A bill to amend title 37, United States Code, to alleviate delay in the payment of the Selected Reserve reenlistment bonus to members of Selected Reserve who are mobilized.

Mr. President, as Co-Chairman of the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, I have closely monitored developments in the Republic of Belarus and informed my Senate colleagues of disturbing trends in that nation. I have met with members of this fledgling democratic opposition who, at great personal risk, dare to speak out against the repressive regime led by Alexander Lukashenka. I have met with the courageous wives whose husbands disappeared because they stood up to the regime and would not be silent. Against the backdrop of this climate of fear, the powers of the state have been brought to bear against independent journalists, trade unionists, and other voices of dissent.

Increasingly, Belarus has been driven into self-imposed isolation under Lukashenka devoid of legitimate leadership or accountability. A little over a year ago I addressed the Senate to voice concern over reported arms deals between the regime and rouge states, including Iraq. It appears that such sales have taken on greater importance as the Belarusian economy spirals downward.

While some might be tempted to dismiss Belarus as an anomaly, the stakes are too high and the costs too great to ignore. Accordingly, today, I am introducing the Belarus Democracy Act of 2003, which is designed to help put an end to repression and human rights violations in Belarus and to promote Belarus' entry into a democratic Euro- Atlantic community of nations.

As a participating State in the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, OSCE, Belarus has accepted a series of norms in the areas of democracy, human rights and the rule of law. As Europe's last dictator, Lukashenka continues to brashly trample the fundamental rights of his own people and their culture.

As I alluded to earlier, independent media, non-governmental organizations, trade unions and the democratic opposition have had to operate under extremely difficult conditions, often facing serious mistreatment and an orchestrated campaign of harassment. Despite the repressions there are courageous individuals who support democracy have not been silenced. Two weeks ago, for example, Alexander Yarashuk, the leader of the Belarusian Congress of Democratic Trade Unions, called on Lukashenka to immediately cease backing Saddam. Moreover, just last week, on March 12, thousands gathered peacefully in a central Minsk square to protest deteriorating economic and social conditions in Belarus. Four of the rally's organizers--Andrei Sannikov, Ludmila Gryaznova, Dmitry Bondarenko and Leonid Malakhov--were given 15 day jail sentences for ``participation in unauthorized mass actions.''

Despite calls for change within Belarus, and considerable prodding from the international community, Lukashenka has shown no desire to deviate from his path of authoritarianism and personal profit at the expense of his own people. A few months ago, Lukashenka, who effectively controls the Belarusisn parliament, signed into law a new, repressive religion law. Local elections held earlier this month followed the pattern of Belarus' 2000 parliamentary and 2001 presidential elections--they were a joke. Control of election commissions, denials of registration for opposition candidates, ``early voting'' and outright falsifications were the norm.

The Belarus Democracy Act of 2003 would authorize additional assistance for democracy-building activities such as support for NGOs, independent media, including radio and television broadcasting to Belarus, and international exchanges. It also encourages free and fair parliamentary elections, which have been notably absent in Belarus. This bill would also deny high-ranking officials of the Lukashenka regime entry into the United States. Additionally, strategic exports to the Belarusian Government would be prohibited, as well as U.S. Government financing except for humanitarian goods and agricultural or medical products. The U.S. executive directors of the international financial institutions would be encouraged to vote against financial assistance to the Government of Belarus except for loans and assistance for humanitarian needs. The bill would also require reports from the President concerning the sale of delivery of weapons or weapons-related technologies from Belarus to rouge states, including Iraq and North Korea.

I am very pleased that the Ranking Member of the Committee on Foreign Relations, Senator Biden, is an original cosponsor of this measure. His support will ensure that we proceed on a bipartisan basis as we work to ensure the timely adoption and implementation of this legislation.

The goal of the Belarus Democracy Act is to assist Belarus in becoming a genuine European state, in which respect for human rights and democracy is the norm and in which the long-suffering Belarusian people are able to overcome the legacy of dictatorship--past and present. Adoption and implementation of the Belarus Democracy Act will offer a ray of hope that the current period of political, economic and social stagnation will indeed end. The people of Belarus deserve a chance for a brighter future free of repression and fear.

I ask unanimous consent that the text of the Belarus Democracy Act be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, today I re-introduced the Rural Heritage Conservation Act, along with my good friend Senator Grassley from Iowa. I would like to say a few words about why this bill is so important to my home state of Montana and to the Nation.

We are losing precious agricultural and ranch lands at a record pace. Farming and ranching are the backbone of my state, comprising the largest sector of my state's economy. Not only do these farms and ranches provide Montana and the Nation with the highest quality food and fiber, they also provide wildlife habitat, open space and peace of mind. It is imperative that we help our hard-working farmers and ranchers preserve this precious heritage and their way-of-life.

Conservation easements have been tremendously successful in preserving open space and wildlife habitat. Unfortunately, the way current tax law is structured makes it difficult for farmers and ranchers, who generally don't have much income, to take advantage of the tax benefits associated with donating conservation easements. They've been left behind by this important conservation tool. That's why I introduced the Rural Heritage Conservation Act. My bill will provide targeted income tax relief to small farmers and ranchers who wish to make a charitable contribution of a qualified conservation easement.

The Rural Heritage Conservation Act would allow eligible farmers and ranchers to increase the amounts of deduction that may be taken currently for charitable contributions of qualified conservation easements by raising the Adjusted Gross Income limitations to 100 percent and extending the carryover period from 5 years to 15 years. In the case of all of the landowners, the AGI limitation would be raised from 30 percent to 50 percent.

This is a win-win situation--farmers and ranchers will be able to preserve their important agricultural and ranching lands for future generations, while continuing to operate their businesses and stay on their land. It's a purely voluntary, incentive-based way to promote conservation. It will allow us to bring people together. Landowners, conservationists, the federal government, and local communities all can work together to preserve our precious natural resources.

This legislation is vitally important to Montana, and to every other state in

the Nation where important agricultural or ranching lands are being lost to rapid development, and a way-of-life is disappearing. I ask my colleagues to join with me and Senator Grassley to pass this bill as soon as possible and send it to the President's desk. We have to act now.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation on behalf of my self and Senator Warner that will provide increased support for the families of those brave men and women in the armed forces who make the ultimate sacrifice in service to our Nation. The bill I introduce will raise the amount paid to the next-of-kin of military personnel killed while on active duty from $6,000 to $12,000. Further, it makes this increase retroactive to September 11, 2001.

Like all Americans, I have been greatly saddened by the loss of life in recent days during our operations in Iraq. While all of us understand the dangers whenever the Commander-in-Chief sends our troops into harm's way, that does not lessen the shock and sadness we all have felt as we learn of the loss of lives and see the cruel video of American POWs held in Iraq.

In the initial days of the war, two Marines with ties to Main lost heir lives. Both Captain Jay Aubin and Corporal Brian Kennedy, who perished in a helicopter crash in the Kuwaiti desert, have parents living in Maine. I came to this floor yesterday to express my condolences to their families, and declare my commitment to ensuring that their sacrifice is remembered.

I can think of no better way to honor their memories, and the memories of other Americans who have given their lives, than to ensure that their loved ones receive the care that they need and deserve. The last time that the death gratuity was raise was in 1991, during the period of the last Gulf War. At that time, it was increased from $3,000 to 6,000. It well past time for the Congress to move forward and increase this amount to better recognize the sacrifices of these families.

The death gratuity is commonly provided within 72 hours to the family of the servicemember who is killed while on active duty. This amount, while a small solace to a grieving family, assist them with their immediate financial needs. It is our obligation as a Nation to ensure that those families receive every support we can provide during such a terrible time. Just as important, as our troops enter into combat they need to be confident that, should the worst occur, that their family will have the support they need.

We can never fully repay the debt of our Nation to those who have laid down their lives for our Nation. The best we can do is honor their memory, ensure that their sacrifice is not in vain, and help provide for their families. The bill I have introduced will send a message to our brave young men and women that their Nation if grateful for their service.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill of critical importance to the over 90,000 participants and beneficiaries of the YMCA pension plan. This issue affects the 656 hard-working YMCA employees in Kentucky that initially brought this problem to my attention.

With its presence felt in more than 10,000 communities nationwide, YMCA is the Nation's largest community service organization. Each year YMCA employees deliver important health and social services to over 17.9 million Americans. The YMCA mission to ``put Christian principles in practice through programs that build healthy spirit for mind, body, for all'' is indeed a very noble endeavor. YMCAs serve people of all faiths, incomes, ages, and race. This generous organization never turns people away for inability to pay.

YMCA's strength is in both its dedicated employees and the people they bring together through its service. Each local YMCA is tailored to the specific needs of the community in which it serves. The employees of the YMCA do God's work each day. This bill ensures that they will continue to receive the pensions they have earned and deserve.

With over $3 billion in assets, the YMCA pension plan has been in place for over 80 years. The plan has always been considered as a ``church pension plan.'' There are no problems with the operation of the plan and the IRS has said it is in full compliance--with one possible exception.

Generally, in order to be considered a ``church plan'' the sponsoring organization must be affiliated with a specific church. Traditionally, the YMCA has not affiliated with any one church, but has instead identified with a ``Christian affiliation.'' This bill would clarify that the plan will continue to be a ``church plan'' despite the fact that the YMCA is not limited to one specific church or religious denomination. It is important that Congress clarifies this technicality to ensure that the beneficiaries of the YMCA pension plan receive the benefits they have earned and deserve.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill to reauthorize the Native Hawaiian Health Care Improvement Act. Senator Akaka joins me in sponsoring this measure.

The Native Hawaiian Health Care Improvement Act was enacted into law in 1988, and has been reauthorized every four years since that time.

The Act provides authority for a range of programs and services designed to improve the health care status of the Native people of Hawaii.

With the enactment of the Native Hawaiian Health Care Improvement Act and the establishment of Native Hawaiian health care systems on most of the islands that make up the State of Hawaii, we have witnessed significant improvements in the health status of Native Hawaiians, but as the findings of unmet needs and health disparities set forth in this bill make clear, we still have a long way to go.

For instance, Native Hawaiians have the highest cancer mortality rates in the State of Hawaii--rates that are 21 percent higher than the rate for the total State male population and 64 percent higher than the rate for the total State female population. Nationally, Native Hawaiians have the third highest mortality rate as a result of breast cancer.

With respect to diabetes, in 2000, Native Hawaiians had the highest mortality rate associated with diabetes in the State--a rate which is 138 percent higher than the statewide rate for all racial groups.

When it comes to heart disease, the mortality rate of Native Hawaiians associated with heart disease is 68 percent higher than the rate for the entire State, and the mortality rate for hypertension is 84 percent higher than that for the entire State.

These statistics on the health status of Native Hawaiians are but a small part of the long list of data that makes clear that our objective of assuring that the Native people of Hawaii attain some parity of good health comparable to that of the larger U.S. population has not yet been achieved.