camp and the free-market economy community helped policymakers, 2 years ago, get a little bit ahead of the curve on how to respond to these remarkable and wonderful events. And I think next year, when they put their big emphasis on the Middle East, that their work is going to become increasingly apparent. Ambassador Lewis told you a couple of weeks ago, that in fact, this program is being undertaken with the active encouragement of the policy planning staff of the State Department. In a way, that is a benchmark. Congressional committees and certain departments and offices of the State Department and other agencies of the Federal Government have used the work of the Institute in the past, but at this moment, the Institute is being actively sought after as a partner, as a provider of information. And I think, therefore, that is good testimony to the increasing relevance of the Institute. We at the foundation consider ourselves the godparents of the U.S. Institute of Peace. As you know with the Peace Academy Campaign and our 50,000 members, we lobbied the Congress to establish it. And I must say we are increasingly proud godparents because we believe the work has become increasingly important, increasingly relevant. And we just hope that you will help the Institute secure what it needs for next year. PREPARED STATEMENT They are asking, as you know, for a little less than $12 million. Their authorized ceiling is $15 million. Every dollar of that will go to a good purpose. So I urge your most sympathetic consideration of this request. [The statement follows:] STATEMENT OF STEPHEN P. STRICKLAND Mr. Chairman and the members of subcommittee, I come before you today representing the Board of Directors and the 15,000 members of the National Peace Institute Foundation, to urge your support for the 1992 appropriations request of the U.S. Institute of Peace. As members of the committee no doubt know, the Peace Foundation and its sister organization, the National Peace Academy Campaign, were the primary proponents of a government entity that would support peace through research, analysis and public education. We worked together for a decade to secure congressional establishment of the Institute, which finally occurred in 1984. So we at the Peace Foundation consider ourselves "godparents" of the Institute. In fact, we have become increasingly proud godparents, just as our late, beloved friend Senator Spark Matsunaga was an increasingly proud parent. You know the leading roles which Senator Matsunaga and Senator Mark Hatfield played in creating the Institute. And I very much hope, Mr. Chairman, that you who have been such a stalwart friend of the Institute share our feeling of satisfaction with the way the agency has developed in the last several years, under the able leadership of its president, Ambassador Samuel Lewis. One reason we testify so enthusiastically this year on behalf of the Institute's 1992 request is because the Institute has become an increasingly important resource to decision makers as they struggle to find right courses in peace building and peace making. For example, a special study group convened by Ambassador Lewis in 1989 dealing with the evolution of democracy in Eastern Europe helped policy makers get a little bit ahead of the curve in planning the U.S. response to the return of Eastern Europe to the community of democratic and market-economy nations. And the Institute's 1990 conference on "Conflict Resolution in the Post-Cold War Third World," scheduled before the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait and carried out before the U.S. and U.N. military involvement in the Persian Gulf, focused attention on both possible peaceable and possible martial responses to the recent aggression for the members of congress, the executive branch, the press, and research and policy analysis organizations who participated in that conference. The Institute's work on ethnic conflicts in various parts of the world, including in the Soviet Union, have pointed up and explained the reasons for the persistent and pervasive ethnic and religious factors in the seemingly endless dilemma of war, with its endless human tragedy. - Mr Chairman, I have recently returned from the Soviet Union where I was an unofficial observer of the national referendum on independence in the Republic of Georgia, and where with colleagues from my Foundation I helped with seminars in shared decision-making for members of the newly elected parliament of the Republic of Armenia. I carried out these tasks, and seized related opportunities to assist both Republics in strengthening their new systems of democratic governance, with greater knowledge and greater confidence, and to greater effect, because I was fortunate enough to be able to participate in programs of the U.S Institute of Peace. And I had digested relevant papers and reports prepared by scholars, fellows, and grantees of the Institute. So I can attest to the practical and immediate usage of a variety of products of the Institute's work. Thank goodness, in its plans for 1991 and 1992, the Institute will continue to devote a considerable amount of its resources to the prospects for peace and for ameliorating continuing - - conflicts in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union. I feel certain, based on the high quality work that I personally benefitted from this year, that the projected enterprises will be equally valuable and relevant. - Mr. Chairman, my board of directors has asked me especially to commend to your attention the special Middle East program already described to you by Ambassador Lewis, which will be a major feature of the Institute's agenda in the present calendar year and the next fiscal year. National elation about the U.S. and U.N. military success in the Persian Gulf is giving way to new feelings of dismay about the chances for lasting peace in the Middle East. I perhaps should not say but will-- that we at the Foundation are not surprised that wartime success has not produced peaceful results. For we who work in this field know that peace building is infinitely more difficult that war making. But, while we are not all together surprised by the new tragic turn of events in Iraq, or the persistent and seemingly intractable dilemma of the Palestinians, and the continuing difficult relations between Israel and its Arab neighbors, we and our friends at the Institute are determined to show how it might be possible to move from the psychology of fear and mistrust to a sense of common problems and opportunities which could finally yield to jointly forged solutions. Over the last two months, we have heard from a great many of our members on the subject of Middle East peace. Almost to a person, they have urged us to urge Congress and the President to keep peace building in the Middle East at the top of the foreign policy agenda. And so our members, and my board, are very impressed with what the U.S. Institute of Peace proposes to do in this difficult but critically important area in 1991 and 1992. we devoutly hope you will approve this full appropriation request for this proposed program, and for the other programs with activities of the Institute. The Institute's role is more With important than ever, its capacity is stronger than ever. your approval of their request for $11,918,000 for Fiscal Year jeez, the Institute will be able to do more and better work for ed of our nation and the world. THE NATIONAL PEACE INSTITUTE FOUNDATION All people share a vision of a peaceful, just and or world. The National Peace Institute Foundation links * Vixion with the growing knowledge and practice of the jervetul remolution of conflict. The we take pride in the fact that our National Peace Actomy Campalun mobilized 45,000 citizens to secure the wtablishment of the United States Institute of Peace. Vampatum afftimed our belief in the power of concerned WeLawns working together to make a difference. We have a apytat pommitment to the further growth of the Institute. The Foundation's wider purpose is to promote pabiliting and peek empower ustoze our own country and tutavate comflict resolution into the mainstream of " The sough the network of our Regional Councils, we work kukka ha a non-governmental member of the United ww Com and in other ways, we participate in a global mommulty of peasemakers. An audive, involved membership is key to the We welcome as Senator HARKIN. Thank you very much, Dr. Strickland. And this subcommittee has been a strong supporter of the Peace Institute and the work that it has been doing, and especially the fine work, as you said, that the Ambassador has done. Dr. STRICKLAND. Yes, sir. Senator HARKIN. The request this year is much too low, and we will see what we can do about some substantial support for the Peace Institute next year. Dr. STRICKLAND. That is a welcome word, sir. Thank you very much. Senator HARKIN. Thank you very much, Dr. Strickland. STATEMENT OF DR. JAMES N. CLARK, TRUSTEE, AMERICAN DENTAL ASSOCIATION Senator HARKIN. I am going to go out of order. I understand someone has a bit of a medical problem here, and I wanted to bring Dr. Jim Clark of the American Dental Association forward at this time. We will proceed a bit out of order here. Dr. CLARK. Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, I am Dr. James Clark, a trustee of the American Dental Association and a private practitioner in Dubuque, IA. On behalf of the 150,000 association members, thank you for this opportunity to testify in support of Federal funding for dental research, education, and disease prevention. DENTAL RESEARCH While research into the treatment and prevention of tooth decay and gum disease continues, the successes at the National Institute of Dental Research over the past four decades, now allows NIDR to expand its focus. It has embarked on two major initiatives: research addressing the oral health needs and treatment of special care patients such as victims of lupus, cystic fibrosis, birth defects, and oral cancers; the research and action program for improving oral health of adults and older Americans, whose goal include eliminating toothlessness in future generations. To continue NIDR's traditional disease research, and to advance these two initiatives, the association recommends that $126,500,000 be appropriated for research grants. To accelerate the transfer of new technology to dental practice, seven additional research centers are needed. To fund their establishment and the 23 centers currently studying such areas as Carries periodontal disease, and aging research, an appropriation of $30 million is requested. The association strongly supports additional research into the safety and ethicacy of water fluoridation as recommended by a special public health committee and by NIDR. For this purpose, an appropriation of $5 million is requested. The recent controversy over the possible harmful effects of dental amalgam fillings heightens the need for the acceleration of NIDR's research on this subject. Such research would concentrate on neurological effects of amalgams, the effects on kidney function and metabolism of elemental mercury, as well as the safety and ethicacy of new alternative materials. The association recommends |