with Latin America and its retention is a remnant of colonialism. To the contrary, respect for the United States would be lessened within the world community; and our allies within the free world will have less confidence in our ability to lead them toward peace through strength. We do appreciate the many thousands of individual letters and phone calls received regarding this important matter that indicate Virginians are overwhelmingly opposed to ratification. IMMIGRATION BILL Our office has received considerable comment from constituents expressing the view that many responsible citizens may be deprived of potential employment opportunities by illegal aliens. Upwards of three million illegals are holding jobs in this country, according to Department of Justice figures. A proposal I introduced would require Congressional approval of large-scale admission of foreign refugees, would impose fines on employers who knowingly hired illegal aliens, and prohibit those individuals living in the country illegally from receiving federal assistance, such as food stamps or Medicaid benefits. Under current government policy, known as parole authority, the Attorney General can allow certain aliens to come into the United States and remain, without specific Congressional approval. A provision of the proposed bill would include the number of refugees paroled into the U.S. within the national quota for that country. It also provides that the government would be required for the first time to report quarterly on the number of illegal aliens holding jobs in the United States. LABOR LAW REFORM The Senate is expected to soon debate proposed amendments to the National Labor Relations Act. This is the basic law regulating collective bargaining in the United States and is intended to protect employees on their right to join unions and bargain collectively. During the past few months amendments to the Act have passed the House of Representatives with strong support of organized labor, and are now under consideration in the Senate. Those supporting labor law amendments argue that delays in enforcement of employee rights have frustrated attempts of large numbers of employees to exercise their right. They believe that changes are necessary to prevent delays in holding union elections and enforcing remedies in unfair labor practice cases. The bill would, among other things, expedite enforcement of orders of the National Labor Relations Board, and prevent employers found guilty of unfair labor practices from receiving federal contracts for a period of three years. Opponents of the bill claim, however, that it is really intended to arrest the decline in union membership; and that when viewed together, the amendments put considerable power in the hands of union organizers and sharply weaken the ability of employers to resist union organization. They argue, for example, that one of its provisions would compel them to give unions equal time, on company property, if management held conferences with employees on company time. TUITION ASSISTANCE The Finance Committee has reported a tuition tax credit bill which would phase in over the next three years a tax credit for educational expenses. Beginning August 1, 1978, the measure would provide a credit equal to 50 percent of tuition and fees to college students with a maximum credit of $250. Two years later, the credit would be increased to cover tuition and fees for grade schools and high schools. Starting the following year, 1981, the credit would be extended to cover the expenses of graduate students and part-time students. The Committee and the Administration admit the bill could cost the government over $5 billion a year in lost tax revenues. Proponents argue that the tax relief provided by this bill is intended to maintain the nation's historic mixture of both public and private education. They do not consider the cost to be great in comparison with the total federal budget for education or that the grant and loan approach gives more power over education to Washington bureaucrats. Opponents say that both the tuition tax credit proposal and the extension of the grant program to church-related and private grade and high schools are unconstitutional under the First Amendment provision for separation of church and state. They believe that church-related schools would be the primary beneficiaries of the RICHMOND VISIT Our next visit to the Richmond office is scheduled for Friday, April 28, and any constituent desiring to discuss a problem or issue is welcome to stop by during regular business hours. The state office is located on the eighth floor of the Federal Building at 400 North 8th Street. The office phone number is 649-0049 if you care to call in advance but an appointment is not necessary. MILITARY SPENDING The President has forwarded to the Congress a budget request of $126 billion for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year beginning October 1. The funds would be spent for procurement of new weapons systems, research and development, military personnel and military retirement pay in addition to operations and maintenance of our active and reserve forces. This request is particularly important in light of a major buildup of the strategic and conventional forces of the Soviet Union over the last ten years. We are told that the Soviet Union has significantly increased its manpower and nuclear and conventional war equipment such as long and intermediate range missiles, tanks, submarines, and this buildup shows no signs of slowing. The committees will take the Soviet buildup into account when making decisions on the U.S. defense budget, and the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee has recently indicated hearings will be had on the production of the neutron bomb. Some adjustments in the President's recommendations will, of course, be made and this could include additional spending to maintain the capacity to defend the country and its vital interests throughout the world. CIVIL SERVICE PROPOSALS Constituents and especially Federal employees should be interested in Administration plans to reorganize the Civil Service System. Two means are being used to put the plan into effect: 1) a legislative proposal to be enacted by Congress, and 2) a reorganization plan under the President's general authority, to reorganize agencies unless either house of Congress disapproves the plan within 60 legislative days after it is submitted. The Civil Service Commission would be abolished in favor of an Office of Personnel Management and a Merit Systems Protection Board. A Federal Labor Relations Authority would administer the existing federal labor-management relations program. Among many other proposed changes is the creation of a Senior Executive Service under which agency heads would have more authority over the pay grades, promotion and demotions of 9200 top government managers. Should you desire a copy of the bill as introduced or a copy of the organization plan, when submitted, please let us know. CONGRESSIONAL PAPERS During the 12 years of service in the House of Representatives and the Senate, our office has accumulated an assortment of papers which are being donated to George Mason University in Fairfax. George Mason, a state institution, was chosen partly because our home for the past 31 years is within a few miles of the campus. However, the university is a developing institution with a present enrollment of approximately 9,600 students, with the prospects of becoming one of the major schools of higher learning in Virginia within a few years. It is understood that a legislative study committee is considering the establishment of a law school on the Fairfax campus; and the university, located within one of the most populous and fast-growing areas of the state, should be considerably expanded in the years ahead. The papers will include a variety of material, such as statements made on the floor of the House and Senate, legislative proposals, committee activities, correspondence with private organizations and governmental agencies, newsletters, responses to annual questionnaires, speeches and background reports on issues considered by Congress. Members of the University faculty and library staff will undertake the task of organizing and preserving items of significant historical value, and our office will work with them in the transfer of the material to the University. it is understood that I will have access to the material, and it can be utilized by the faculty, students working with them, and will be available to the general public three years after the termination of my Senate service. OPINION POLL RESULTS We are grateful to constituents who responded to our 12th annual questionnaire and shared their views on a number of important issues. The tabulation of results, some of which are shown below, leaves little doubt of how Virginians feel on the questions presented. 87 percent of the people responding opposed ratification of the Panama Canal treaties, while 13 percent favored ratification. Only 6 percent favored election day voting registration, while 94 percent ex pressed opposition. An overwhelming 86 percent of those responding opposed repeal of the Hatch Act, while 14 percent favored repeal. The enactment of a national welfare system was opposed by a margin of 86 percent to 14 percent. With regard to the proposed Strategic Arms Limitation Agreement now being negotiated, only 12 percent of the constituents who responded believed the Russians would adhere to any treaty agreed upon, while 13 percent believed the Senate should ratify a treaty regardless of any imbalance in numbers in order to obtain a limitation on the growth of strategic arms, and 15 percent believed we should allow the Soviets to have material superiority in some fields to compensate for our more sophisticated weapons in other areas. 88 percent, 87 percent and 85 percent respec tively were of a contrary opinion. 83 percent of those responding would amend the Constitution to provide that the states rather than the federal government have the power to regulate the circumstances under which pregnancies might or might not be terminated. 76 percent of the people felt that foreign assistance should be reduced or eliminat ed entirely, while only 3 percent favored a spending increase. The remaining 21 percent preferred retaining foreign aid at present levels. SOMETHING TO PONDER "To inform the minds of the people, and to follow their will, is the chief duty of those placed at their head." THOMAS JEFFERSON. [From the Congressional Record-Senate, Apr. 13, 1978] THE PANAMA CANAL TREATY The Senate continued with the consideration of the treaty. The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator will state it. The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. There is; one hour, equally divided. UP AMENDMENT NO. 25, AS MODIFIED Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I send to the desk a modified form of amendment No. 3 and ask for its immediate consideration. The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The amendment will be stated. 25. The assistant legislative clerk read as follows: The Senator from Kansas (Mr. Dole) offers an unprinted amendment numbered Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that futher reading of the amendment be dispensed with. The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so ordered. The amendment is as follows: In the second sentence of the first paragraph of article XI, strike out "for thirty calendar months" and insert in lieu thereof "until such date as is agreed upon by the members of the Panama Canal Consultative Committee, but not before January 1, 1990". In paragraph 2 of article XI, amend subparagraph (a) to read as follows: "(a) The authorities of the United States of America shall have the primary right to exercise criminal and civil jurisdiction over employees of the Panama Canal Commission who are citizens of the United States and their dependents, and members of the United States Forces and civilian component and their dependents, in the following cases:" In paragraph 2(a)(i) of article XI, strike out "offense committed" and insert in lieu thereof "act or omission". In paragraph 2(a)(ii) of article XI, strike out "offense committed" and insert in lieu thereof "act or omission". In the text following clause (ii) of paragraph 2(a) of article XI, strike out "offenses committed" and insert in lieu thereof "acts or omissions". Strike paragraph 6 of article XI. Renumber subsequent paragraphs of article XI accordingly. Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, on my time, I suggest the absence of a quorum. The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll. The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I ask unamimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER. (Mr. Nunn). Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I may proceed as in legislative session for a period of 5 minutes, the time to be charged against the time of the Senator from Kansas. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. DOLE. On two matters, both relating to agriculture. THE PANAMA CANAL TREATY The Senate continued with the consideration of the treaty. UP AMENDMENT NO. 25, AS MODIFIED Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, at the desk is a modified form of amendment No. 3 to article XI of the Panama Canal Treaty. Consistent with the intent of article XI of the Panama Canal Treaty, which seeks to "provide for an orderly transition" of juris diction over the Panama Canal Zone, I have proposed an amendment which would simply extend the period for the transfer of jurisdiction from the United States to Panama. This treaty is being marketed by the administration as a "twenty-two year" transition document. However, a careful reading of the treaty provisions suggests that this is not a 22-year transition agreement-it is a 30month transfer of title. Thirty months is entirely too short a period to avoid serious disruption in the lives of Americans and their dependents who live and work in the Canal Zone. In order to prevent confusion, disruption, and a massive exodus of Americans now residing in the Canal Zone, it is important to extend the transition period for a more orderly transfer of authority. As things now stand, the treaty returns full jurisdiction over the Canal Zone to Panama as soon as the treaty enters into force, and it transfers all U.S. judicial, administrative, and regulatory authority to Panama 30 months later. After that, American citizens will be subject to Panamanian law, and subject to Panamanian civil and criminal justice as well. More specifically, article XI provides the following: Effective immediately, Panama assumes full plenary jurisdiction over the entire Panama Canal Zone, and Panamanian courts assume jurisdiction over all new civil cases of a private nature involving American citizens. Only 30 months later, at the end of the so-called "transition period," Panamanian courts will assume jurisdiction over all criminal cases involving American citizens; the United States will withdraw all its police forces and lose all police authority in the former Canal Zone; and the U.S. court system will cease to function. American laws, regulations, and administrative authority will no longer be enforced. All this occurs, despite the fact that the United States retains the right to use certain designated areas and installations within the former Canal Zone until the year 2000. I question just how effective our rights of "use" will be for the remaining 20 years, after our laws and administrative authority end in 30 months. UNFAIR TO AMERICAN EMPLOYEES Mr. President, I believe the question is, does this constitute "orderly transition"? I do not know of many Americans who are willing to subject themselves to the justice and authority of the Panamanian National Guard. This provision will literally drive Americans out of Panama. If article XI remains unchanged, I believe we will see a mass exodus of U.S. engineers, pilots, and other canal personnel within the next 21⁄2 years. |