May 11, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — Extensions of Remarks E 1009

whose descendants today are ever vigilante in

their reminding the world never to repeat

crimes of this magnitude again.

For too long, people have ignored or forgotten this unimaginable atrocity. The time has

come for the United States, and people everywhere, to remember and honor the victims of

this brutal crime against humanity. It is imperative that we all remember the incredible inhumanity of which people are capable, for to remember is to be vigilant. And vigilance is the

only way we can ever keep such atrocities

from reoccurring. Through these efforts we

can promote peace and goodwill among all

nations and cultures. We must, for if not all

that we consider humanity will be lost.

CUTS ENDANGER OUR ELDERLY

fHON. RONALD D. COLEMAN OF TEXAS

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Thursday, May 11, 1995

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, the Republican party is certainly full of contradictions. Six

months after signing a ‘‘Contract With America’’ that included a platform promising fairness for senior citizens, they propose a budget that will harm the poorest and the least

healthy of our Nation’s older population. The

House Republican budget outlines cutting

Medicare funding by $270 billion over the next

7 years. In the same period of time, they propose that we abdicate responsibility for the

Medicaid to the States, while decreasing the

funding by $184 billion. In order to justify their

cuts, they are insisting that without reform, the

Medicare Program will be bankrupt by the

year 2002.

Frankly, their new position makes very little

sense. After all, nothing is being done to actually reform the system. Capping Medicare

spending is not reform. Last year, President

Clinton and the Democratic leaders in Congress struggled to reform the whole health

care system, and to prevent the very crisis in

Medicare that the Republicans decry today.

Republicans refused to assist in the health

care debate, and preferred partisan sniping.

They were hiding their heads in the sand.

They were all too eager to criticize the Democratic reform that would have applied small

Medicare savings to comprehensive health

care reform.

This year, we hear nothing of comprehensive reform. We are moving no closer to universal and affordable coverage. There are no

genuine efforts to make our health care system more effective and more affordable. But

the Republicans are talking about Medicare

and Medicaid cuts. The cuts that they are proposing will not go toward saving Medicare, or

ensuring universal coverage, but toward tax

breaks to the wealthy.

The Republican party, which proudly authored a bill entitled the ‘‘Senior Citizens Fairness Act’’ now proposes to take a hit and the

poor and the sick elderly, without putting one

penny back into their health care. They are offering us all the pain of cuts, without the benefits of reform. Cuts like these are misguided,

and should not be tolerated. Many people who

have made tremendous contributions to this

Nation, people in the twilight of their life, will

suffer as a result of this budget.

SUPERFUND LIABILITY

ALLOCATION ACT OF 1995, H.R. 1616

HON. FRED UPTON OF MICHIGAN

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Thursday, May 11, 1995

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, if ever a Federal

program needed reform, it is the Superfund

Program. It was first created in 1980 under the

Comprehensive Environmental Response,

Compensation & Liability Act [CERCLA]. It

was changed and reauthorized in 1986 under

the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act [SARA]. It was supposed to be reauthorized in the last Congress and committees

in the House and in the other body reported

comprehensive reform bills, but this effort fell

short in the final days of the session.

At the center of the Superfund Program are

liability provisions arguably more draconian

than found in any other Federal statute.

Superfund liability is retroactive, meaning that

potentially responsible parties can be held liable for lawful actions taken before enactment

of CERCLA or SARA. Superfund liability is

also strict, meaning that there is no need to

prove negligence to establish liability. It is also

joint and several, meaning that a party or parties that contributed small amounts of contamination to a contaminated site can be held liable for all cleanup expenses.

With Superfund site cleanups now averaging $30 million, the incentive to avoid any liability at any cost is strong. Small wonder that

Superfund has launched a tidal wave of litigation. At least $1 in $4 spent on Superfund

cleanups is spent on lawyers and the consultants needed to support lawyers in litigation to

avoid Superfund liability or to transfer liability

to other parties via so-called contribution suits.

In my district, one of these contribution suits

eventually involved more than 700 firms and

organizations. More recently, a firm that had

negotiated a cleanup plan costing nearly $20

million with EPA turned around and filed contribution suits against three dozen local firms.

More important than the moneys involved,

these Superfund-driven suits have divided

whole communities and created resentment

that will last for years. This can’t be what Congress wanted to happen when the program

was created.

In response to these unpleasant realities, I

am today joining the gentleman from Virginia

[Mr. BOUCHER], in introducing the Liability Allocation Act of 1995. Mr. BOUCHER and I first addressed these issues in November 1993 in the

Superfund Liability Reform Act (H.R. 3624).

After negotiations with the administration and

other Superfund stakeholders, we introduced a

revised version of H.R. 3624 as H.R. 4351,

also entitled the Superfund Liability Allocation

Act. This latter measure became section 412

of H.R. 3800, as reported by the then Committee on Energy and Commerce, and section

413 of the same bill as reported by the then

Committee on Public Works and Transportation. As I mentioned earlier, H.R. 3800 was

not considered by the House prior to adjournment in 1994.

This legislation would create an entirely new

system of liability under Superfund, one based

upon proportionality and the allocation of liability shares among potentially responsible parties. It places a moratorium on the commencement of cost recovery and contribution suits

for cleanup costs until the allocation process is

concluded and a stay on all existing cost recovery and contribution litigation. Each party’s

liability would be calculated in expedited manner; parties will pay only their equitable share

of the cleanup costs, those clearly related to

their respective roles at the site and to the

amount of waste they actually contribute; finally, the expedited process for assigning liability and the limited court review of that

process should significantly decrease transaction costs for all parties at Superfund sites.

The new system established under this bill

would operate as follows:

First, after a site is listed on Superfund’s

National Priority List, EPA notifies all parties at

the site that they are required to participate in

the liability allocation process.

Second, the parties choose from an EPAapproved list of private allocators to conduct

the allocation.

Third, EPA and any of the parties may

nominate additional parties to be included in

the process or may excuse parties from the

process.

Fourth, EPA is able to provide expedited

settlements to ‘‘de minimis’’ and ‘‘de micromis’’

parties to enable such parties to avoid having

to participate in the 18-month allocation process, satisfying small business’ major concern.

Fifth, the allocator is armed with the necessary information-gathering powers, including

subpoena power, and is able to enforce such

powers with the backing of the Justice Department. Parties who do not cooperate in providing information are subject to stiff civil and

criminal penalties.

Sixth, each party is given the opportunity to

be heard, including submitting an initial statement and commenting on the draft allocation

report before the final report is issued.

Seventh, after considering the ‘‘Gore Factors’’—including the party’s role at the site and

the toxicity and volume of material—the allocator issues a report identifying each party’s

share of liability for the cleanup costs at the

site.

Eighth, each party may settle with the EPA

based on its allocated share. As consideration,

the party is shielded from joint and several liability and from actions for contribution from

other parties. Any party who rejects its allocated share will be exposed to joint and several liability and remains unprotected from

contribution suits. Although the allocation is

nonbinding as to the parties, the exposure to

joint and several liability serves as a disincentive to reject the allocated share.

Ninth, the Government is bound by the allocation unless there is proof of bias, fraud or

unlawful conduct on the allocator’s part or if

‘‘no rational interpretation of the facts before

the allocator, in light of the factors he is required to consider, would form a reasonable

basis’’ for the allocation. The Government only

has 180 days during which such review can

occur, after which the right to reject the allocation is waived.

Tenth, the orphan share—for defunct and

insolvent parties—is paid out of the

Superfund.

Eleventh, the Government reimburses parties who pay for the cleanup for amounts

spent beyond their allocated shares. The Government also pursues recalcitrant parties who

fail to pay their allocated shares.

Mr. Speaker, many interests worked together in developing this legislation. If the
E 1010 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — Extensions of Remarks May 11, 1995

adage that success has many fathers while

failure is an orphan is accurate, than the father of this excellent proposal is my cosponsor

and learned friend from Virginia, Mr. BOUCHER.

We have cosponsored several bills in the past

and each of these bills has done well in the

legislative process. It is a pleasure to join him

again in offering this legislation.

We urge every member of this House to join

us in cosponsoring H.R. 1616, the Superfund

Liability Allocation Act of 1995, and ask that

they call David Luken of my staff (ext. 53761)

or Andrew Wright of Mr. Boucher’s staff (ext.

53861) to do so.

RABBI AND REBBETZEN RYBAK

fHONORED

HON. WILLIAM J. MARTINI OF NEW JERSEY

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Thursday, May 11, 1995

Mr. MARTINI. Mr. Speaker, on Sunday

night, May 14, 1995, Rabbi Dr. Solomon

Rybak and Rebbetzen Dr. Shoshana Rybak

will observe the completion of 10 years affiliation with the congregation and service to the

Passaic and Clifton communities at Congregation Adas Israel in Passaic, New Jersey. I congratulate them and wish them all the best as

they celebrate this truly special occasion.

Rabbi and Rebbetzen Rybak have been

recognized as exceptional personalities in the

Passaic-Clifton area as well as in the larger

metropolitan New York-New Jersey educational community. Both have attained significant achievements in furthering Jewish education and values. Upon completing his studies at Yeshiva University and receiving rabbinical ordination from the late, renowned

torah giant Rabbi Dr. Joseph Soleveitchik,

Rabbi Rybak served as Rabbi Soleveitchik’s

research assistant in the Rogosin Institute of

Ethics. Rabbi Rybak was appointed by Dr.

Samuel Belkin, President of Yeshiva University, to the position of Rosh Yeshiva at the Yeshiva University High School and held that position for 27 years. Rabbi Rybak earned his

Ph.D. in Semitic languages from the Bernard

Revel Graduate School of Yeshiva University

and has lectured and published on educational

and Halachic topics. In addition to his duties

as spiritual leader of Congregation Adas Israel, Rabbi Rybak is a Professor of Jewish

Studies at Touro college, serves as the editor

of CHAVRUSA, the professional publication of

the Yeshiva University Rabbinical Alumni and

is a member of the executive board of the

Rabbinical Council of America.

Equally accomplished, Rebbetzen Rybak

has balanced the dual role of a Rebbetzin and

a professional in her daily routine. Rebbetzen

Rybak was educated in both Israel and in New

York and holds a Jewish Teacher’s Diploma

from Beth Jacob Seminary and a Doctorate in

school and clinical psychology from Pace University. Rebbetzin Rybak has been involved in

many of the congregation’s programs, concentrating on the youth Yom Tov celebrations

and the congregation’s Simchat Torah, Purim,

and Yom Haatzmaut festivals. As a therapist

and licensed psychologist, Dr. Rybak has

been involved with several groups of exceptional children including the handicapped, the

developmentally disabled and the gifted. She

is currently the clinical coordinator at the Hebrew Academy for Special Children [HASC] in

Brooklyn and is a member of several professional organizations including the American

Psychological Association, the National Association of School Psychologists, and the Council for Exceptional Children.

Upon their arrival in Passaic in 1984, Rabbi

and Rebbetzen Rybak found a diversified

community representing the full spectrum of

modern Jewish society. In a quiet and unassuming manner Rabbi and Rebbetzen Rybak

began actively participating in the ongoing revitalization of the Passaic-Clifton community.

The contributions of Rabbi and Rebbetzen

Rybak over the past 10 years have been instrumental in continuing to make Passaic and

Clifton attractive to young Jewish couples

looking for a vibrant area in which to establish

their home. Their dedication to community

service and education serves as a role model

and inspiration to all. I salute these two fine individuals, and can only say that I am proud to

call them members of the Eighth Congressional District of New Jersey.

COAST GUARD AUTHORIZATION

ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1996

fSPEECH OF

HON. C.W. BILL YOUNG OF FLORIDA

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Tuesday, May 9, 1995

The House in Committee of the Whole

House on the State of the Union had under

consideration the bill (H.R. 1361) to authorize

appropriations for fiscal year 1996 for the

Coast Guard, and for other purposes:

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I rise

in strong support of H.R. 1361, the Coast

Guard Authorization Act.

The men and women of the Coast Guard

are life savers, they protect our national security, they fight crime, and they protect our environment.

The people of Florida have a special appreciation for the work of the Coast Guard. As the

chairman of the Florida congressional delegation, I in particular pay tribute to the 7th District which serves Florida, the busiest Coast

Guard district in our Nation.

It is a privilege for me to represent Pinellas

County, FL, which is home to three Coast

Guard stations including Group St. Petersburg,

which is responsible for protecting Florida’s

west coast down through the Carribbean, the

Clearwater Air Station, the largest Coast

Guard Air Station in the United States, and the

Sand Key Station, which responds regularly to

emergencies at sea and in our inland waters.

Because the Coast Guard has consistently

responded to untraditional challenges to our

Nation with determination, creativity, and effectiveness, the Congress has seen fit year

after year to add to its long list of multifaceted

responsibilities. In the early 1980’s, when the

flow of illegal narcotics through the Carribbean

threatened the nationality security of the United States, the U.S. Coast Guard was charged

with slamming the door on this drug trade.

The vigilance with which the Coast Guard undertook this mission forced drug smugglers to

abandon Florida as a primary point of entry

into the United States. Those who persist in

trying to bring drugs into our Nation through

Florida have been met with the firm response,

such as last year when the St. Petersburg

based Coast Guard Cutter Point Countess

intercepted the freighter Inge Frank near the

Sunshine Skyway bridge at the entrance to

Tampa Bay, escorted it to its mooring, and

joined the DEA and Customs Service in a raid

that seized more than 6,000 pounds of cocaine, preventing $272 million in illegal drugs

from reaching our streets.

Most recently, when our Nation was faced

with an exodus of tens of thousands of Cuban

and Haitian refugees, the Coast Guard responded. The 7th District rescued more than

23,000 Haitians at sea in unsafe vessels last

Spring, and expanded its operations last Summer, pulling more than 35,000 Cubans from

the waters of the Florida Straits. Aircraft from

the Clearwater Air Station flew 3,200 flying

hours in support of these missions, and delivered over 600 tons of cargo to the U.S. forces

implementing our immigration policies on

shore.

It is the Coast Guard which is responsible

for enforcing all United States laws at sea,

whether they be immigration, narcotics, environmental, fishery, or safety-related.

It is the Coast Guard which is responsible

for its well known search and rescue missions

at sea. This mission not only saves lives just

about every day of the year, but also saves

significant amount of public and private property. Recently the Florida pilot of a small plane

learned this lesson the hard way, when, far

from land, he radioed a mayday, saying he

had only 15 minutes of fuel left. His plane hit

the water 70 miles west of Tampa Bay, and

sank within 60 seconds. A nearby Coast

Guard Falcon Fanjet used direction-finding

equipment to locate the plane, witnessed it hit

the water, and dropped a life-raft and emergency locating transmitter which enabled the

pilot to be rescued later. Similar air rescues

have saved 188 lives off the coasts of Florida

alone since last April, and will continue to provide Americans with a level of safety at sea.

It is also the Coast Guard which is responsible for the less glamorous, but vitally important responsibility of maintaining vital aids to

navigation that keep ships and boats out of

jeopardy. Though some take channel markers,

ocean buoys, loran stations, and other necessary navigational aids for granted, they are

the critical signposts that allow for the safe

passage of boaters on our waterways.

The Coast Guard receives invaluable help in

fulfilling many of these diverse responsibilities

from the volunteers of the Coast Guard Auxiliary. The 572 active members of Auxiliary Division 8, who provide support to Group St. Petersburg, make up the largest auxiliary unit in

the Nation. Auxiliary members are very active

in educating the public about boating safety issues, providing free boating safety classes

and dockside courtesy marine examinations.

Last year alone, in addition to training 1,330

students and conducting 8,104 courtesy marine examinations, Division 8 also conducted

1,364 support missions, logged over 14,607

underway hours, saved five lives, assisted 393

boaters, and saved more than $2.6 million in

property.

Mr. Speaker, perhaps the least known and

understood of the Coast Guard’s mission is

one for which I have funding and oversight responsibility: defense readiness. When activated by the President, the Coast Guard assists the U.S. Navy in time of conflict, guarding the foreign and domestic ports we use to