S6230 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE May 8, 1995

three Justices—Justice Souter, Justice

O’Connor, and Justice Anthony Kennedy, all nominated by Republican

Presidents.

So it seemed to me curious, to say

the least, that there should be a call

for his defeat because he had performed

abortions, a medical procedure authorized by the Constitution of the United

States.

Then issues were cited about character, about what representations Dr.

Foster had made as to how many abortions he had performed. It then came

to light that there had been an indication from the White House about some

misinformation. Then other issues

arose in a variety of contexts.

I believe that the hearings last week

have laid all of those issues to rest. Dr.

Foster was a compelling witness, a

forceful witness on his own behalf and

he answered all of the outstanding

questions, so that there is no doubt

about his good character or about his

excellent service as a physician, or

about his care for the poor and downtrodden, and about his excellent work

as a doctor over many years.

I had occasion to meet personally

with Dr. Foster and discuss at some

length his own background and the issues which had been raised about him.

It seemed to me at that time at that

meeting, which was in early February,

that his nomination certainly ought to

go forward. I did not state at that time

support for his nomination because it

seemed appropriate to me that we

await the hearings by the committee

to see what would occur at that time.

After reviewing the hearings and what

occurred at the hearings, today I am

confident that Dr. Foster ought to be

confirmed as Surgeon General of the

United States and, therefore, announce

my intention to vote for him.

I was encouraged to see the media reports that our distinguished majority

leader will meet with Dr. Foster, and I

am hopeful that that meeting will

produce a result that Dr. Foster’s nomination will come to the floor.

I note the comments of the distinguished chairman of the committee,

Senator KASSEBAUM, that Dr. Foster’s

nomination ought to come to the floor

and ought to be voted upon, although I

do not believe at this stage that Senator KASSEBAUM has stated whether

her intention is to vote ‘‘aye’’ or ‘‘nay’’

on the nomination itself.

I am hopeful that there will not be a

filibuster, as has been mentioned, on

Dr. Foster. Any Senator has the right

to handle that in any way that any

Senator pleases, and any Senator has a

right, as I now express my right to say

that I hope that we will not be confronted by a filibuster.

But if we are, Mr. President, it is my

sense of the Senate—and this is only

one Senator speaking—that a filibuster

will be defeated and that even Senators

who think that Dr. Foster ought not to

be confirmed as Surgeon General of the

United States will not support a filibuster; that as a matter of fairness to

Dr. Foster, he ought to get his day in

court, his day in the Senate for a ‘‘yes’’

or ‘‘no’’ vote; and that he ought not to

have been railroaded out of town, as

some have suggested, even without a

hearing before the committee; and that

he ought not to be railroaded out of

town without the matter coming to the

floor of the U.S. Senate; and that he

ought not to be railroaded, or have his

fate decided, without having the Senators vote ‘‘yes’’ or ‘‘no’’ on his confirmation.

So I am pleased to be in a position

today, Mr. President, to say what I

sensed when I met with Dr. Foster in

early February, that he is truly a man

who merits being confirmed as Surgeon

General of the United States.

I think that it is time that we put to

rest the issue of what is the law of the

land of the United States of America

with respect to a woman’s right to

choose. I personally am very much opposed to abortion, but I do not believe

that it is a matter that can be controlled by the Government. I believe it

is a matter for the woman’s choice, it

is a matter for the family, it is a matter for priests, rabbis, and ministers,

and it is not to be determined by the

Government of the United States.

When we have decisions of the Supreme

Court separated from 1992 back to 1973

and the law of the land stated in Casey

v. Planned Parenthood, a decision written by three Justices for a majority of

the Court, Justices appointed by Presidents Reagan and Bush, that that is

the law of the land, we ought not to reject a nominee because he is performing medical procedures which are authorized by the Constitution.

I think it is time that the Senate of

the United States faced up to that

proposition squarely. I hope it will be

done by having the nomination reported to the Senate floor and by having an up-or-down vote. I intend to

vote ‘‘aye,’’ and it is my prediction

that Dr. Foster will be confirmed.

I thank the Chair and yield the floor.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN addressed the

Chair.

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the

Senator from California is recognized

to speak up to 15 minutes.

A LOOK BACK AND A LOOK

fFORWARD

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Thank you very

much, Mr. President.

Mr. President, today, May 8, is V–E

Day, which stands for Victory in Europe, and it marks the end of one front

of the most disastrous event in modern

human history.

The war in Europe was one in which

50 million civilians and military personnel alike died. It was not only a

war, but a major crime against humanity.

Two out of three Jews in Europe were

scientifically exterminated—a total of

6 million—along with 5 million other

victims. In the Soviet Union, 27 million

people lost their lives. I visited Leningrad where you see 25,000 people in one

mass grave, and these are plot after

plot after plot. No country lost as

much as did the people of the former

Soviet Union.

The war spread death across six of

the seven continents and all over the

world’s oceans. In the end, much of the

heart of Western civilization lay in

ruins.

Sixteen million one hundred twelve

thousand Americans served in the U.S.

Armed Forces during World War II, and

they knew the ravages of war. Of these,

more than 1 million were Californians;

408,000 Americans never came home. To

these Californians and these Americans, I want to say you have my deepest respect, and I know I join with all

of my Senate colleagues in saying

thank you.

For me, I was one of the lucky ones:

I was 11 years old, a girl, living in a

flat in the Marina District of San Francisco. I remember the blackout shades,

the submarine nets under the Golden

Gate Bridge, troops shipping out from

Fort Mason 6 blocks from my home and

the Nike gun emplacements on the marina headlands and in the Presidio. As

a lucky one in the land of the free and

the home of the brave, for me there

was no Auschwitz or Bergen-Belsen.

V–E Day represents a victory over

fascism, paranoia and the most devastating war in history, all sparked

and guided by one man. Probably the

most infamous demagog the world has

ever seen, Hitler was described by one

of his early associates, Otto Stresser,

as a speaker ‘‘who touches each private

wound on the raw, liberating the unconscious, exposing its innermost aspirations, telling it most what it wants

to hear.’’

Jews and Slavs were referred to as

‘‘untermenschen,’’ subhumans. Moscow, Leningrad, and Warsaw were hard

hit, their industries left in ruins.

In ‘‘Mein Kampf,’’ Hitler described

what history has shown to be correct.

He said:

The masses more readily fall victim to the

big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies * * * it would

never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe

that others have the impudence to distort

the truth so infamously.

Millions, indeed, did fall victim to

the big lie. Fanatical in his quest for

personal power, Hitler withdrew Germany from the League of Nations,

aproclaiming that the European powers

will ‘‘never act * * * they’ll just protest * * * and they will always be too

late.’’

In fact, the West’s hesitance in the

face of this evil has sullied the word

‘‘appeasement’’ for all time.

By 1943, Hitler held the power of life

and death over 80 million Germans and

more than twice that number of vanquished people.

After Hitler took his own life on

April 30, 1945, and the end of the war
May 8, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S6231

was in sight, devoted followers professed their determination to continue.

A Nazi-controlled newspaper said at

the time:

The heart which beat only for us, the will

which blazed only for us, the creative genius

which thought and acted only for us, the

voice which so often galvanized us—all this

no longer exists! However low fate has

brought events, Hitler’s achievements will

illuminate, far into the distant future, the

epoch which began with him.

Now, 50 years later, these words offer

an ominous warning. Modern-day paranoia, built upon elaborate conspiracy

theories and fears, I am sorry to say, is

still very much alive today.

For several years, we have seen an

escalation in fundamentalist-inspired

killings in Egypt and Algeria, the rise

of neo-Nazism in Germany, nationalistic fervor in former Communist States,

severe anti-immigrant backlash in

France, and poison gas attacks in

Japan.

The rise of fanaticism and the terrorism it spawns is ever increasing right

here in the United States as well.

I think no event embodies this more

than the Oklahoma City bombing.

Whatever the final outcome of the investigation into the bombing, a new—

and, I believe eye-opening—look at the

growing trend of extremism is taking

place across the world.

In this country, so-called militias are

growing in numbers, stockpiling vast

arsenals, preaching hate and violence

against this Government.

Here are some examples:

The Federal Emergency Management

Agency has orders for Hispanics and

African-Americans to be ‘‘rounded up

and detained’’ in the event of a State of

domestic national emergency.

That is false.

They say tax protesters, demonstrators against Government military

intervention outside United States borders, and people who maintain weapons

in their homes are the next targets.

That is false.

They say that FEMA advocates ‘‘the

rounding up and transfer to ‘assembly

centers or relocation camps’ of at least

21 million American Negroes.’’

That is false.

They say there are black helicopters

with no markings spying on citizens.

They say police officers were met by

‘‘armed men in black uniforms,’’ reportedly from the Federal Government.

That is false.

They say U.N. troops are training to

suppress America’s people.

That is false.

They say Somalia was simply a practice run for occupying the United

States.

That is false.

They point out that Russian trucks

and personnel carriers are being imported as well as ‘‘100-car trains filled

with United Nations equipment.’’

That is false.

They even say that Crips and

Bloods—gangs that dominate some

urban areas—are being trained to serve

as something called ‘‘shock troops’’

and ‘‘cannon fodder’’ for house-tohouse searches conducted by ‘‘New

World Order officers.’’

That is false.

So theories about black helicopters,

modern day concentration camps, and

mass raids abound, we find, throughout

this land of the free and home of the

brave. Even on Internet, this system is

used to spread conspiracy theories

across our land. Even a terrorist handbook is run on the Internet on how to

build a bomb. I read this handbook, and

they tell you how to break into university chemical labs, how to find the

chemicals you need, and how to steal

those chemicals.

Finally, we see neo-Nazism, even

signs popping up here and there saying

‘‘whites only,’’ and on and on and on.

One must ask the question on this

very special day: Will the threats, the

fear mongering, and the paranoia eventually fuel major bloodshed? Was it responsible for encouraging the terrible

Oklahoma City bombing?

Two years ago, militia members

warned about U.N. troops poised along

the United States-Canadian border,

ready for invasion. Thirty years ago,

the John Birch Society warned of Chinese troops in box cars along the Mexican border. Fifty years ago, the most

deadly of all wars ended.

History can teach us lessons if we

want to learn. Or we can be doomed to

repeat history time and time again.

We all pray that the Oklahoma City

bombing is a one-time-only event.

Yet, as a country, this is a time for

us to come together, to heal, to begin

anew, to straighten with truth vicious

lies, to look for what unites us and

strengthens us as a people, an American people, to strengthen these bonds,

rather than to seek what divides us.

The wounds of the past can guide us

in the future. We simply need the determination and the political will to

fight the fear and the paranoia that is

still so strong in our society.

V–E Day is a chance to celebrate the

conclusion of one of the darkest eras in

our history. It is a chance to say thank

you to those who gave their lives so

that we might remain a free people.

Let us use this day to also look deeply at America as it exists today. There

is a great deal of work to do to sort it

out, to pull this country together before fear and intolerance rips us apart.

It is with the loving memory of the

millions and millions of victims of

World War II—and the hundreds of victims of the Oklahoma bombing—that I

make these remarks today. And I give

thanks to those who fought and died in

Europe so that we may know freedom.

I thank the Chair and yield the floor.

Mr. GRAMS addressed the Chair.

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Minnesota [Mr.

GRAMS], is recognized.

PRODUCT LIABILITY

Mr. GRAMS. Mr. President, for the

last 2 weeks we have had a serious debate over our Nation’s broken liability

system.

We have heard stores from supporters

of the plaintiff’s bar who claim that

manufacturers are putting products on

the market with little regard for

consumer safety.

And we have also heard from supporters of manufacturers who have anecdotes of honest individuals who were

sued for multimillion-dollar awards

and settled out of court to avoid more

costly legal fees, even when they were

innocent.

Later today or tomorrow, there will

be an effort by supporters of product liability reform to end debate, but before

we do that, I wanted to make sure this

body heard comments from a few of my

constituents

An all-too-familiar story from America’s small businesses is exemplified in

a letter from Trade Mart Furniture’s

Jerry Johnson, a constituent from

Rochester, MN.

Jerry writes:

I’ve experienced firsthand the effects of a

frivolous lawsuit. After two years of court

appearances, legal fees and countless hours, I

won. It cost almost $10,000 to defend myself.

I thought the legal system was created to

protect the citizen, not the profiteer.

Ann Hartman of Hartman Tree

Farms in Victoria, MN, states, ‘‘I am

tired of seeing lawyers make so much

money off the tragedies of others.’’

And a couple from Menahga, MN,

who own Burkel Turkey Farms writes:

The system now is a free-for-all for the

money-hungry and the lawyers. There are far

too many people out there that feel the system owes them something.

We are at the mercy of dishonest people

who are only out for a buck. It’s different if

a person has a legitimate claim, but something must be done to maintain a fair legal

system for the honest people of this world.

Mr. President, these are just a few of

the comments I have received throughout my tenure as a representative from

Minnesota, and as a small businessman

myself, I understand the effects of the

threat of a potential lawsuit.

The fact is that almost 90 percent of

all U.S. companies can expect to be

named in a product liability lawsuit.

The present liability system costs

Americans $300 billion a year and like

most Americans, my Minnesota constituents are concerned about the devastating effects the liability system

has on them.

Recent polls continue to show strong

support for liability reform: 83 percent

believe the present liability system has

problems and should be improved,

while 89 percent believe that ‘‘too

many lawsuits are being filed in America today.’’

Our current system benefits the lawyers and the dishonest. It treats both

plaintiffs and defendants unfairly. Inconsistent laws force both sides to sacrifice time and money on unpredictable