Document Type: 
Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 
Release Decision: 
Original Classification: 
Document Page Count: 
Document Creation Date: 
December 23, 2016
Document Release Date: 
December 15, 2011
Sequence Number: 
Case Number: 
Publication Date: 
December 21, 1987
Content Type: 
PDF icon CIA-RDP89B01356R000200240003-9.pdf758.07 KB
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/12/15: CIA-RDP89BO1356R000200240003-9 ROUTING AND TRANSMITTAL SLIP STAT STAT TOt (Name. office symbol, room number. building, Agent /Post) 1. X OS Initials Osts 2. 6 s- i7 4. 5. Action File Note and Return Approval For Clearance Per Conversation N Requested For Correction Prepare Reply Circulate For Your Information See Me Comment Invests ate ature Coordination Justify I. ~~ AlO u/ G -e . Grin G? ',l d tC4 REMARKS DO NOT use this form as araa noeCORD similar rovas concurencel, disposals, FROM: (Name, org. symbol, Agency/Post) OPTIONAL FORM 41 (Rev. 7.76) hNeribN asu FPMR (41 CFR)101.11.ZW Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/12/15: CIA-RDP89BO1356R000200240003-9 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/12/15: CIA-RDP89BO1356R000200240003-9 - _S 1$6 4: QONGRESSIONAL RECORD- SENATE Dwember.Y41987 tlmai Weather Service said NESDIS the House approved H.R.1464 without printed; and that the Presidents mes- empioyees. La fact. flight service we. dissent. I very much appreciate the ef- sage be painted is the Recroan. ciali is routinely refer the more com- forts of my colleagues on the' Public The PRESIDING) OFFICER. With. placated pilot briefings directly to Lands Subcommittee and the Energy out objection. It is so ordered. NWS employees. who also participate and Natural Resources Committee to The Presidents message is as fol-flight servift coerdiaatieg search d vista bring this measure up for Senate can. lows: sa resoue efforts. sideration prior to the end of this ses- 1dy amendment would establish eq- slon. unable. treatment for weather service As my colleagues recall, last year employees, to whom we all owe such a Congress enacted legislation to au- debt at gratitude for their oonaclen- thorize the construction of a memorial tious performance of duty. It is estl- to veterans of the Korean war. The mated that it would currently Affect memorial project lea' to be funded pri- m more than about 300 senior em- madly by private contributions and ployees, although those 300 deserve the American Battle Monuments Com- our gyp. mission was given responsibility for The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is the project. there further debate an the amend- H.R. 1434 and S. 1525 seek to make went? U not, the question Is on agree- minor modifications In the law en- Ing to the amendment of the Senator acted last year. Primarily, the bills from Tennessaee LMr. BASaaRI. would permit the American Battle The amendment (No. 1378) was Monuments Commission to earn inter- to. eat on the contributed funds, until The PREYING OFFICER. The such time as they are needed for the question is on the engrossment of the memorial project. by Investing them in amendment and third reading of the interest-bearing obligations of the bill' United States or an obligation guaran- The amendment was ordered to be teed as to principal and Interest by the engrossed, and the bill to be read a United States. To date the ABMC has third time. received $1.547 million in eontribu- The bill was read a third time. tions toward the Korean War Memori- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The al and they estimate that, absent the bill having been read the third time, authority contained in H.R. 1454 and the question is. Shall the bill pass? S. 1525, they are currently forgoing So the bill (B.R. 1948), as amended, $10,000 per month in Interest. was passed. Senator Aa imsT ono and I, and all Mr. BYRD. Mr. President. I move to who share our Interest In seeing a reconsider the vote by which the bill Korean War Memorial become a reali- was passed' ty. appreciate the efforts of every Sen- Mr. ARMSTRONG. I move to lay ator who has cooperated to expedite that motion on the table. - consideration of this measure. The motion to lay on the table was The PRESIDING OFFICER. The agreed to. KOREAN WAR VETERANS MEMORIAL CONTRIBUTIONS Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Commit- tee on Energy and Natural Resources be discharged from further consider- ation of H.R. 1454, and that the Senate proceed to its Immediate con- sideration. The PRESIDING OFFICER. With- out objection, it Is so ordered. The clerk will report. The legislative clerk read as follows: A bill (R.R. 1454) to permit certain private eontributlons for aorstrnotion of the Korean War veterans Memorial to be In- vested temporarily in Government securities until such contributed amounts are required for disbursement for the memorial. There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to the Immediate consider- ation of the bill. Mr. GLENN. Mr. President, I rise to express my support for H.R. 1454 which would authorize the Secretary of the Treasury to invest private funds contributed to the American Battle Monuments Commission (ABMCI for the construction of the Korea War Veterans Memorial in public debt se- curities. In July Senator AR*sT8oa0 and I introduced the Senate compan- ton measure. S. 1525, and In October bill is before the Senate and open to amendment. If there be no amend- ment to be offered, the question is on the third reading and passage of the bill. The bill (H.R. 1454) was ordered to a third reading, was read the third time, and passed. Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed. Mr. ARMSTRONG. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. REMOVAL OF INJUNCTION OF SECRECY-MONTREAL PROTO- COL ON SUBSTANCES THAT DEPLETE THE OZONE LAYER Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, as In ex- ecutive session. I ask unanimous con- sent that the Injunction of secrecy be removed from the Montreal protocol on substances that deplete the ozone layer-Treaty Document No. 100-10- which was transmitted to the Senate today by the President of the United States. I further ask that the treaty be con- sidered as having been read the tint time; that It be referred. with aocom- panying papers. to the Committee on Foreign Relations and ordered to be To Tilt Smuts or TS= Umensa STATES: I transmit herewith. for the advice and consent of the Senate to ratifica- tion, the Montreal Protocol on Sub. stances that Deplete the Ozone Layer. done at Montreal on September It. 1987. The report of the Department of State is also enclosed for the Informa- tion of the Senate. The Montreal Protocol provides for internationally coordinated control of ozone-depleting substances In order to protect public health and the environ- ment from potential adverse effects of depletion of stratospheric ozone. The Protocol was negotiated under the aus- pices of the United Nations Environ- mental fin, pursuant to the Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer, which was ratified by the United States In August 1986, In this historic agreement, the inter- national community undertakes coop- erative measures to protect a vital global resource. The United States played a leading role In the negotia- tion of the Protocol. United States ratification is necessary for entry Into force and effective implementation of the Protocol. Early ratification by the United States will encourage similar aciton by other nations whose partici- pation is also essential. I recommend that the Senate give early and favorable consideration to the Protocol and give Its advice and consent to ratification. RONALD RLACAN. Tam WnzTa Housa. December 21, 1987. ACTION WITH RESPECT TO CERTAIN BILLS ON CALENDAR Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate's request for a conference with respect to S. 864, S. 865, and S. 866. and the listing of S. 1174 as a bill in confer- ence. no longer be printed as part of the Senate's daily calendar. This should result in a significant saving to the taxpayers. by virtue of the fact that those several pages of the Calendar of Business will not con- tinue to have to be printed. The PRESIDING OFFICER. With- out objection. It is so ordered. COMPUTER SECURITY ACT OF 1987 Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of ILR. 145, the Computer Security Act of 1987, which is being held at the desk. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill will be stated by title. The legislative clerk read as follows: ?8 Y1GIS,n1 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/12/15: CIA-RDP89BO1356R000200240003-9 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/12/15: CIA-RDP89BO1356R000200240003-9 - JAaxmaerll, j# i WNGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 818635 afaedseds ves forrea emputer will move os a step closer to pnovidihsg that darge inoludes responsibility for H adequaft ar to Drb vi t ter Qes oftumnal Protection. uraw of Slaad . security standards In the fields of both meet-wide computer security. =A " w9- butii0mal Remarry Decimlm Directive computers and telecommanieations. viide 4or ie the ftsining in Security aertteua of lib-NERD 14S- eargned dgriflcaot Keep in mind, to the extent that erfp. parsmr wbo sae hnelved is the Memsse- responsibility for the fps comput- tolimhY Is bnm?Ved, It is essential for meat,+aeestlaa. and use at Federal eewpol, er security matters to the Depsitm it purposes of national severity that ersostens. sad isr arise Purposes. of Defame. specifically the National IISA retains Its present responsibility. The C3 O9'!wm is Security AceFICY, IBA. This arr. ge. Mr. G ENN. I have one final ques. there olJection to o the present eonaid- menu has given rise to widespread con- tion. Is it the intention of this bill eratlon of the bfl exsD about a defense sr Intelligence that, when developing security guide- There beige no objection, the senate moos bang responillity ever Pbd- lines, NSA will make every effort to proceeded to consider the bill. semi wrrrputer ajstems that contain amore that those guidelines are can. Mr. CSII.FJ Mr. president. I aaa amdefemme and n?ncssstiied informs- alert with those standards leaned by pleased to announce that fen senate tisn. To allay these concerns, this bill NB8? Quite will soon Move to adopt and pass by sponsiility bility for wirers certain eothempnter aprimarydcnie- Mr. CB LIM. Yes, that Is true. it Is unanimous . W Security c t of HJL 1997. ,. the Cwa- ft* ds EN~ National ammu of verY tl"tks p eIDt that other. rather I want to comment on the legislation The bill +egairrs that aQBB In ding than spark confusion through incon- before we do. us shall dew apvn computer The bill coaxes to us from the House system technical sea. city guiaell to r sistency. Mr. $VI MEZY. I say to the cludr. - Repreeentatiires. Duripg this Con- developed by the !rational Security man that our Judiciary mrlttee Viand last, the noun Committees Agency. Consequently. the Senate ex- on Technology and the law law has juris- OD Oo d T Operation and $0l pects that NHS will work comely with diction over the Preedorm of Inlorave- . and ch and u Tied upon this hex PISA to samure that. the fine work done ~ n Act fat~a~ security and C3ov- 1 R. Report 100-153. part 1 and 2 a that am is pat fin good use not? DO y does it and that JIM to to the aardm?r extent t tuIIjSouse passed this nlatra^ , aasmr es that eompatehr securi- Mr. I+F~IHY. That L correct. b standards that It sets we ooodstent HUMPHREY. There has been tion by voice vote on June 22 of this and compatible with computer seahai- some concern that the laaguaee of sec. Few. b guidelines developed by NSA. Lion 8(2) of the peg 4Lng bill could be let me eOO gut Congr'eassham Tints bill ahem the previoady esbt- construed to support the expansion of C3ucusesr, the sponsor of this legisla- log pa y directed assiermsent existing Governzieeht disclosure obliga- tion and my friend Cisisnsan Banos of respamsibillties in the computer se- yens- And I appreciate the Senator's for their Iesadership In bringing this ca-MY arms by making NBS the gut- willingness to work with she to addrem legislation about. asary agency responsible for sensitive these coocems. in considering this legislation here civil sector computer matters. It is im- Mr. LEARY. Concerns have also in the Senate. several senators repro- portant that it be understood that this been raised that the Computer Securi- muting points of view from the Gov- bill is not intended In any way to alter tY Act might be inigeonsti-ned to re_ erumental Affairs. Commerce, Judid- the assignment of responsibilities in strict existing Government dieeleeure Sri. and Intelligence Committees en- the area of telecommunications securi- obligations. gaged the administration to bring to- ty. - It is not the intent of this bill to gether several interests in the execu- Now Mr. President, let me turn to expand or to restrict the Federal Gov- tive branch in older to explain the Senator Gimir, the chairman of the e'nment s disclosure obligations under co seensus that exists -within the exec- Governmental Affairs Comnittee, the Freedom of Information Act with utive an this legislation- who will Pone questions to me which I respect to any category or medium of Procem As it result of partidpstIng In that will answer. information. ire-- following cPresident. I omments want the bill this time there ~aa recoatine been significant that up to Section 8 of I1.B. 145 pa: ovldes that The till see have before us-today, the aponsibdlity for computer and telec ec l m- the bill shall not be construed to &u- The thorize the withholding of any agency Computer Security Act of 1987. will m unication security vested In NSA by records or iaformat on which are dis- move us s long way toward prov hg virtue of a Presidential directive. But, closable under the Freedom of Infor- much -needed protection for the vast I would like to point out that since oration Ad. amount of data which the Arrnerican 1965, under the Brooks Act, Public At the same time, section 8 does not people entrust to the computer my*- Law 89-396, the Co mere Depart- require the disclosure of any records, terns of the Federal Government. We meat NBS has had a significant role in information, electronically stored all know that in this computer age all this area, as well. of data, software, data Processing infor- society. but especially the Federal Mr. CHILES. I thank the Senator mation, or computer programs which Government. relies on computers to for this clarification. could be withheld under the Freedom handle information of extraordinary Mr. GLENN. I also recognise that in of Information Act. Nor does the hilt impo nee-4nfor1na lcn which mud the statement of the Senator, he ex- authorise the Withholding of any be protected from unauthorized pressly states that this bill Is not In- records, Information, electronically access, manipulation, or don. tended in any way to alter the assign- stored data, software, data processing is The prntieetiasr of information stored nx-nt of current responsibilities In the information, or computer programs computers or transmitted among area of telecommunications security. which would be disclosed under the computer systems is vital. for example. Is the Senator aware that under the Freedom of Information Act. to preserving our Matiam's security, to same law-that Is, under Public Law Mr. HDMPHREY. I thank the Sena- Protecting privacy of individuals. 89-808-NH8 has responsibility for for for the clarification. Let me ad- to naintatning the integrity of finan- both computer and telecomnhunlcatlon dress a second issue that has been cull and medical tratwactlans, and to standards, and that this responsibility raised. assuring safety in our won for standards Includes responsibility U.S. commercial computer technolo. industry- Inadequate computer spa- for security standards in these areas, gy vendors have Invested heavily in re- tems security can lead to access or ma- as well? search efforts to meet the %mique se- nipulatton by hostile intelligence sere- Mr. CHILES. Yes, the law can be emits requirements of intelligence lam criminal elements, foreign coo- read that way. I am aware that NBS and defense agencies with commercial nomic conopetitors, or emu unbal- has the statutory charges to develop products. This spurs development of anted Individals, The threat is too se- and implement both computer and data security technology while ensur- rious to be Ignored. This legislation teieeomnnunication standards and that Ing that its costs do not fail principally Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/12/15: CIA-RDP89BO1356R000200240003-9 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/12/15: CIA-RDP89BO1356R000200240003-9 S-18636 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -SENATE December 21, 1987 on the Government. We are mindful our economy. . . ." The Computer Be- consult with NBe to determine how its ef- of the potential negative impact on curity Act of 1987: Hearings before the forts can beat support such requirements. technology companies, and the Gov- Subcommittee on Science, Research We believe this would avoid eosuy duplica. ernment as well, should this legisla- and Technology and the Suboommit- u?n of effort tint regimens of computer security technology-one for civilian agencies and another for Intelligence and de- fense agencies. Will this legislation adequately safeguard the commercial interests of these companies? Mr. LEAHY. The legislation does not mandate or even urge the estab- lishment of two sets of data security standards or systems. Instead, it pro- vides a framework for recognizing and reconciling the sometimes differing se- curity needs of these distinct commu- nities. Mr. President, today we are consider. ing the Computer Security Act of 1987. The House sent this bill over to the Senate on June 23. Since that time, I have been working with Sena- tors CHI as, Guam, Hold ixGS, and RoTH, Congressmen GI.IcxatAi and Baooxs. the National Security Agency, the National Bureau of Stand- ards. and the Office of Management and Budget to assure the adoption of this important legislation. This legislation will restore civilian control over all Federal computer sys- tems except those excluded under the Brooks Act (10 U.S.C. 2315) and the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3502(2)). The Computer Security Act is a significant act of Congress that re- jects the promulgation of information policy by executive fiat. The central purpose of this legisla- tion is to reject the Federal computer security plan set forth in NSDD-145. National Security Decision Directive 145 signaled a dramatic shift in the management of Government informa- tion protection from civilian authority to military authority. It has set the Government on a course that has served neither the needs of national security nor the interests of the Amer- ican people. Since the issuance of that directive we have watched a Govern- ment attempt to: Limit the availability of unclassified data in Government data bases; Place selective limits on who may access Government data bases; Intimidate private data base firms and public libraries to limit access to their electronic files-files which con- tain information published in newspa- pers everyday; Impose unnecessary restrictions on the nearly 500 U.S. firms that sell in- formation abroad. These efforts have been widely op- posed by the leaders of our informa- tion industry and those concerned with the public's right to know. The president of Mead Data Central told a Congressional hearing that "Such new restrictive and unwarranted policies under the unilateral control of the De- fense Community threaten to bring this industry to a halt and would negate the significant productivity gains being made in many sectors of Materials of the House Committee on computer standards, wfll be developed in ac- d r anot Science, Space and Technology, 100th CO with established NBS Procedures. Cong., lit Sess. 112 (1987) (statement lines this provided regard by the NSA to technical NSS WilllW security be s treat- of Jack Simpson). Counsel for dialog ed as advisory and subject to appropriate has warned that these controls could NBS review ... " H. Rep. 100-153, 100th have a devastating impact, noting that Cons., lit Sess., pt. 1, 41 (letter to Congress- "the information Industry is one of man Roe): H. Rep. 100-153, 100th Cons.. 1st the few areas of commerce in which Seas. pt. 2. at 37 (letter to Congressman the United States has a favorable bal. Brooks)- ance of trade." The Boston Globe. It Is my understanding that this con- April 20, 1987, at 35. tinues to be the administration's posi- Moreover. such efforts obstruct the tion and that the administration con- free flow of information in our society. sensus described by Senator CHnt:s in Information is the cornerstone of our his statement is consistent with Direc- democracy. As a comprehensive report tor Miller's letter. from People for the American Way re- I want to remind all those involved leased last week warns. a government in the protection of Federal computer of secrecy produces Decisions without Democracy." The Computer Security Act estab- lishes a comprehensive program for Federal computer systems security. A civilian agency-the National Bureau of Standards (NBSI-will implement that program. As H.R. 145 states in the first specific purpose outlined in section 2(bXl), the act assigns to the National Bureau of Standards respon- sibility for developing standards and guidelines for Federal computer sys- tems, including responsibility for de- veloping standards and guidelines needed to assure the cost-effective se- curity and privacy of sensitive infor- mation in Federal computer systems, drawing on the technical advice and assistance of the National Security Agency, where appropriate. The Computer Security Act assigns to NBS responsibility for developing standards and guidelines for the secu- rity of Federal computer systems. It provides for a Computer Systems Ad- visory Board to identify emerging Fed- eral computer security and privacy issues. It requires the development of security plans by the heads of all Fed- eral agencies. And it will establish a training program for all persons in- volved in Federal computer systems. These are sound and comprehensive objectives for a Federal computer se- curity policy. There is no question that properly classified information requires special- ized security measures to safeguard against unauthorized acquisition, al- teration, or destruction. That is why the Computer Security Act leaves NSA's authority over computer sys- tems containing such information un- changed. OMB Director Jim Miller has also outlined this relationship between the agencies: . it is the Administration's position that NBS, in developing Federal standards for the security of computers, shall draw upon technical security guidelines developed by NSA in so far as they are available and con- sistent with the requirements of civil de- partments and agencies to protect data processed in their systems. When devel- oping technical security guidelines, NSA will systems that we should not fall into the trap of characterizing computer system security as simply a matter of national security. This invites techno. logical xenophobia, and produces mis- guided policies and misdirected pro- grams. A recent report stated: Security experts are nearly unanimous in their view that the more significant security problem is abuse of Information systems by those authorized to use them, rather than by those trying to penetrate the systems from outside. Office of Technology Assess. ment, Federal Government Information Technology: Management, Security and Congressional Oversight 65 (1986). The report of the House Committee on Science, Space and Tehnology on H.R. 145 found that Federal computer fraud and abuse is most often conduct- ed by insiders. An extensive 1984 ABA study on computer crime and ar)other study conducted by the President's Council on Integrity and Efficiency supported this finding. A computer se- curity policy that fails to recognize this insight will impose unnecessary costs on the Government and the pri- vate sector. It will substitute high- technology fixes for solid management practices. Ultimately, such a policy would frustrate this much needed effort to enhance Federal computer system security. This country cannot afford a hemor- rhage of vital national security infor- mation. Federal computer security is critical to the cost-efficient implemen- tation of Federal programs as well as to a secure future for all Americans. As chairman of the Senate Subcom- mittee on Technology and the Law. I look forward to continuing to work the National Security Agency and the Na- tional Bureau of Standards to promote necessary, strong, and cost-effective Federal computer systems security. Access to information by our coun- try's scientists, Inventors, scholars, his- torians, journalists, and, most impor- tantly, American citizens is also vital to America's future. Interest in, and awareness of, the activities of our na- tional government instills vitality In our political process. Therefore. com- puter security legislation must be care- Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/12/15: CIA-RDP89BO1356R000200240003-9 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/12/15: CIA-RDP89BO1356R000200240003-9 December 21,1987' CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -SENATE S 18637 fully crafted so that It safeguards sys- tems without restricting seem to un- classified information. That is why I would prefer that the legislation not include the charged phrase "seasltlve information." How- ever. I have worked to ensure prompt passage of the bill because of the ur- gency of reasserting civilian control over the computer systems of the fed- eral government. I hope that the next time the Congress considers this Issue It will aviod terms that raise fears of increasing government restriction over access to unclassified information. As used in the Computer Security Act? the phrase "sensitive but unclassi- fied information" is Intended to under- score the Importance of information held in Federal computer systems, par- ticularly as it affects the conduct of Federal programs or the privacy of in- dividuals. As defined in the legislation. this term Is an explicit rejection of the broad and ambiguous phrases used In NSDD-145 and the 198$ National Telecommunications and Information Systems Security Policy No. 2. It does not create another category of re- stricted Government information. (bee H. Rcpt, 100-153, 100th Oong.. let Seas., pt. 1, at 24, 31.) Further, the Computer Security Ad states that pudic availability or use of Information shall not in any way be limited. I discussed the Freedom of In- formation Ad with the ranking minor- ity member of the Technology Sub- committee earlier today. The House Committee reports on Section 8 exam- ine other laws. (See H. Rept. 100-153. 100th Cong., 1st Seas., pt. 1, at 31. Committee on Science, Space and Technology); H. Rept. 100-153. 100th Cong., 1st Sees.. pt. A at 30-31 (Com- 8 n say that we are adopting a good piece Bureau of Standards. I have been as- guished majority feeder yield? of legislation sired by NBS that, once a system has Mr. BYRD. I yield that reflects several Mr. LFAgY. Mr. President, I concur years of congressional study. This act curit muster at NSA's Computer Se- completely in what the majority will coordinate many aspects of Feder y Center, It would not have to go leader has said I do not know what ai computer security without tram- through the NBS process for use by any of us would do without the staffs pling on the rights of its users, the ui- agencies with unclassified systems. If on both sides of the aisle. tlmate beneficiaries of all activities un- the system provides the additional I also note rag else. dertaken by this Government, Ameri- safeguarding required for classified In my State, we have certain harbin- can citizens. As we are protecting the systems, It would clearly be sufficient gers, as other States do: the robin, the security of Federal computer systems, for use by agencies with unclassified first harbinger of spring; the maples we will also safeguard the most pre- systems- changing color, the first harbinger of clous right of Americans--the opportu- So. I am pleased that agreement has fah. nity to understand and participate in been reached to clear this legislation Mr. President. I note that the distin- the activities of our Government, for the President's signature and look tuished majority leader has the one I would like to think Senators forward to its successful implements- harbinger that-all of us look for day Cxrrae, Houures, Gran``, Roar, and tion. after day at this time of the year. I Hua[rarnsr for all their help on this The PRESIDING OFFICER. The refer, of course, to that unique Item of legislation. I would also like to thank bill is open to amendment. If there be haberdashery, his sine die tie. their staff members. Bob Coakley with no amendment to be proposed. the Many of us have looked in vain for Senator Caries. Pat Windham with question Is on the third reading of the that the past few days, and now I hope Senator HOrasrrGS, Stephen Ryan with bill it is not a mirage. I hope it is not an 11- Senator [jinx. John Elliff and Ed The bill was ordered to be read a lusion. I hope that that tie, which Levine with the Senate Intelligence third time, was read the third time, comes out only on occasions such as Committee. John Parisi with Senator and passed. this, is an indication that perhaps Rom. And George Smith with Senator Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I move to there will be freedom for the Senate HIIupAmsy, for their hard work. reconsider the vote by which the bill 100. Finally. I would like to thank my was passed. 60 I say that, like the robin In the own staff. Ann Harkins and )dare Ro- Mr. ARMSTRONG. I move to lay spring and the maples in the fall, the tenberg. for their efforts to ensure that motion on the table. unique tie of the distinguished Sena- passage of the Computer Security Act The motion to lay on the table was for from West Virginia Is the harbin- at 1987. agreed to, ger of sine die-1 hope. and then again through the National Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, will the In closing, Mr. President, I want to di ti Mr. ROTIL Mr. President` I am COMPLIM 'rs TO M1l.FORITT pleased that the Senate is conddering AND MINORITY PL008 STAFFS H.R. 145, a bill that will help improve of th Mr. BYRD. Mr. President. I thank the securit I l y n e ever- cteaa n5 number of computer systems utilized by the Federal Government. The pro- visions of H.R. 143 will strengthen Federal efforts to deter computer crime and to ensure the Integrity and privacy of information stored In com- puter systems utilized by the Federal Government. The bill appropriately divides re- sponsibility for developing computer security standards between the Na- tional Bureau of Standards and the National Security Agency. NSA will provide guidelines for computer sys- tems which handle classified Informa- tion and NBS will provide guidelines for those which handle unclassified but sensitive information. One concern that was ratsed over this division of responsibility was the potential for duplication of effort. The terms of the bill seek to militate against that. and the ongoing coopera- tive efforts of NSA and WBS will be continued under the bilL Continued cooperation between NSA and NBS under the terms of this act will be helpful to the many private firms which are in the business of de- veloping computer security systems. The process of testing and validating these systems for use by the Federal Government. particularly our defense and Intelligence agencies, Is very rigor- ous and can take a long time. Some of these firms, including firms in my State of Delaware, were concerned opIewaratinottn. o take this opportunity, also, to thank our excellent floor staffs on both sides of the able. who have made It possible for the Senate to conduct its work expeditiously and very profes- sionally. Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. President, I should like to join in the majority leader's commendation of the floor staffs. It is just extraordinary. the level of responsibility and the patience and attention to detail which this handful of people on the floor demon- strates. They do the vast bulk of the routine work of the Senate. The ma- jority leader Is quite right to compli- ment them. Mr. BYRD. What we see is really a phenomenal job done by Howard and Elizabeth Greene. Charles Kinney. Marty Paone. and Bill Norton. These people work together so well, and they make our work easier. They are ex- ceedingly pleasant to work with. I earavilawnt the people an the other side of the aisle. This fine young lady, Elizabeth Greene, and her hus- band. Howard, are pleasant to work with. It makes my work a lot easier and ce ertainly moves the work of the Without their cutting the briars out of the path, the Senate would not be able to act as expeditiously and as thoroughly as it does. that they might be forced to run the THE MAJORITY LEADER'S SINE gauntlet twice: once through NSA's DIE TIE Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/12/15: CIA-RDP89BO1356R000200240003-9 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/12/15: CIA-RDP89BO1356R000200240003-9 - S18638 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE December 21, 1987 Mr. BYRD. I thank the Senator. Mr. President, I hope I am not still wearing it at this time tomorrow night. [Laughter.] I thank the distinguished Senator for his very generous comments. TRIBUTE TO BOB BERRY, READ- ING CLERK OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, Bob Berry is one of the reading clerks of the House. He delivers messages to this body often, and we all are accus- tomed to seeing his similing face as he comes in the south door of the Cham- ber. He has been the reading clerk in the House for the last 17 years. Before that. he was minority counsel to the Senate Governmental Operations Committee and legislative assistant to the late Senator Carl Mundt. I call to the attention of my col- leagues that this will be the last time that Bob Berry delivers a message to this body. [Applause.] MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE At 11:09 p.m., a message from the House of Representatives, delivered by Mr. Berry. one of its reading clerks, announced that the House agrees to the report of the committee of confer- ence on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendment of the Senate to the bill (H.R. 3545) to pro- vide for reconciliation pursuant to sec- tion 4 of the concurrent resolution on the budget for the fiscal year 1988. Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The assistant legislative clerk pro- ceeded to call the roll. Mr. CHII.F.S. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER. With- out objection, it is so ordered. The Senator from Florida is recog- nized. Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, will the distinguished Senator yield? Mr. CHILES. Yes. Mr. BYRD. Could he and his distin- guished counterpart give to the Senate some indication of the time that they believe will be required on this report so that we can notify Senators. Some Senators will need 30 to 40 minutes, probably, notice to get here for the rollcall which will occur on the adop- tion of the conference report. The CHILES. Mr. President, I think they ought to start if they are going to need that long. Mr. DOMENICI. I concur, unless someone around here wants to talk a lot longer than I. Mr. CHILES. I say they are starting late. Mr. BYRD. Very well. Mr. CHILES. I am going to take a few minutes in my remarks. OMNIBUS BUDGET RECONCILIA- TION ACT-CONFERENCE REPORT Mr. CHIMES. Mr. President, I submit a report of the committee of confer- ence of H.R. 3545 and ask for its im- mediate consideration. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The report will be stated. The assistant legislative clerk read as follows: The committee of conference on the dis- agreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendment of the Senate to the bill (H.R. 3545) to provide for reconciliation pursuant to section 4 of the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 1986. having met, after full and free conference, have agreed to recommend and do recommend to their respective Houses this report, signed by a majority of the conferees. The PRESIDING OFFICER. With- out objection, the Senate will proceed to the consideration of the conference report. (The conference report is printed in the House proceedings of the Racoan of December 21, 1987. Mr. CHILES. I ask for the yeas and nays. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? There is a sufficient second. The yeas and nays were ordered. Mr. CHILES. Mr. President, in the long fight against the Federal deficit, this has been the longest year. With the approval of this conference report, we can make it the most successful year. This is not the first time we have spent months of hard work or dealt with frustrations. But this time all the effort has produced landmark results. As a practical matter, we are about hopefully to agree on the largest defi- cit-reduction package in history. It is real and it is for 2 years. We said we wanted to get $76 billion in savings at the summit, and that is exactly what we have done. Of the savings we aimed for, roughly $50 billion of that amount is contained in the reconciliation package now before the Senate. Included in that amount are $13.5 billion in entitlement savings-$5.8 bil- lion for 1988 and $7.7 billion for 1989. When added to the provisions in- cluded in the continuing resolution, the total savings on the spending side are $33 billion-$20 billion in domestic and $13 billion in the military. So. Mr. President, with the nearly $50 billion in deficit reduction con- tained in reconciliation and the addi- tional savings in the continuing recon- ciliation, we will have reached our goal of $78 billion cut from the deficit. This agreement stands for some- thing central to the future of the economy. A year ago-as the Senate changed hands-all that people were talking about was suspicion and doubt and impasse. Congress would not cooperate with the White House. A year ago, the budget process was a watchdog without teeth. The automat- ic provisions of Gramm-Rudman-Hol- lings had been removed and the deficit was high and all indications were it was going higher. And a year ago, the only attention anyone paid to the deficit targets was who would miss them first. So. while this has been a very long year, it has been a year of very great change. We have for the first time in many years. a bipartisan. bicameral agree- ment. Working together for Just 2 months, we have cut the deficit by $75 billion. If we can keep it up for an- other year or two, we can get to a bal- ance. So. a Democratic Congress. a Repub- lican President, and a minority under the Republicans in Congress have worked together. We restored the automatic features of Gramm- Rudman-Hollings. And we have worked out an effective agreement to reduce the Federal deficit. Any time people meet face to face to work out their differences in public, there will always be people on the sidelines and in the bleachers who compare the outcome with some set of ideals. You get a lot of critics who say what it should have been and every- thing that should have been in it. Some years ago a gentleman from the media said a critic is the person who walks across the field after the battle is over and shoots the survivors. Those of us who have been through the battle-and there have been so many who fought so long to put this package together-know what it has been like. We have heard from the groups on one side who suffered some pain. We have heard from groups on the other side who preferred a scorched-earth approach. And we have left some tears of our own on the negotiating table. But we have been through the battle, and I am convinced time will tell us it was a major victory for the American people and for the Nation's economy. Within the last couple of days, we have had a report from the Institute for International Economics that spoke of a global economic collapse unless we did better. The report of the economists called the summit agree- ment. grossly inadequate-but, of course, that comes from a profession with a tendency to be "grossly inaccu- rate." Yet, the economists warned that we need $40 billion in deficit reduction each year for the next 4 years, and that is something I agree with. In fact. that notion is at the center of the package before the Senate which aims to reduce the deficit at least $38 bil- A year ago, all the predictions were lion in each of the next several years. that the President would not work Here is the point. The reconciliation with a Democratic Congress and the conference report is tough. It involves Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/12/15: CIA-RDP89BO1356R000200240003-9