­rage over the denial of economic secu­rity and equality of opportunity so ap­parent in South Africa.

For the information of my col­leagues, I am enclosing a section-by­section explanation of each of the bills I have introduced today.

SECTION-BY-SECTION

Section 1. Short title: South African Labor Relations Reform Act of 1985.

Section 2. Findings: < 1 > that all human beings, irrespective of race, creed, or sex, have the right to pursue both their material wellbeing and their spiritual development in conditions of freedom and dignity, of eco­nomic security and equal opportunity; <2> that the labor policies and practices of South Africa have severely and intractably abridged the exercise of this right; and <3> that the United States has an obligation to promote affirmatively and actively the exer­cise of this right by means that are peaceful and that are not counterproductive.

Purpose: To collect information and make recommendations to guide the Congress in the formation of United States policies and activities that will promote improved rights of labor in South Africa.

Section 3. Investigation by the Secretary of Labor which must include < 1 > a compari­son of the labor practices and policies of South Africa as measured against the labor conventions of the ILO; Convention 87-"Freedom of Association and the Right to Organize"; Convention 98 -"Application of the Principle of the Right to Organize and to Bargain Collectively"; Convention III­"Discrimination in Respect of Employment and Occupation"; <2> the extent to which changes in United States policies and activi­ties can promote labor practices and policies of South Africa that do not vary from such standards; and <3> the extent to which the labor policies and practices of South Africa cause the export of capital and Jobs from the United States.

Section 4. The Secretary of Labor must submit his findings and recommendations in the next annual report submitted more than six months after the date of enact­ment.

The Secretary must include an analysis of the following proposed statutory revisions:

< 1 > revising the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 to prohibit in­vestment of pension funds in South Africa;

(2) revising the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to apply minimum wage, equal pay, and child labor restrictions to the employ­ees in South Africa of United States compa­nies;

<3> revising the National Labor Relations Act to prevent sanctions from being im­posed on employees for refusal to off-load shipments from South Africa;

(4) revising title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to apply to the employees <or applicants for employment> in South Africa of United States companies; and

<5> revising Federal education statutes to increase the amount of assistance available to South African students who have been

February 4, 1985 subject to a denial of the rights described in section 2<a>.

Section 5. Definition of the term "South Africa".

SECTION BY SECTION

Section 1. Short title: Pension Plan South African Investments Reporting Act of 1985.

Section 2. <a> Amends section 103<b> of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 by adding a new paragraph <5> which requires that as part of the existing reporting and disclosure provisions of para­graph <2> of section 103(b), and its required statement of assets and liabilities, that, in the future, private employee pension bene­fit plans subject to the Act, must include a separate schedule itemizing each investment it made in South Africa which either initial­ly occurred during the plan year covered by the statement or with respect to which any funds were expended or received by or on behalf of the plan during such year, i.e. a long term investment purchased before the date of this act but for which a funds ad­justment or a return on the investment was made after the date of enactment but during the plan year. The itemization must include: (1) the identity of each party; <2> a description of the asset to which the trans­action relates; <3> the purchase or selling price, the rental, the interest rate and matu­rity date in the case of a loan or the exten­tion of credit; <4> expenses; and <5> the cost of the asset, the current value of the asset, and the net gain or loss on the investment.

This section defines the term "South Africa" to be the Republic of South Africa; any territory under the administration, legal or illegal, of the Republic of South Africa; and the 'bantustans' of 'homelands', to which South African blacks are assigned on the basis of ethnic origin, including Transkei, Bophuthatswana, Ciske, and Venda.

This section also defines the terms "in­vestment in South Africa" and "business en­terprise in South Africa" which taken to­gether will describe the types of invest­ments and their relationship to South Africa that will trigger the reporting and disclosure duties under this Act. The term "investment in South Africa" includes: <1> the direct establishment of a business enter­prise in South Africa, i.e. the fund invests directly in a South African enterprise; <2> the fund makes a direct loan or other exten­sion of credit for the establishment of a business enterprise in South Africa, or (3) the fund invests in the securities of a busi­ness doing business in South Africa. The in­vestment can include the acquisition of a share or interest in the business enterprise, the acquisition of a bond or other debt in­strument issued by the business enterprise, a capital contribution in money or kind to the business enterprise, and the making of a loan or other extension of credit with a ma­turity of more than two years to the busi­ness enterprise.

Once the nature of the investment is ana­lyzed it must then be determined that such investment relates to a "business enterprise in South Africa" for this is in essence the term for doing business in South Africa. A "business enterprise in South Africa" means: < 1 > any organization, association, branch, or venture which is located in South Africa which exists for profitmaking pur­poses or to otherwise secure economic ad­vantage, and (2) reaches any "person" indi­vidual, partnership, joint venture, corpora­tion, mutual company, joint stock company,

February #, 1985 trust, estate, unincorporated organization, association or employee organization> con­trolling any business enterprise described in < 1 > above, even if such person is not located in South Africa. The "person" shall be pre­sumed to be in control if: < 1) the person ben­eficially owns or controls <whether directly or indirectly) more than 35 percent of the outstanding voting securities of the business enterprise; <2> the person beneficially owns or controls <whether directly or indirectly) 25 percent or more of the voting securities of the business enterprise, if no other person owns or controls <whether directly or indirectly) an equal or larger percentage; <3> the business enterprise is operated by the person pursuant to the provisions of an ex­ecutive management contract; (4) a majority of the members of the board of directors of the business enterprise are also members of the comparable governing body of the person; <5> the person has authority to ap­point a majority of the members of the board of directors of the business enter­prise; or (6) the person has authority to ap­point the chief operating officer of the busi­ness enterprise.

The term "branch is also specifially de­fined in this section to mean the "oper­ations or activities conducted by a person in a different location in its own name rather than through a incorporated entity". It is so defined so as to insure coverage where there is no controlled incorporated entity in South Africa <e.g. a wholly owned subsidiary located in South Africa) and where the cor­porate structure is located outside South Africa <e.g. in Rhodesia) but where such a corporation maintains extensive operations and activities in South Africa, <e.g. a loan officer with substantial funds available for business investment). In this example, any pension fund investment in the operations and activities in South Africa of the compa­ny in Rhodesia would be subject to the re­quirements of this Act.

Section 2. Amends sections 104(a)(2) and 110(a) of the Act to insure the applicability of this bill to all pension plans and that with regard to the specific reporting and disclosure provision of this bill there may be no alternative methods of compliance.

Section 3. Provides for civil enforcement against the plan administrator, or under certain conditions against "any fiduciary of the plan" for the failure to comply with the reporting and disclosure requirements of this bill. The amount of the civil penalty may not exceed $100 a day from the date of such violation and can only be assessed against the administrator or fiduciary in their personal capacities done so as to avoid penalizing the fund and its eventual pen­sioners. There is, however, no liability if the plan administrator or other fiduciary shows that the administrator acted in a good faith effort to avoid such violation as set forth in the bill.

Section 4. Effective date covers reports for plan years beginning after one year after the date of the enactment of this Act.e

LAND DISPOSAL AMENDMENTS OF 1985

HON. GLENN ENGUSH OF OKLAHOMA

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, February 4, 1985 e Mr. ENGLISH. Mr. Speaker, today, I am introducing some preventive

EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS medicine for the people of this Nation. The medicine is packaged as the Land Disposal Amendments of 1985 and is designed to encourage alternative dis­posal methods for hazardous wastes.

We are spending millions of dollars to clean up existing hazardous waste landfill dump sites, and I am hopeful that these efforts will be successful. There is, however, no guarantee that once existing sites are cleaned up that new, presently nonexisting, sites will not require additional future funding for dumpsite cleanups.

My legislation would prevent future sites from needing additional future cleanup funds. By banning the land disposal of all hazardous waste and by making available a portion of current Superfund money to make alternate hazardous waste disposal methods more economically attractive, I feel we can avoid the further buildup of land­fill dumpsites which would otherwise require expenditure of enormous funds. I am convinced that companies which require hazardous waste dispos­al methods would choose methods other than landfill dumps if alternate disposal methods were more afford­able. My bill would allow the use of Superfund money to equalize the costs and encourage alternate disposal methods. We can pay now or we can pay twice as much later. I feel this is clearly a case where prevention is the best cure.

The text of the legislation follows: H.R. 919

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE

This Act may be cited as the "Land Dis­posal Amendments of 1985". SEC. 2. PROHIBmON OF LAND DISPOSAL OF HAZ­

ARDOUS WASTE. (a) REPEAL OF 1984 PROVISIONS.-Section

3004 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended by striking out subsections (b), <c>, (d), <e>, (f), (g), <h>. and m.

(b) NEW PROHIBITION.-Section 3004 of such Act is amended by inserting the follow­ing new subsection after subsection <a>:

"(b) PROHIBITION ON LAND DISPOSAL.-Ef­fective on the date of the enactment of the Land Disposal Amendments of 1985, the land disposal of hazardous waste listed or identified under section 3001 is prohibited.".

(C) CONFORKING AIIENDMENTS.-(1) Section 3004<m><l> of such Act is amended by strik­ing out "Simultaneously with the promulga­tion of regulations under subsection (d), (e), (f), or (g) prohibiting one or more methods of land disposal of a particular hazardous waste" and substituting "As promptly as practicable after the enactment of the Land Disposal Amendments of 1985".

<2> Section 3004<m><2> of such Act is amended by-

<A> striking out the last sentence thereof; and

<B> striking out "any prohibition promul­gated under subsection (d), <e>, (f), or (g)" and substituting "the prohibition estab­lished under subsection <b>".

<3> Section 3004<o> of such Act is amended by striking out subparagraph <l><A> and paragraphs <4> through <6>.

1709 SEC. 3. GRANTS TO EQUALIZE COSTS.

(a) GRANT AUTHORITY.-Subtitle C of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended by adding the following new section at the end thereof: "GRANTS TO EQUALIZE COSTS OF TREATMENT AND

LAND DISPOSAL "SEC. 3020. (a) AUTHORITY TO MAKE

GRANTs.-The Administrator is authorized to make grants to the owners and operators of hazardous waste treatment facilities to reimburse such owners and operators for a portion of the costs of construction and op­eration of such facilities.

(b) AMOUNT OF GRANTs.-The amount of any grant made under this section shall be an amount determined by the Administra­tor which is equal to the excess of the amount referred to in paragraph < 1) over the amount referred to in paragraph <2>:

"(1) COS"i' OF TREATMENT.-The cost of con­struction and operation <over its estimated useful life> of the treatment facility for which such grant is made.

"(2) COST OF LANDFILL DISPOSAL.-The amount which the Administrator estimates it would cost to construct and operate a landfill in the same region to dispose of the same volume of hazardous waste as will be treated and rendered nonhazardous by the treatment facility.

"(C) Ftnms DERIVED FROM SUPERFUND.­Grants under this section shall be made from amounts available in the Hazardous Substance Response Trust Fund established under section 221 of the Comprehensive En­vironmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980. ".

(b) AMENDMENT OF SUPERFUND Acr.-(1) Section 221<c><l> of the Comprehensive En­vironmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 is amended by inserting after "described in" the following: "<A> sec­tion 3020 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act or <B>'' and by redesignating subparagraphs <A> through <D> as clauses (i) through (iv) respectively

<2> Section 221<c><2> of such Act is amend­ed by inserting after "shall be reserved" the following: "for the purposes specified in sec­tion 3020 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act and".

<3> Section lll<e)(2) is amended to read as follows:

<2> For reservation of 85% of certain amounts appropriated to the Fund estab­lished under title II for specific purposes, see section 22l<c><2>.".e

AMENDMENT TO SOCIAL SECURITY

HON. CHARLES E. SCHUMER OF NEW YORK

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, February 4, 1985 e Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing an amendment to title II of the Social Security Act to prohibit the payment of benefits thereunder to individuals who have been deported from the United States on account of certain activities con­ducted under the direction of or in as­sociation with the Nazi government during World War II.

This amendment plugs a loophole in the Social Security Act. The current law provides for the termination of

1710 benefits upon deportation of the pri­mary beneficiary under 18 of the 19 grounds for deportation under section 24l<a> of the Immigration and Nation­ality Act. The 19th ground provides for deportation when an individual en­gaged in certain activities involving the persecution of persons during World War II in association with the German Nazi government. This ground was added as an amendment to the Immigration and Nationality Act in 1978. However, due to an oversight, the Social Security Act was not amended at the same time to include paragraph 09) as a basis for terminat­ing benefits. Thus, a Nazi persecutor who is deported from the United States under paragraph (19) of the Im­migration and Nationality Act may continue to collect Social Security benefits.

This situation offends my sense of fair play and justice. These individuals have already benefited by living in the United States and largely escaping de­tection all these years. They have never been brought before a tribunal for their crimes. In most cases, they never will. Yet, as the law stands now, they can collect Social Security. This is particularly unfair when individuals deported under the other 18 para­graphs of the Immigration and Na­tionality Act cannot collect Social Se­curity.

To add insult to injury, this loophole is often used as a basis to plea bargain with these criminals. I am outraged that these criminals are enticed to admit to persecutions under para­graph 09) in order to continue to re­ceive Social Security benefits.

Mr. Speaker, for thse reasons I am introducing this amendment and I urge the support of my colleagues. The text of the bill is below.

H.R. 933 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of

Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That <a> section 202<n><l> of the Social Security Act is amended by striking out "or (18)" in the matter preceding subparagraph <A> and in­serting in lieu thereof "(18), or <19)".

<b> Section 202<n> of such Act is further amended by adding at the end thereof the following new paragraph:

"<3> For purposes of paragraphs (1) and <2> of this subsection, an individual against whom a final order of deportation has been issued under paragraph <19) of section 24l<a> of the Immigration and Nationality Act <relating to persecution of others on ac­count of race, religion, national origin, or political opinion, under the direction of or in association with the Nazi government of Germany or its allies) shall be considered to have been deported under such paragraph (19) as of the date on which such order was issued or became final.".

SEc. 2. The amendments made by the first section of This Act shall apply only in the case of deportations occurring, and final orders of deportation issued, on or after the date of enactment of this Act, and only with respect to benefits for months beginning

EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS <and deaths occurring) on or after that date.e

FIRST NATIONAL BANK DE­CLARES WAR ON FEDERAL BUDGET DEFICITS

HON. JOHN EDWARD PORTER OF ILLINOIS

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, February 4, 1985 • Mr. PORTER. Mr. Speaker, people across the United States are becoming fed up with Congress' inability to con­trol its spending habits. This Nation is currently facing one of the most severe fiscal crisis that it has encoun­tered since the Great Depression. The Federal debt, and the current budget deficit, must be reduced, and spending restraint is the primary solution.

As an indiction of the degree of con­cern over the Federal deficit, the First National Bank of Deerfield, located in my congressional district, has formally declared war on Federal budget defi­cits. The following article, drafted by the bank's president, Alan Meyer, re­inforces the importance of Congress' actions to limit spending over the next year:

FIRST NATIONAL BANK DECLARES WAR ON FEDERAL BUDGET DEFICITS

How would you like to be able to borrow all the money you want, anytime you wanted to, and never have to worry because you could always borrow more to pay back what you already owe? It sounds pretty tempting, doesn't it? The policy makers in the federal govern­

ment know how attractive it is. They have fallen to the temptation for more than two decades. And the only way to keep them from falling again and again is to take the temptation away. As the record shows, they cannot handle it.

Since 1961, the federal government has experienced 22 deficits and just one surplus in its budget.

As a result, it is more than $1.6 trillion in debt. Furthermore-if things don't change­it will be adding in the neighborhood of $200 billion to that debt year after year for the foreseeable future. At that rate, the total debt would double in just seven years. If you divided $1.6 trillion among every

man, woman, and child in the U.S., each in­dividual would receive almost $7,000. That is almost $28,000 for the traditional family of four.

In 1982 prices, $1.6 trillion would buy more than 24 million new homes and almost 270 million new automobiles.

Furthermore, it would take nearly every dollar on deposit in domestic offices of America's banks to pay that debt off. In other words, we would almost wipe out all the savings in U.S. banks to pay the debt.

The numbers are frightening-but the speed at which the government has racked up this debt is even more frightening.

In 1970, the entire federal budget was $200 billion and the government had over­spent by $2.8 billion. In other words, our current deficit just about equals all the money spent by the government just 13 short years ago.

Government deficits affect our everyday lives-they help determine how many Amer-

February 4, 1985 icans are working, how much the value of our dollar is eroded by inflation, and how difficult it is for businesses and consumers to get credit.

How? These deficits must somehow be financed.

To do this the government can borrow money or it can simply increase the amount of dollars in circulation. If it borrows, it will absorb new savings

needed for the private investment necessary to keep our economy moving and our stand­ard of living rising: investment for plant and equipment, research, technology and con­sumer goods.

Traditionally, the federal government has used about one-quarter of our national sav­ings pool.

If deficits continue at their current high level, this figure will be closer to one-half to two-thirds of that pool-year after year.

The obvious result of this course is that interest rates will be pushed higher and higher, since there will be greater competi­tion for the same amount of funds. Think about that the next time you or someone you know wants to purchase a car or a home.

As an alternative to borrowing, the federal government may decide to finance its deficit by creating more money. Then we will suffer from inflation. In the classic econom­ic definition, we will have more dollars chas­ing the same amount of goods.

When inflation is on the rise, no one has any incentive to save and invest. Industry becomes starved for capital, savers watch their nest eggs disappear and recession re­turns to the horizon. In addition, interest rates rise.

Whichever course the government takes to finance its deficit-borrowing, creating money or a mix of the two-interest rates rise, bringing higher unemployment in their wake.

Fortunately, since we live in a democracy we can deal with the deficits.

Democracies are vulnerable to deficit spending because it is far more pleasant to raise spending than to reduce it.

Elected officials know that Santa Clauses get re-elected and Scrooges get rejected.

In Scrooge's day, individuals who could not pay their debts were thrown into debt­or's prison.

Our accumulated deficits are slowly, but surely, incarcerating our entire population­and our children for years to come-in what soon may become an inescapable debtors' prison. The walls of this prison are not made of brick, concrete and steel. Instead, they are composed of high interest rates, in­flation, unemployment and sluggish invest­ment.

Our key to escape can be found in legisla­tion introduced in both the U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate that would provide for a congressionally initiated con­stitutional amendment requiring a balanced budget. The requirement would not apply in case of national emergency.

This amendment is necessary to provide Congress with the incentive to make the tough decisions that must be made to elimi­nate the deficit. Without such direction, the Congress would continue to spend, spend, spend, far beyond the country's means.

For that key to work we must convince Congress to use it now, before we are locked into this debtors' prison forever.

A little more than two centuries ago, 58 Americans stood up to create this country. Now the members of the House and Senate must stand up to save it.e

February 4, 1985 HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION 124,

TERM LIMITATION CONSTITU­TIONAL AMENDMENT

HON. RICHARDT. SCHUUE OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, February 4, 1985 e Mr. SCHULZE. Mr. Speaker, the debate over the length of term to be served by Members of Congress is as old as our Republic and proposals to reform the system have been intro­duced in almost every Congress since 1869.

While we have adapted to our cur­rent system, it may serve us well tore­examine the question of tenure in light of the events that led to our Founding Fathers initial choice and in light of our needs in the 20th century.

Therefore, today I am reintroducing a constitutional amendment increasing the term of a Member of the U.S. House of Representatives from the present 2 years to 3, and limiting the number of consecutive terms Members may serve to six. In addition, my amendment limits to three, the 6-year terms of Members of the Senate and establishes a 6-year term for the Presi­dency.

History shows us that at the Consti­tutional Convention of 1787, the 2-year term emerged as a compromise between annual elections and a pro­posal for triennial elections supported by James Madison. Madison argued for a House term short enough to be responsive to a Member's constituents yet long enough to enable legislators to learn their jobs and carry out their public function. Although a compro­mise was forged, the long and impas­sioned debate over the term length question continued to be one of the great controversies throughout the ratification process of our Constitu­tion. And, since the Constitutional Convention, approximately 211 consti­tutional amendments to lengthen the House term have been introduced.

Certainly, one would wish only to amend the Constitution if the reasons were imperative. Therefore, to explore the reasons, let us consult experience.

A recent article in the Washington Post entitled "Woes of a Hill Fresh­man" outlined the circumstances with which freshman Members contend as they assume their new responsibilities as legislators. As related in the article, information overload, managerial nightmares and the time-consuming need to raise money in order to win re­election quickly transform high expec­tations into a mantle of frustration. Unfortunately, this situation is not confined only to a Member's freshman year. We all grapple with the obstacles that detract from the wholehearted devotion to public service.

Under the current 2-year term, Rep­resentatives are often forced to be

51-059 0-86-12 (pt. 2)

EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS campaigners when their real choice is to be legislators. Many times the re­election treadmill impinges on the im­portant time needed to develop in­formed judgments concerning today's complex issues.

Mr. Speaker, applied to the realities of a 20th century Congress, does our short 2-year term actually contribute to the best interest of democracy? The primary purpose of my proposed con­stitutional amendment is to allow Members to spend more time in the substance of their work which is fram­ing the policies of our country and serving the people who sent them here. I urge my colleagues to join me in support of this constitutional amendment so that we may give our fullest measure of skill to the citizens we all serve.e

IN MEMORY OF MORRIS BRYAN, JR.

HON. ED JENKINS OF GEORGIA

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, February 4, 1985 e Mr. JENKINS. Mr. Speaker, too often we wait until death to pay trib­ute to someone who selflessly devotes time, energy, and personal and finan­cial resources to others. We did not overlook paying public tribute to Morris Bryan. He insisted in life that we not turn the spotlight on him. He spent his life turning the spotlight on others, often after he had provided the stage, the props and the script.

When he died December 29, 1984, he left legacies in education, textile man­ufacturing, and athletics.

In education, he not only gave of his time serving 10 years on the board of regents of the University System of Georgia; in the Georgia Tech National Alumni Association in several leader­ship positions; as a trustee of both Brenau College and the Richard B. Russell Foundation; as a founding trustee of Gainesville Junior College; and for 35 years, as chairman of the board of Education of the Jefferson City School System in Jefferson, GA; he put his money into those educa­tional systems, as well. He preferred to keep amounts of monetary contribu­tions out of the headlines, but credit for the library, the football stadium, and the first all-weather track at Jef­ferson High, his alma mater, goes to Morris Bryan, Jr.

Conceiving, organizing and operating the Georgia Olympics for State high school track and field championships earned him the Georgia High School Association Distinguished Service Award in 1972. His other education awards included the 1975 Distin­guished Service Award from Brenau College, the 1976 Georgia Tech Alumni Distinguished Service Award,

1711 the Sam Burke Award from the Geor­gia Athletic Coaches Association in 1977, the Service to Sports Citation in 1978 in the Georgia Athletic Hall of Fame, and in 1978, National Distin­guished Service Award from the Na­tional High School Athletic Coaches Association and appointment to the Georgia Sports Hall of Fame Board of Trustees.

Morris Bryan's contributions in tex­tile manufacturing gained him State, national, and international recognition and status. During his professional career as president of Jefferson Mills, Inc., he had served as president of the Textile Education Foundation of Georgia, president of Georgia Textile Manufacturers Association, president, vice president, director, and chairman of the education, membership, and economic committees of the American Textile Manufacturers Institute, Inc., director and chairman of the Sales Promotion Committee of the National Cotton Council, director and vice president of the Georgia State Cham­ber of Commerce, and at his death was a director of the Southern Industrial Relations Conference.

His reputation in the textile commu­nity, reflected in many positions he held, did not come by chance. His in­novative engineering and construction design at his Jefferson plant showed the industry that the textile manufac­turing environment could be made safe for the workers. OSHA developed its standards, using Morris Bryan's plant as an example. His exterior roof support construction eliminated cum­bersome columns, which impeded the manufacturing process.

In his list of personal accomplish­ments, one can see marks of a leader. His leadership style encouraged others to join him in pursuits of goals. He saw potential in others and challenged it to be used. Those who accepted his challenges will continue his legacy.

For those of us who knew him per­sonally, Morris Bryan was a gentle­man's gentleman. His strong-willed ap­proach put him among the true movers and shakers. His expertise and honesty put him in the role of confi­dential adviser to public officials from mayors, Governors and Congressmen to Presidents. And all this he did with­out publicity.

Even though he was a statesman in State, national, and international mat­ters, he never lost personal contact or sight of his goals for his beloved home, Jefferson, GA. It was there he worked in community and civic groups and de­voted most of his time, money and energy. And in death, his family hon­ored that first obligation. His obituary requested that memorial donations be made to Jefferson High School Foun­dation or a favorite charity.

No doubt, many tributes will be paid to Morris Bryan; however, the silent,

1712 solemn gesture made on the day of his death could have meant no more to him. The flag on the Jefferson High School lawn flew at half-mast.e

CONDEMNING ANTI-SEMITISM

HON. BARBARA A. MIKULSKI OF MARYLAND

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, February 4, 1985 eMs. MIKULKSI. Mr. Speaker, reli­gious tolerance was fundamental to the founding of this Nation. In fact, the guarantee of religious freedom is explicitly stated in our Constitution. Yet for too long our country has been enduring increasing incidences of anti­Semitic activity. This is abhorrent to the essential principles of our Nation. Anti-Semitism must be comdemned and combated, until it is no longer evi­denced in America.

The Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith recently released its audit of anti-Semitic activity. This study re­veals that such activities are on the rise nationwide. In 1984, there were 715 reports of violence against Jews and Jewish institutions, compared with 670 in 1983. The B'nai B'rith report shows that my own State of Maryland ranks third in the country in the number of anti-Semitic attacks.

The increase in incidences also re­veals a rise in more serious anti-Semit­ic crimes, such as bombing and arson. No one knows why there has been this increase in the country, or why Mary­land should rank so high. But no reason can alleviate the horror of these incidences of religious terrorism.

In 1985 we commemorate the 40th anniversary of the liberation of the Nazi death camps. In November 1976 I went to Poland. I had read the lessons of history but I wanted to learn those lessons first hand. I went to the Warsaw ghetto where so much in some ways began. I was stunned by how small it was and envisioned the num­bers of people packed into that space. I went to Auschwitz to see the camp, the barracks, the gas chambers, the liberation films. I never made it all the way through the tour. The bins of children's shoes broke my heart and I could go no further.

Then, during the Passover-Easter season in 1983 I revisited Israel and felt the sense of renewal that Ausch­witz was not the final end. From Y'ad Vashem, the Holocaust Memorial, to the new settlements we celebrated the lives of the survivors-as we do today.

But we are also left with a legacy of warning: Zachor, remember. Remem­ber the genocide. Remember those who were killed. Remember the reli­gious persecution. Through remem­brance of what did happen, and con­tinued vigilance and public education, we can work to be free of anti-Semi­tism.

EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS In Congress I am cosponsoring legis­

lation to halt religious hate crimes. This bill, H.R. 665, will impose stiff penalties, including fines and prison sentences, for individuals committing acts of violence and vandalism against religious property.

Maryland has taken the lead in State action to address the problem of anti-Semitism. Maryland's coalition opposed to violence and extremism co­ordinates statewide programs. Mary­land also passed legislation to estab­lish sophisticated reporting procedures for religious terrorism.

The National Institute for the Pre­vention and Control of Violence and Extremism is a national research and education institute founded in Balti­more. This institute will centralize data collection and dispersal, will prompt research into the links be­tween prejudice and violence, and will help develop models for States to use in response to religious terrorism and other violence motivated by prejudice. I urge my colleagues to see to it that their States support and work with the institute, and initiate efforts back home to combat anti-Semitism.

The B'nai B'rith audit chronicles the rise of violence against Jews in Amer­ica. These incidences are motivated by ignorance and prejudice. As we re­member the Holocaust, let's not forget to renew our efforts to wipe out cur­rent anti-Semitic activity. Zachor.e

NATIONAL COMMUNITY COLLEGE MONTH

HON. DON YOUNG OF ALASKA

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, February 4, 1985

e Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speak­er, I am today introducing legislation to recognize the contributions that community colleges have made to our Nation. This bill designates May 1985, as "National Community College Month."

Community, technical, and junior colleges educate more than half of all first and second year students enrolled in postsecondary institutions. They prepare people for employment in over 1,400 different occupations, usu­ally within reasonable commuting dis­tance for more than 90 percent of all Americans. The cost of going to com­munity, technical, and junior colleges is low, with an average tuition of $501 a year. Black, Hispanic, American Indian, and Alaskan Native credit stu­dents are represented at higher than average population rates in these insti­tutions, enrolling more than half of all minority undergradutes attending postsecondary institutions.

More than 97 percent of the congres­sional districts in the United States have at least one community, techni-

February .4, 1985 cal, or junior college, educating a total of over 11.41 million Americans in 1981 alone. For many of them it is their first, and sometimes only, chance for postsecondary learning-and they are of benefit to us all. I therefore urge my colleagues to support "Na­tional Community College Month" and join me in saluting them for all of their contributions to this great Nation.e

BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA

HON. WIWAM H. NATCHER OF KENTUCKY

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, February 4, 1985

e Mr. NATCHER. Mr. Speaker, throughout 1985 the Boy Scouts of America will celebrate the 75th anni­versary of the founding of this organi­zation with the theme-"Pride in the Past • • • Footsteps to the Future."

Observances during anniversary week, February 3-9, include a heritage campfire caravan; Scout jamboree in Fredericksburg, VA, for 30,000 Scouts; and a congressional breakfast in Washington, DC.

Membership in the Boy Scouts of America increased in 1984 for the fifth consecutive year. There are currently 4, 773,000 Scouts and over 70 million have participated in Boy Scouts since its founding in 1910.

Boy Scouts of America continued to expand its programs last year. Sports has been introduced as an integral part of the program for Cub Scouts. A family camping association has been formed to enable families to use Scout camps. "Mom and Me" provides an op­portunity for 8-, 9-, and 10-year-old boys to camp with their moms on weekends. Varsity Scouting showed a 30-percent growth during its first year. Explorers elected their own national youth president who has been ap­pointed to the national executive board of the Boy Scouts of America.

The Four Rivers Council, serving the Second Congressional District of Ken­tucky, which I have the privilege of representing, has had a 20-percent in­crease in membership during the past year. The council has completed nego­tiations for continued use of Camp Roy C. Manchester and kicked off a $100,000 capital campaign for the camp. The council also increased serv­ice to young people in remote rural areas who were previously not served.

At this time I want to congratulate the Boy Scouts of America on its 75th anniversary. I am pleased to commend the Boy Scouts for their past accom­plishments and I wish them further successes in the years ahead.e

February 4, 1985 LONG-OVERDUE PROTECTION

FOR CIVIL SERVICE EMPLOYEES

HON. MERVYN M. DYMALLY OF CALIFORNIA

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, February 4, 1985

e Mr. DYMALLY. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing legislation which I believe provides long-overdue protec­tion for the many civil service employ­ees in the excepted service. My bill will give excepted service employees the right to administrative due process when adverse personnel actions are taken against them-a right they do not now have.

A wide variety of positions in the civil service are excepted from the competitive process. These positions include attorneys, physicians, scien­tists, chaplains, handicapped workers, and certain midlevel administrative positions. Positions may be excepted from the competitive service by law, Executive order, or by the Office of Personnel Management. There are over one-half million excepted service employees in executive agencies.

Under current law, Federal employ­ees in the competitive service have the right to receive advance written notice of an adverse action and to respond in writing to the action. They also have the right to appeal an adverse action to the Merit Systems Protection Board, an independent agency estab­lished by the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978. These procedures also apply to veterans' preference eligibles in the excepted service. However, all other excepted service employees have no way to defend themselves in an ad­verse action situation, even though they may have served in the Federal Government for many years. They may be summarily terminated without even knowing the reason for such an action.

The bill I am introducing, with my colleagues, Ms. 0AKAR, Mrs. SCHROE­DER, Mr. HOYER, and Mr. BARNES, Will entitle employees in an executive agency who have served 2 continuous years in the excepted service to these same procedural rights when an ad­verse action is taken. The bill will not cover personnel in positions which are confirmed by the Senate, or are confi­dential or policy determining in char­acter.

I strongly believe that excepted serv­ice employees will be better able to serve the American public if they are free from the fear of adverse actions taken against them without cause. The right to due process and to defend one's work and career is fundamental to all working men and women. Those in public service should be no excep­tion to the rule.e

EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS A MEMORIAL TRIBUTE TO JOHN

W. JACKSON, JR.

HON. DENNIS M. HERTEL OF MICHIGAN

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, February 4, 1985

e Mr. HERTEL of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my deepest sorrow upon the loss of a close friend and loyal public servant, Michi­gan Assistant Attorney General John W. Jackson, Jr. Mr. Jackson was in charge of the Michigan attorney gen­eral's office in Detroit and, prior to that, represented the Michigan De­partment of Treasury.

John Jackson, Jr., was a dedicated professional and an exceptionally tal­ented public servant. Mr. Jackson's ac­complishments and contributions to Michigan's legal system are certainly impressive and will continue to have an impact on the legal process.

Over the years, many young lawyers, fresh out of law school, served in the attorney general's office and they always found a friend and confidant in John Jackson, Jr. I am proud to have been one of those lawyers.

Mr Jackson served the State of Michigan with tremendous patience, diligence, conviction, and dedication and always gave of himself to his fellow man. Mr. Jackson's honesty and integrity were the factors that set him apart from other public servants. John Jackson, Jr., was a great family man who dedicated his life to helping others. We thank God for sharing John with us. His quality of profes­sionalism will live on in those he in­spired by his example.

I join the fine people of the State of Michigan in paying our highest re­spect to John Jackson, Jr., and we sor­rowfully extend our deepest sympathy to his wife, Berniece, and his son, Javon. We greatly appreciate the out­standing contributions of John Jack­son, Jr., to the State of Michigan. He will always be remembered in our prayers.e

THE SECONDARY SCHOOLS BASIC SKILLS ACT

HON. JAMES J. FLORIO OF NEW JERSEY

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, February 4, 1985

e Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased today · to join my colleague, PAT WILLIAMS of Montana, in reintro­ducing the Secondary Schools Basic Skills Act. I would urge my colleagues to join us in supporting this effort to provide necessary funding for assisting local education agencies with large numbers of economically disadvan­taged students in upgrading their basic skills.

1713 Mr. Speaker, our Nation's secondary

schools are in the midst of an econom­ic and academic crisis. Secondary schools across this country are experi­encing increased dropout rates, and more and more high school students are unable to pass the required basic skills tests necessary not only for grad­uation but also for functioning in an increasingly complex society and work environment. The President's Commis­sion on Excellence in Education fo­cused our attention to educational studies that have indicated that profi­ciency in basic skills of reading, writ­ing, and comprehension has seriously faltered over the past 20 years. At this time, it is estimated that 23 million Americans, and approximately 13 per­cent of all 17-year-olds, do not have adequate reading, writing, and com­prehension skills to function in every­day life. Last year, in my own State of New Jersey, over 50,000 entering col­lege freshmen took the New Jersey College Basic Skills Test. Less than a third proved proficient in verbal skills and only 12 percent were proficient in elementary algebra.

Despite this proven need in our Na­tion's high schools for increased atten­tion, our secondary schools are receiv­ing very little funding to strengthen their basic academic program. Depart­ment of Education analyses indicate that 77 percent of chapter 1 funds are invested in preschool, kindergarten, and lower elementary grades. Our sec­ondary school students are being ne­glected to the detriment of their future and our country's future.

To correct this inequity, the Second­ary Schools Basic Skills Act would pro­vide secondary schools with a 6-year authorization of $900 million annually to upgrade their basic skills program. Any secondary school in which 20 per­cent of the student body is economi­cally disadvantaged, would be eligible for funding. The funds would be used for the benefit of all students at that school that are classified as low achievers, and not merely those low­achievers that are also economically disadvantaged. Funding would be dis­continued at the end of 2 years if that school could not demonstrate progress in improving the basic skills of its stu­dent body. We have however included a 1-year waiver provision if extenuat­ing circumstances precluded an im­provement within the space of 2 years.

During the 98th Congress, when Mr. WILLIAMS and I introduced this bill, two concerns were expressed by educa­tors relating to the authority of the National Institute of Education [NIEl to administer the program and with the discontinuation of funding if the school could not demonstrate an im­provement after 2 years. We have modified our new bill to address these concerns by eliminating the provision establishing a National Secondary

1714 Schools Basic Skills panel under NIE authority and placing the program di­rectly under the supervision of the De­partment of Education and the Secre­tary of Education. This should elimi­nate further layers of bureaucracy and hopefully accelerate the decisionmak­ing and evaluation process. We have also allowed for extenuating circum­stances by empowering the Secretary of Education to grant 1-year waiver for schools whose circumstances war­rant additional time.

Our country's future rests in the ability of our youth to function and succeed in our society. The lack of basic skills precludes any such success and can only spell disaster for our country. I urge my colleagues to sup­port this worthwhile effort.e

A GREAT MAN IN MICHIGAN

HON. WILUAM D. FORD OF MICHIGAN

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, February 4, 1985 e Mr. FORD of Michigan. Mr. Speak­er, it is a special pleasure to make note of 25 years of dedicated and selfless public service to the people of our area on the part of Robert McLachlan. His remarkable record includes being an active member in the Lions, Elks, Masons, Moose, Shrine, Knights Templer, and Goodfellows.

Besides being the clerk for the city of Dearborn Heights, he is the city's representative to the Peoples Commu­nity Hospital Authority and the Cen­tral Wayne County Sanitation Author­ity. He is past president of the Wayne County Municipal and Township Clerks Association and the Michigan Association of Municipal Clerks.

It is highly appropriate that Mem­bers of Congress and others be aware of this remarkable example of a gen­tleman who has maintained his dedica­tion and interest in serving our citi­zens in a remarkable variety of ways. So often we take for granted people who serve in these offices with no thought or expectation of having public notice or attention. Therefore, I think it is fitting and proper that we now take a moment to give special ac­colades and thanks to Robert McLach­lan and to wish him well in the years ahead.e

STRENTHENING FEDERAL WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTIONS

HON. JOHN R. McKERNAN, JR. OF MAINE

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, February 4, 1985 e Mr. McKERNAN. Mr. Speaker, the Merit Systems Protection Board, which is charged with determining the validity of complaints by Federal em-

EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS ployee whistleblowers of act of em­ployer reprisal, recently issued a report which found that, despite the existence of the Board, most Federal employees who know firsthand of in­stances of waste, fraud, or abuse still fail to report them. The reasons given by these employees were: First, their belief that nothing would be done to correct the situation; and second, their fear of reprisal by their superiors if they reported wasteful or illegal activi­ties taking place in their agencies.

Mr. Speaker, perhaps such findings would not have been surprising before the enactment of the 1978 Civil Serv­ice Reform Act, which created the Merit Systems Protection Board [MSPBJ and a Special Counsel's Office to prosecute cases of Federal employer reprisal against whistleblow­ers. One of the major purposes of that legislation was to provide assurances to Federal workers that they would be protected from acts of reprisal if they reported instances of waste, fraud, or abuse known to them. The Civil Serv­ice Reform Act was intended to en­courage Federal employees to come forward when they know of illegal or abusive practices taking place within their agencies. Unfortunately, the Merit Systems Protection Board's recent report has verified what many of us already suspected-that if any­thing, Federal employees are now more frightened of possible employer reprisal if they report any instances of waste, fraud, or abuse than they were in earlier years. The report found that in 1983, 69 percent of those Federal employees who said they knew first­hand of some example of Government waste failed to report it. That was ap­proximately the same percentage found in a similar survey conducted in 1980. Of those who knew of waste but did not report it, 37 percent in 1983 gave fear of reprisal as a reason for keeping silent. In 1980, that figure was only 20 percent. Of those who report­ed their findings to superiors, 20 per­cent of them in 1980 said they subse­quently suffered reprisal, in the form of a demotion, a poor performance rating or losing a promotion. In 1983, 23 percent of those reporting such in­cidents said they subsequently suf­fered reprisal-a notable increase over the 1980 figure.

Clearly, the findings contained in this report indicate that the creation of the Merit Systems Protection Board and the Office of the Special Counsel have not succeeded in assuring Federal employees that they will be protected if they report wasteful or illegal prac­tices at work. And just as clearly, the report suggests that employees' fears are well founded. Whistleblowers are not adequately protected under the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978. Under that law, a Special Counsel was created to receive complaints by Fed­eral whistleblowers of employer repris-

February 4, 1985 al, investigate such complaints, and, if the complaint is found to have merit, to argue before the MSPB that such whistleblower's superior committed an act of reprisal in response to having had the whistle blown on him or her. The Board then decides whether an act of reprisal was in fact committed and, if so, what relief is appropriate.

Unfortunately, in practice this ar­rangement has not been as effective in successfully prosecuting offending Federal employers as Congress intend­ed. There are several reasons for this. Often, the Special Counsel has an almost insurmountable burden to overcome in proving his case, and while agencies have the right to appeal unfavorable Board decisions on behalf of an accused supervisor, the Special Counsel currently lacks the authority to appeal a board decision against the whistleblower.

I am convinced that such appeal au­thority is crucial if the Special Coun­sel is to be able to successfully pros­ecute those cases where his investiga­tion has revealed an act or acts of em­ployer reprisal.

During the 98th Congress, I, along with Congressman BARNEY FRANK, in­troduced legislation which would au­thorize the Special Counsel to appeal unfavorable Board decisions to Feder­al court. Our introduction of this legis­lation followed a hearing by the House Manpower and Housing Subcommittee in which we heard from a Federal worker employed at the Kittery Ports­mouth Naval Shipyard in my district who had been reprimanded by his su­pervisor for pointing out safety haz­ards at the shipyard to the Occupa­tional Safety and Health Administra­tion. My constituent's experience pointed up the need to protect Federal employees from employer reprisal for reporting health or safety hazards, as well as instances of waste, fraud or abuse. The day after our August 9 hearing, Congressman FRANK and I in­troduced our legislation.

A similar bill was introduced in the Senate by CHARLES GRASSLEY, and was eventually passed by the Senate in an amended version. Unfortunately, the House adjourned for the year before it had a chance to vote on the bill.

The legislation we are introducing today, and which Senator GRASSLEY has again introduced in the Senate, in­corporates the minor changes which were made to last year's bill by the Senate. In addition to granting the Special Counsel authority to appeal unfavorable MSPB decisions to Feder­al district court, our bill would permit the aggrieved employee to intervene in the Special Counsel's action as a matter of right. The bill would also give the Special Counsel authority to enforce subpoenas and protective orders pursuant to his or her investi­gative and prosecutorial authority.

February 4, 1985 Mr. Speaker, I am hopeful that our

legislation will be considered early in this session of Congress. Enactment of our bill will encourage would-be whis­tleblowers throughout the Govern­ment to come forward by increasing the authority currently available in the Special Counsel to prosecute those who commit acts of reprisal against such employees. And by encouraging more whistleblowers to report known waste, fraud or abuse in their agencies, our bill will indirectly benefit all the taxpayers in this Nation who are cur­rently footing the bill for such prac­tices.e

A TRIBUTE TO HERBERT E. LOCKHART

HON. RON de LUGO OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, February 4, 1985 e Mr. DE LUGO. Mr. Speaker, I would like to bring to your attention and to that of my colleagues, the name of a remarkable Virgin Islander whose ac­complishments have won him recogni­tion not only in my district, the U.S. Virgin Islands, but as far away as Sweden. The man to whom I am refer­ring is Herbert E. Lockhart, a member of one of the most distinguished fami­lies in the U.S. Virgin Islands. For the past 33 years, he has served as the Swedish Counsel to the Virgin Islands, a longer term than any other Swedish Counsel in the United States. This achievement combined with his super­lative work, led to his being awarded the honor of commander of the Royal Order of Polar Star by Order of the King of Sweden. It was conferred on him by the Swedish Consul General who made a special trip to our islands for this tribute to Herbert Lockhart.

I salute Herbert E. Lockhart, an il­lustrious Virgin Islander who has earned the respect and love of his community.e

H.R. 852

HON. DON YOUNG OF ALASKA

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, February 4, 1985 e Mr. YOUNG. Mr. Speaker, I have introduced legislation to repeal the in­terest and dividend tax compliance provisions of Public Law 98-67.

On August 5, 1983, Congress re­pealed the 10-percent withholding pro­visions on interest and dividents. How­ever, in their place, Congress accepted backup withholding and reporting re­quirements nearly as onerous to payers and payees as those repealed. These backup provisions were the price Congress had to pay to see the 10-percent withholding repealed.

EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS Through H.R. 852, I now seek to com­plete the repeal process and return us to prewithholding reporting require­ments. Specifically, sections 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, and 109 of the Interest and Dividend Tax Compliance Act of 1983 are repealed by this bill.

Foremost in my rationale for spon­soring this legislation is the belief that the people of this country are opposed to greater Government intervention in their lives. The reporting and compli­ance provisions of Public Law 98-67 allow the Government to intrude into the private financial relationships be­tween individuals and businesses. This intrusion into the private financial af­fairs of tax-abiding citizens is hardly justified by the increased ability of the IRS to track down tax-delinquent citizens. Granted, only the guilty suffer the legal penalties of these pro­visions but the public's opposition to these measures is motivated by its value of privacy, not the concern for being found guilty of tax evasion. Most taxpayers honestly report their income and have no fear of being ac­cused otherwise. Congress must recog­nize and act to preserve the privacy that this country regards with such conviction.

In addition to the privacy argument made above, my rationale for repeal­ing the backup withholding provisions includes the belief that financial insti­tutions and businesses should not be forced to be tax collectors. The Inter­nal Revenue Service has been given the authority to collect taxes levied by Congress and it, not the financial in­stitutions and businesses, should bear the burden of this responsibility. Tax collection should be between the IRS and the taxpayer. Forcing the task of tax collection onto third parties com­plicates their operations and requires them to absorb added expenses. It should be noted that section 103 of the Interest and Dividend Tax Compli­ance Act, which appropriates addition­al revenues for purposes of collecting tax, remains unchanged by this bill. If Congress wants better tax compliance, it should use the IRS as its vehicle and properly equip it to do the job.

In closing, I cannot stress strongly enough the need for Congress to evaluate our Nation's regard for priva­cy and the role of the IRS as our Na­tion's tax collector. In light of this evaluation, I urge all Members to con­sider and support H.R. 852.e

A TRIBUTE TO MR. ERIC STAHLBERG

HON. SILVIO 0. CONTE OF MASSACHUSETTS

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, February 4, 1985

e Mr. CONTE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to share with my colleagues

1715 some of my thoughts on one of my constituents. It is always a pleasure to have the opportunity to honor such a devoted man. Eric Stahlberg has dedi­cated his life to community service. As a nationally known pioneer in fabri­cated plastics, he worked for the Pre Corp., in Florence, MA, for over 40 years. His last 13 years with them, he served as their vice president for man­ufacturing and operations, before his retirement in 1982. He has been said to be involved in a lifelong love affair with plastics.

Mr. Stahlberg is known around Flor­ence as a "good neighbor." He has been active in the United Way, there­gional YMCA and the Clarke School for the Deaf. Besides working hard for various community organizations, Mr. Stahlberg also works hard not to let people know all that he has done.

Since childhood, one of Mr. Stahl­berg's greatest passions has been the Boy Scouts of America. Coincidental­ly, the Great Trails Council's bound­aries, which is the area of most of Mr. Stahlberg's work, almost fully coincide with my congressional district. Mr. Stahlberg was the first young boy in this region to be awarded the high scouting honor of Eagle Scout. That was some 50 years ago. Since that time, Mr. Stahlberg has dedicated a great deal of time to giving back to the Boy Scouts that which he feels he re­ceived from them. He has held various voluntary positions with the Great Trails Council, including serving on the district council, organizing activi­ties and chairing fund raising drives.

Mr. Speaker, it has been my pleasure to honor Eric Stahlberg, a fine busi­nessman and citizen.e

TRIBUTE TO JAMES AND MARGARET LA GRECA

HON. ROBERT G. TORRICELLI OF NEW JERSEY

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, February 4, 1985 e Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. Speaker, in our fast-paced world often we don't stop and take the time to appreciate those things which are truly valuable in our lives. Few would argue with the fact that the American family is a cen­tral institution in our society. Today I rise to pay tribute to one family in particular, James and Margaret La Greca of Garfield, NJ, who have cele­brated their 50th wedding anniversary.

As parents, the La Grecas were blessed with two kind and caring chil­dren. Now fully grown, Marilyn and James, Jr., have families of their own. The grandchildren, Cindy, Susan, Lenny, Danny, Jimmy, and Jeff, are a constant source of happiness and pride for James and Margaret.

Active in town affairs, both James and Margaret have been a constant

1716 source of inspiration for their neigh­bors. Whether through their involve­ment in the Democratic Party or Elks Lodge events, they have provided strength for each other and service to the community of Garfield.

Let us look to the example of James and Margaret LaGreca, who through their 50 years together have proven that bonds of friendship and love are everlasting, and from those bonds, good things grow ·•

CARL SANDBURG HIGH SCHOOL

HON. HARRIS W. FAWELL OF ILLINOIS

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, February 4, 1985

• Mr. FAWELL. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take a moment to commend the Carl Sandburg High School in Orland Park, IL, for being selected as one of the Illinois nominees in the National Secondary School Recognition Pro­gram for 1984-85.

The purpose of the National Second­ary School Program is to identify and call attention to a national group of schools that are unusually successful in meeting the educational needs of the students. Carl Sandburg High will now compete with schools from every State in the Union for the National Excellence in Education Award. Those schools receiving this award will be an­nounced in June.

I am proud a high school in my con­gressional district has been deemed worthy of the nomination. I am cer­tain my colleagues will join me in con­gratulating the faculty and staff of Carl Sandburg High School for con­tributing to the success of meeting the educational needs of its students.e

SENATE COMMITTEE MEETINGS

Title IV of Senate Resolution 4, agreed to by the Senate on February 4, 1977, calls for establishment of a system for a computerized schedule of all meetings and hearings of Senate committees, subcommittees, joint com­mittees, and committees of conference. This title requires all such committees to notify the Office of the Senate Daily Digest-designated by the Rules Committee-of the time, place, and purpose of the meetings, when sched­uled, and any cancellations or changes in the meetings as they occur.

As an additional procedure along with the computerization of this infor­mation, the Office of the Senate Daily Digest will prepare this information for printing in the Extensions of Re­marks section of the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD on Monday and Wednesday of each week.

Any changes in committee schedul­ing will be indicated by placement of

EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS an asterisk to the left of the name of the unit conducting such meetings.

Meetings scheduled for Tuesday, February 5, 1985, may be found in the Daily Digest of today's RECORD.

MEETINGS SCHEDULED

FEBRUARY6 9:00a.m.

Armed Services To continue hearings on proposed au­

thorizations for fiscal year 1986 for the Department of Defense, focusing on Navy and Marine Corps programs.

SR-253 10:00 a.m.

Budget To continue hearings in preparation for

reporting the first concurrent resolu­tion on the fiscal year 1986 budget.

SD-608 Environment and Public Works

To hold hearings on the nomination of Lee M. Thomas, of South Carolina, to be Administrator, Environmental Pro­tection Agency.

SD-406 Foreign Relations

To continue hearings to discuss Ameri­can foreign policy.

SD-419 Judiciary

To hold hearings on S. 172, to provide a cause of action to cities to prevent pro­fessional football teams from aban­doning them for more profitable loca­tions, and to provide limited antitrust immunity to joint action of those teams engaged in professional football, and S. 298, to clarify congressional intent regarding the application of antitrust laws to certain types of major sports leagues practices and de­cisions.

SD-226

FEBRUARY7 9:00a.m.

Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Foreign Agricultural Policy Subcommittee

To hold hearings to examine the com­petitive position of U.S. agriculture in the current world environment.

SR-328A Armed Services

To continue hearings on proposed au­thorizations for fiscal year 1986 for the Department of Defense, focusing on Air Force programs.

SR-253 9:30a.m.

Budget To continue hearings in preparation for

reporting the first concurrent resolu­tion on the fiscal year 1986 budget.

10:00 a.m. SD-608

Foreign Relations To continue hearings to discuss Ameri­

can foreign policy. SD-419

Labor and Human Resources Alcoholism and Drug Abuse Subcommit­

tee To hold hearings to review advertise­

ments promoting the use of alcohol. SD-430

Joint Economic To continue hearings in preparation of

its forthcoming annual report. SD-342

February 4, 1985 2:00p.m.

Small Business Small Business: Family Farm Subcommit­

tee To hold hearings to examine the farm

credit problem and its impact on rural agricultural banks.

SR-428

FEBRUARY8 9:00a.m.

Budget To continue hearings in preparation for

reporting the first concurrent resolu­tion on the fiscal year 1986 budget.

SD-608 9:30a.m.

Judiciary Immigration and Refugee Policy Subcom­

mittee To hold hearings on the famine effects

on African refugees. SD-226

FEBRUARY 19 10:00 a.m.

Appropriations To hold hearings to review the Presi­

dent's proposed budget requests for fiscal year 1986.

SD-192 2:00p.m.

Appropriations Interior and Related Agencies Subcommit­

tee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corporation, National Capital Plan­ning Commission, and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation.

SD-138

FEBRUARY20 9:00a.m.

Commerce, Science, and Transportation To resume hearings on S. 259 and S. 287,

bills to protect local community inter­ests regarding the relocation of certain professional sports teams.

SR-253 10:00 a.m.

Energy and Natural Resources Business meeting, to consider the com­

mittee budget for 1985, and other pending calendar business.

SD-366 Environment and Public Works

To hold hearings on those programs which fall within the jurisdiction of the committee as contained in the President's budget requests for fiscal year 1986, focusing on requests for the Environmental Protection Agency.

SD-406 1:00 p.m.

Veterans' Affairs To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the Veterans' Administration.

SR-418 2:00p.m.

Appropriations Energy and Water Development Subcom­

mittee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for energy and water development programs, fo­cusing on Army civil works programs.

SD-192

February 4, 1985 FEBRUARY 21

9:00a.m. Veterans' Affairs

Business meeting, to consider committee budget for 1985, and committee rules of procedure for the 99t h Congress.

SR-418 2:00p.m.

Appropriations Interior and Related Agencies Subcommit­

tee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Holocaust Memorial Council, and the Federal Inspector for the Alaska Gas Pipeline.

SD-138 Appropriations Transportation and Related Agencies Sub­

committee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the De­partment of Transportation.

SD-124

FEBRUARY 26

9:00a.m. Appropriations Interior and Related Agencies Subcommit­

tee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the De­partment of the Interior and related agencies.

SD-124 Appropriations Labor, Health and Human Services, Edu­

cation, and Related Agencies Subcom­mittee

To hold hearings on proposed budget es­timates for fiscal year 1986 for the Office of the Secretary of Labor, and the Employment and Training Admin­istration, Department of Labor.

SD-116 9:30a.m.

Veterans' Affairs To hold joint hearings with the House

Committee on Veterans' Affairs to review the legislative priorities of the Disabled American Veterans.

345 Cannon Building 10:00 a.m.

Appropriations Transportation and Related Agencies Sub­

committee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for theRe­search and Special Programs Adminis­tration and the Office of the Inspector General, Department of Transporta­tion.

SD-138 2:00p.m.

Appropriations Energy and Water Development Subcom­

mittee To resume hearings on proposed budget

estimates for fiscal year 1986 for energy and water development pro­grams, focusing on the Department of the Interior.

SD-192 Armed Services

To hold closed hearings on the maritime threat to U.S. national interests.

SR-222

EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS FEBRUARY 27

9:00a.m. Appropriations Labor, Healt h and Human Services, Edu­

cation, and Related Agencies Subcom­mittee

To hold hearings on proposed budget es­timates for fiscal year 1986 for t he Labor-Management Services Adminis­tration, Employment Standards Ad­ministration, and Bureau of Labor Statistics, all of the Department of Labor, and the Pension Benefit Guar­anty Corporation.

SD-116 Veterans' Affairs

To hold joint hearings with the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs to review the legislative priorities of the Paralyzed Veterans of America, Blind­ed Veterans of America, Purple Heart, and Vietnam Veterans of America.

334 Cannon Building 9:30a.m.

Energy and Natural Resources To hold oversight hearings to review

those programs which fall within the jurisdiction of the committee as con­tained in the President's proposed budget for fiscal year 1986, focusing on the Department of the Interior.

SD-366 2:00a.m.

Appropriations To resume hearings to review the Presi­

dent's proposed budget requests for fiscal year 1986.

SD-192

FEBRUARY28 9:00a.m.

Appropriations Labor, Health and Human Services, Edu­

cation, and Related Agencies Subcom­mittee

To hold hearings on proposed budget es­timates for fiscal year 1986 for the Oc­cupational Safety and Health Admin­istration, Mine Safety and Health Ad­ministration, and Departmental Man­agement, all of the Department of Labor, and the President's Committee on Employment of the Handicapped.

SD-116 9:30a.m.

Energy and Natural Resources To continue oversight hearings to

review those programs which fall within the Jurisdiction of the commit­tee as contained in the President's pro­posed budget for fiscal year 1986, fo­cusing on the Department of Energy.

SD-366 10:00 a.m.

Appropriations Transportation and Related Agencies Sub­

committee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the Na­tional Highway Traffic Safety Admin­istration, Department of Transporta­tion.

SD-138 2:00a.m.

Appropriations Interior and Related Agencies Subcommit­

tee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the Commission of Fine Arts, and the Na­tional Gallery of Art.

SD-138

1717 MARCH 1

9:00a.m. Energy and Natural Resources

To continue oversight hearings to review those programs which fall within the jurisdiction of the commit­tee as contained in the President's pro­posed budget for fiscal year 1986, fo­cusing on the Forest Service <Depart ­ment of Agriculture>. U.S. Synthetic Fuels Corporation, and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission <De­partment of Energy).

SD-366

MARCH5

9:00a.m. Appropriations Labor, Health and Human Services, Edu­

cation, and Related Agencies Subcom­mittee

To hold hearings on proposed budget es­timates for fiscal year 1986 for the Office of Secretary of Health and Human Services.

SD-116

10:00 a.m. Appropriations Transportation and Related Agencies Sub­

committee To hold he~ings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the Federal Highway Administration, De­partment of Transportation, and the Panama Canal Commission.

SD-138

2:00p.m. Appropriations Interior and Related Agencies Subcommit­

tee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Depart­ment of the Interior.

SD-138

Appropriations Energy and Water Development Subcom­

mittee To resume hearings on proposed budget

estimates for fiscal year 1986 for energy and water development pro­grams, focusing on the Tennessee Valley Authority.

SD-192

MARCH6

9:00a.m. Appropriations Labor, Health and Human Services, Edu­

cation, and Related Agencies Subcom­mittee

To hold hearings on proposed budget es­timates for fiscal year 1986 for the De­partment of Health and Human Serv­ices, including the Health Resources and Services Administration, and the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health.

SD-116

Veterans' Affairs Business meeting, to mark up proposed

legislation authorizing funds for fiscal year 1986 for the Veterans' Adminis­tration.

SR-418

1718 MARCH7

10:00 a.m. Appropriations Energy and Water Development Subcom­

mittee To resume hearings on proposed budget

estimates for fiscal year 1986 for energy and water development pro­grams, focusing on the Department of Energy.

SD-192 2:00p.m.

Appropriations Interior and Related Agencies Subcommit­

tee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the strategic petroleum reserve, and the Office of Emergency Preparedness.

SD-138 Appropriations Transportation and Related Agencies Sub­

committee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the Na­tional Transportation Safety Board, and the St. Lawrence Seaway Develop­ment Corporation, Department of Transportation.

SD-192 MARCH 12

9:30a.m. Veterans' Affairs

To hold hearings with the House Com­mittee on Veterans' Affairs to review the legislative priorities of the Veter­ans of Foreign Wars.

345 Cannon Building 10:30 a.m.

Appropriations Transportation and Related Agencies Sub­

committee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the Interstate Commerce Commission.

SD-138 2:00p.m.

Appropriations Energy and Water Development Subcom­

mittee To resume hearings on proposed budget

estimates for fiscal year 1986 for energy and water development pro­grams, focusing on solar and renew­abies and energy research.

SD-192

MARCH 14 10:00 a.m.

Appropriations HUD-Independent Agencies Subcommit­

tee To hold hearings in proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the Na­tional Aeronautics and Space Adminis­tration.

SD-192 2:00p.m.

Appropriations Interior and Related Agencies Subcommit­

tee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the Smithsonian Institution.

SD-138 Appropriations Energy and Water Development Subcom­

mittee To resume hearings on proposed budget

estimates for fiscal year 1986 for energy and water development pro­grams, focusing on nuclear fission,

EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS commercial waste management, and uranium enrichment.

SD-192

MARCH 19 9:00a.m.

Appropriations Labor, Health and Human Services, Edu­

cation, and Related Agencies Subcom­mittee

To hold hearings on proposed budget es­timates for fiscal year 1986 for the Na­tional Institutes of Health, Depart­ment of Health and Human Services.

SD-116 2:00p.m.

Appropriations Interior and Related Agencies Subcommit­

tee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the land and water conservation fund.

SD-138 Appropriations Energy and Water Development Subcom­

mittee To resume hearings on proposed budget

estimates for fiscal year 1986 for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and the Federal Energy Regulatory Com­mission.

SD-192

MARCH20 9:00a.m.

Appropriations Labor, Health and Human Services, Edu­

cation, and Related Agencies Subcom­mittee

To continue hearings on proposed budget estimates for fiscal year 1986 for the National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services.

SD-116 Veterans' Affairs

To hold joint hearings with the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs to review the legislative priorities of AMVETS, World War I Veterans, Jewish War Veterans of the U.S.A., and Atomic Veterans.

334 Cannon Building 10:00 a.m.

Appropriations HUD-Independent Agencies Subcommit­

tee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the American Battle Monuments Commis­sion, Army cemeterial expenses, Office of Consumer Affairs <Department of Commerce), and the Consumer Infor­mation Center.

SD-124 Appropriations Transportation and Related Agencies Sub­

committee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the Federal Railroad Administration, De­partment of Transportation, and the National Railroad Passenger Corpora­tion <AMTRAK>.

SD-138

MARCH21 9:00a.m.

Appropriations Labor, Health and Human Services, Edu­

cation, and Related Agencies Subcom­mittee

To continue hearings on proposed budget estimates for fiscal year 1986

· February 4, 1985 for the National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services.

SR-428A 10:00 a.m.

Appropriations BUD-Independent Agencies Subcommit­

tee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corpora­tion, National Credit Union Adminis­tration, Office of Revenue Sharing and the New York City loan program <Department of the Treasury), Federal Home Loan Bank Board, and the Na­tional Institute of Building Sciences.

SD-192 Appropriations Energy and Water Development Subcom­

mittee To resume hearings on proposed budget

estimates for fiscal year 1986 for energy and water development pro­grams, focusing on atomic energy de­fense activities.

SD-116 Appropriations Transportation and Related Agencies Sub­

committee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the Washington Metropolitan Area Tran­sit Authority, and the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compli­ance Board.

SD-138 2:00p.m.

Appropriations Interior and Related Agencies Subcommit­

tee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for energy conservation programs.

SD-138

MARCH26 9:00a.m.

Appropriations Labor, Health and Human Services, Edu­

cation, and Related Agencies Subcom­mittee

To hold hearings on proposed budget es­timates for fiscal year 1986 for the De­partment of Health and Human Serv­ices, including the Centt::rs for Disease Control, Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Mental Health Administration, Office of the Inspector General, and Office for Civil Rights.

SD-116 2:00p.m.

Appropriations Interior and Related Agencies Subcommit­

tee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the Ge­ological Survey, Department of the In­terior.

SD-138 Appropriations Energy and Water Development Subcom­

mittee To resume hearings on proposed budget

estimates for fiscal year 1986 for energy and water development pro­grams, focusing on the Power Market­ing Administration.

SD-192

February .4, 1985 MARCH 27

9:00a.m. Appropriations Labor, Health and Human Services, Edu­

cation, and Related Agencies Subcom­mittee

To hold hearings on proposed budget es­timates for fiscal year 1986 for the De­partment of Health and Human Serv­ices, including the Health Care Fi­nancing Administration, Social Securi­ty Administration, and refugee pro­grams.

SD-116 10:00 a.m.

Appropriations BUD-Independent Agencies Subcommit­

tee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the Se­lective Service System, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Office of Science and Technology Policy, and the Council on Environmental Qual­ity.

SD-124

MARCH28 9:00a.m.

Appropriations Labor, Health and Human Services, Edu­

cation, and Related Agencies Subcom­mittee

To hold hearings on proposed budget es­timates for fiscal year 1986 for the De­partment of Health and Human Serv­ices, including Human Development Services, Office of Community Serv­ices, Departmental Management <sala­ries and expenses), and Policy Re­search.

SD-116 10:00 a.m.

Appropriations BUD-Independent Agencies Subcommit­

tee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the Veterans Administration, and the En­vironmental Protection Agency.

S-126, Capitol Appropriations Energy and Water Development Subcom­

mittee To resume hearings on proposed budget

estimates for fiscal year 1986 for energy and water development pro­grams.

SD-192 2:00p.m.

Appropriations Interior and Related Agencies Subcommit­

tee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation Commission, and the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Department of the Interior.

SD-138 Appropriations Energy and Water Development Subcom­

mittee To continue hearings on proposed

budget estimates for fiscal year 1986 for energy and water development pro­grams.

SD-192

EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS APRIL 1

10:00 a.m. Appropriations Energy and Water Development Subcom­

mittee To resume hearings on proposed budget

estimates for fiscal year 1986 for energy and water development pro­grams.

SD-192 2:00p.m.

Appropriations Energy and Water Development Subcom­

mittee To continue hearings on proposed

budget estimates for fiscal year 1986 for energy and water development pro­grams.

SD-192

APRIL 2 9:00a.m.

Appropriations Labor, Health and Human Services, Edu­

cation, and Related Agencies Subcom­mittee

To hold hearings on proposed budget es­timates for fiscal year 1986 for the Office of the Secretary of Education, Departmental Management <salaries and expenses), Office of Civil Rights, Office of Inspector General, National Institute of Education, and Bilingual Education, all of the Department of Education.

SD-116 10:00 a.m.

Appropriations Energy and Water Development Subcom­

mittee To continue hearings on proposed

budget estimates for fiscal year 1986 for energy and water development pro­grams.

SD-192 2:00p.m.

Appropriations Interior and Related Agencies Subcommit­

tee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the Na­tional Park Service, Department of the Interior.

SD-138 Appropriations Energy and Water Development Subcom­

mittee To continue hearings on proposed

budget estimates for fiscal year 1986 for energy and water development pro­grams.

SD-192

APRIL3 9:00a.m.

Appropriations Labor, Health and Human Services, Edu­

cation, and Related Agencies Subcom­mittee

To hold hearings on proposed budget es­timates for fiscal year 1986 for the De­partment of Education, including vo­cational and adult education, educa­tion for the handicapped, rehabilita­tion services and handicapped re­search, special institutions <including Howard University), and education statistics.

SD-116 10:00 a.m.

Appropriations Energy and Water Development Subcom­

mittee To continue hearings on proposed

budget estimates for fiscal year 1986

1719 for energy and water development pro­grams.

SD-192 Appropriations Transportation and Related Agencies Sub­

committee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the Federal Aviation Administration, De­partment of Transportation.

SD-138 2:00p.m.

Appropriations Energy and Water Development Subcom­

mittee To continue hearings on proposed

budget estimates for fiscal year 1986 for energy and water development pro­grams.

SD-192

APRIL4 10:00 a.m.

Appropriations Hun-Independent Agencies Subcommit­

tee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the De­partment of Housing and Urban De­velopment.

SD-192 Appropriations Transportation and Related Agencies Sub­

committee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for Con­rail, U.S. Railway Association, and the Office of the Secretary of Transporta­tion.

SD-138 2:00p.m.

Appropriations Interior and Related Agencies Subcommit­

tee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Department of the Interior.

SD-138

APRIL 16 10:00 a.m.

Appropriations Transportation and Related Agencies Sub­

committee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the Urban Mass Transportation Adminis­tration, Department of Transporta­tion.

SD-138 2:00p.m.

Appropriations Interior and Related Agencies Subcommit­

tee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the Bureau of Mines, Department of the Interior.

SD-138

APRIL 18 10:00 a.m.

Appropriations Transportation and Related Agencies Sub­

committee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Transportation.

SD-138

1720 2:00p.m.

Appropriations Interior and Related Agencies Subcommit­

tee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the Na­tional Endowment for the Humanities, and the National Endowment for the Arts.

SD-138 APRIL 23

9:00a.m. Appropriations Labor, Health and Human Services, Edu­

cation, and Related Agencies Subcom­mittee

To hold hearings on proposed budget es­timates for fiscal year 1986 for the De­partment of Education, including ele­mentary and secondary education, education block grants, and impact aid.

SD-116 10:00 a.m.

Appropriations Interior and Related Agencies Subcommit­

tee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the Forest Service, Department of Agricul­ture.

SD-138 APRIL 24

9:00a.m. Appropriations Labor, Health and Human Services, Edu­

cation, and Related Agencies Subcom­mittee

To hold hearings on proposed budget es­timates for fiscal year 1986 for the De­partment of Education, including stu­dent financial assistance, guaranteed student loans, higher and continuing education, higher education facilities loans and insurance, educational re­search and training, and libraries.

SD-116 10:00 a.m.

Appropriations BUD-Independent Agencies Subcommit­

tee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, and the National Science Foundation.

9:00a.m. Appropriations

APRIL 25 SD-124

Labor, Health and Human Services, Edu­cation, and Related Agencies Subcom­mittee

To hold hearings on proposed budget es­timates for fiscal year 1986 for the Soldiers' and Airmen's Horne, Prospec­tive Payment Commission, Railroad Retirement Board, National Labor Re­lations Board, National Mediation Board, OSHA Review Commission, and the Federal Mediation and Concil­iation Service.

SD-116 2:00p.m.

Appropriations Interior and Related Agencies Subcommit­

tee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the Office of Indian Education, and the Institute of Museum Services.

SD-138 APRIL 30

10:00 a.m. Appropriations

EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS Interior and Related Agencies Subcommit­

tee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the Office of the Secretary and the Office of the Solicitor, Department of the In­terior.

SD-138

MAY1 9:00a.m.

Appropriations Labor, Health and Human Services, Edu­

cation, and Related Agencies Subcom­mittee

To hold hearings on proposed budget es­timates for fiscal year 1986 for the De­partment of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and cer­tain related agencies.

10:00 a.m. SD-116

Appropriations BUD-Independent Agencies Subcommit­

tee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the De­partment of Housing and Urban De­velopment and certain independent agencies.

SD-124

MAY2 9:00a.m.

Appropriations Labor, Health and Human Services, Edu­

cation, and Related Agencies Subcom­mittee

To hold hearings on proposed budget es­timates for fiscal year 1986 for the De­partment of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and cer­tain related agencies.

SD-116 10:00 a.m.

Appropriations BUD-Independent Agencies Subcommit­

tee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the De­partment of Housing and Urban De­velopment and certain independent agencies.

SD-124 2:00p.m.

Appropriations Interior and Related Agencies Subcommit­

tee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for territo­rial affairs, Department of the Interi-or.

SD-138

MAY7 9:00a.m.

Appropriations Labor, Health and Human Services, Edu­

cation, and Related Agencies Subcom­mittee

To hold hearings on proposed budget es­timates for fiscal year 1986 for the De­partments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and cer­tain related agencies.

SD-116 10:00 a.m.

Appropriations Interior and Related Agencies Subcommit­

tee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the Indian Health Service, Department of Health and Human Services.

SD-138

9:00a.m. Appropriations

February 4, 1985 MAYS

Labor, Health and Human Services, Edu­cation, and Related Agencies Subcom­mittee

To hold hearings on proposed budget es­timates for fiscal year 1986 for the De­partments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and cer­tain related agencies.

SD-116 MAY9

9:00a.m. Appropriations Labor, Health and Human Services, Edu­

cation, and Related Agencies Subcom­mittee

To hold hearings on proposed budget es­timates for fiscal year 1986 for the De­partments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and cer­tain related agencies.

' 2:00p.m. SD-116

Appropriations Interior and Related Agencies Subcommit­

tee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the Bureau of Land Management, Depart­ment of the Interior.

SD-138 MAY14

9:00a.m. Appropriations Labor, Health and Human Services, Edu­

cation, and Related Agencies Subcom­mittee

To hold hearings on proposed budget es­timates for fiscal year 1986 for the De­partments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and cer­tain related agencies.

SD-116 10:00 a.m.

Appropriations Interior and Related Agencies Subcommit­

tee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the Energy Information Administration, and the Economic Regulatory Admin­istration, Department of Energy.

SD-138 MAY21

10:00 a.m. Appropriations Interior and Related Agencies Subcommit­

tee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for the Minerals Management Service, De­partment of the Interior.

SD-138 MAY23

2:00p.m. Appropriations Interior and Related Agencies Subcommit­

tee To hold hearings on proposed budget es­

timates for fiscal year 1986 for Naval Petroleum Reserves, and fossil energy.

10:00 a.m.

CANCELLATIONS FEBRUARY6

Joint Economic

SD-138

To continue hearings in preparation of its forthcoming annual report. SD-G50