April 27, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S5749

State of Washington as a U.S. Senator,

but also dedicate a lot of energy, caring, and love as a parent to my son and

daughter.

Today is an important day in America. Across this Nation, parents are

taking their daughters and other

young women to work. They are helping to broaden young women’s horizons, to show them the range of options available to them in the future.

I hope this day is a day when young

women everywhere recognize that if

they work hard and believe in themselves, they can be whoever they want

to be. I am a U.S. Senator today because I learned to face tough challenges with courage, to take risks, not

to be afraid to try, and to always

dream the impossible.

Finally, I would like daughters

across this Nation to remember a lesson I was taught early on: When others

say you can not make a difference,

they are usually just afraid you will.

Thank you, Mr. President.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, tomorTRIBUTE TO DAVID JOLLY

frow, in Missoula, MT, a man who has

done a great service for our Nation’s

national forests will be honored by his

friends, family, and colleagues. David

Jolly, the Regional Forester for the

U.S. Forest Service’s northern region,

is retiring after almost 34 years of public service.

Dave’s career in the forestry and natural resources field has been long and

distinguished. His work has taken him

around the country where he has lived

in eight States and in Washington, DC.

Dave was born in Knoxville, TN. He

grew up in a small town called Norris,

TN, where his father worked as an

economist for the Tennessee Valley

Authority’s Forestry Department

headquarters. In this environment,

Dave developed a great passion for forestry as a young boy. He completed a

pre-forestry program at the University

of Tennessee then went on to receive a

degree from North Carolina State in

forestry in 1961. During his college

years, Dave served his country in the

U.S. Naval Reserve.

Dave began his forestry career in the

summer of 1961 working as a research

aid for the Weyerhauser Co. in

Centralia, WA. Later that same year,

he got his first job with the U.S. Forest

Service as a forester on the Francis

Marion National Forest in South Carolina. From there, his career took off as

he went on to become district ranger

on the Ouachita National Forest in Arkansas, then deputy forest supervisor

on the Ozark and St. Francis National

Forests in Arkansas.

In 1972, he furthered his education in

public policy at the University of

Washington, then went on to work in

the Forest Service’s southern regional

office in Atlanta. In 1976, he became

forest supervisor of the Shawnee National Forest in Illinois. In 1982, he became deputy director of the Forest

Service’s Timber Management Program in Washington, DC. From there

his career continued to flourish as he

became deputy regional forester, then

regional forester, of the agency’s

southwestern region overseeing the National Forests in Arizona and New

Mexico. In 1992, I am proud to say, he

came to Montana to oversee the northern region. This was no easy task managing such a vast region of forests and

rangeland in Montana and Idaho but

Dave did an exemplary job.

I personally came to gain a deep respect for Dave when the Department of

Agriculture last year announced its intention to close region 1. Dave played

no part in this misguided decision.

And, personally, I suspect he shares my

view that region 1 should remain open.

Yet Dave is a professional. He has

never let his personal views be known.

But he has done a first-rate job of communicating with me, region 1’s employees, and the people of Montana. He has

heard our concerns. He has provided

the best information possible. In short,

Dave Jolly is a class act.

I understand that Dave and his wife

Peggy share a love of Montana and the

great outdoors. I am pleased to hear

that they plan to stay in Montana for

awhile. Dave plans to do a lot of fishing

in his retirement—what better place

than Montana? I am sure than in between fishing trips, Dave will maintain

his lifelong interest in forestry. He is a

member of the Society of American

Foresters, Rotary International, and

the Society for Range Management. I

wish Dave and his family much happiness in the coming years.

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, this week

CRIME VICTIMS’ RIGHTS

fis Crime Victims’ Rights Week. It was

so designated by the President long before the devastating events in Oklahoma City last Wednesday. Our hearts

go out to the families and victims of

that terrible criminal act.

I know that the Attorney General

and entire Federal, State, local, and

international law enforcement community are dedicated to bringing those responsible for this heinous act to justice.

I rise today to commend those who

are working so hard on behalf of all

crime victims in crime victims’ assistance and compensation programs.

Over the last 15 years we have made

strides in recognizing crime victims’

rights and providing much needed assistance. I am proud to have played a

role in passage of the Victims and Witness Protection Act of 1982, the Victims of Crime Act of 1984, and the Victims’ Rights and Restitution Act of

1990 and the other improvements we

have been able to make.

Indeed, only last year, in the Violent

Crime Control Act of 1994, Congress

acted to make tens of millions of dollars available to crime victims. No

amount of money can make up for the

harm and trauma of being the victim of

a crime, but we should do all that we

can to see that victims are assisted,

compensated, and treated with dignity

by the criminal justice system.

With this in mind, I was shocked to

find that the House-passed legislation

that would devastate funding for crime

victims’ assistance programs and funding for child advocacy centers in the

so-called Personal Responsibility Act,

H.R. 4. Among the most important advances achieved over the last few years

has been our attention to crime victims. We need to do more, not less.

The House bill would have the effect

of reversing recent progress by prohibiting the use of the crime victims fund

for victims’ assistance. That is the effect of section 371(b)(2) of the Housepassed bill. Buried in the fine print in

a section entitled ‘‘other repealers’’ is

the end of the Federal Crime Victims’

Assistance Program. That is wrong and

I strenuously oppose such efforts.

We in the Senate should use this

week, Crime Victims’ Rights Week, to

declare our opposition to the House’s

short-sighted legislation. No one

should need a reminder of how important our crime victims’ assistance programs are.

For those who do, there is the recent,

tragic examples of the bombing of the

Oklahoma City Federal building and

the gut-wrenching events that occur

all too often in all too many of our

urban and rural jurisdictions throughout the country.

Recognizing appropriate rights of

crime victims is essential to securing

dignity and a proper place in the criminal justice process for crime victims

and their families. Last year, the Violent Crime Control Act included provisions to ensure a right of allocation for

victims of crimes of violence or sexual

abuse. This is the right to be heard at

sentencing, the opportunity for the

crime victim to speak to the court either directly or through a family member or legal representative. I fully support that addition to Federal law.

Indeed, I plan to introduce a bill that

would extend that right to all Federal

crimes.

TRIBUTE TO THE VICTIMS OF

OKLAHOMA CITY BOMBING

fMrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President,

much has been said and written in the

last 8 days since the bombing in Oklahoma City. And we have all been

shocked and angered by the panoply of

images dominating our television

screens and newspapers.

One hundred and ten dead have so far

been recovered from the rubble, and

there is fear that many more lie beneath slabs of cement and twisted girders.

So many of those killed or injured

were public sector employees, and I believe we should take a moment to consider their sacrifice.

All too often, its easy to abuse those

who work in Government jobs. They

are called bureaucrats and accused of