[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 81 (Thursday, June 23, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: June 23, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
       NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZA- TION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1995

  The Senate continued with the consideration of the bill.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I wish to inform the Senate that at the 
appropriate time, subject to the concurrence of the managers as to 
timing, it would be the intention of the Senator from Virginia to move 
to table the amendment of the Senator from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. NUNN. Mr. President, I do not want to cut anyone off, if the 
Senator from Pennsylvania would like perhaps a couple minutes to close 
out his argument. We will have a motion to table. I have another 
amendment ready to come up at the moment.
  Would the Senator from Pennsylvania like to have the final word here, 
and then we could go to the Warner motion to table?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania is recognized.
  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Georgia.
  I would like to make a few concluding remarks, and they will not be 
long, so colleagues will be on notice we will be voting in the course 
of the next few minutes.
  I frankly am a little bit at a loss on the whole procedure under the 
Base Closure Act, as to what is happening here and in the courts on, in 
effect, sanctioning concealment and fraud by the Department of the 
Navy. I am concerned about it because the fraud is blatant, it is 
obvious, and it is provable by documentation.
  For a very brief personal aside, Mr. President, I think I became 
interested in being in the Congress of the United States when I was a 
youngster in Wichita, KS, and I heard my father comment about the 
veterans march on Washington in about 1932 or 1933, when the troops 
were called out and the veterans were marching for their bonus. In a 
sense, I think I have been on my way to Washington for a long time out 
of concern for that kind of injustice.
  I think it is a rare opportunity to be a U.S. Senator, to speak out 
and to act on that kind of injustice.
  I strongly, really fervently believe there is that injustice in this 
matter, and I have pursued it in the Federal courts, with the help of 
former Pennsylvania supreme court Justice Bruce Kauffman and the 
Dilworth law firm, which has invested more than $1 million in time pro 
bono; that is, free from public cost.
  The Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit twice said that a very 
narrow ambit ought to be subject for review. The Supreme Court of the 
United States said there would not be judicial review because the 
Congress had not authorized it.
  So I bring the matter back to the Congress to ask, on a very, very 
narrow ambit, for judicial review when there are two documents showing 
fraudulent concealment.
  This is not the first time I have asked the Congress to review the 
matter. Because I asked the subcommittee of the Armed Services 
Committee to do so back in 1991 immediately after the base closure 
order came down, and was told at that time by the chairman of the 
subcommittee, then Senator Dixon, that it was a matter for the courts. 
So I pursued it in the courts, and I brought it back here today.
  I am a little bit at a loss when I hear assertions about a volume of 
litigation. I have asked the question and gotten responses from two 
Senators that they really do not have any--I am not looking for 
evidence--they do not have any indicators that there would be an 
avalanche of litigation.
  There were some 310 cases brought on base closures and realignment. 
There are only three lawsuits. And I do not know of any lawsuit that 
rises to the level of the documentary evidence which I have put in the 
Record here: three letters from admirals, two admirals, Claman and 
Hexman, saying the base ought to be kept open.
  I am not saying that those letters would have carried the day, Mr. 
President, before the Base Closure Commission, but I am saying that 
they certainly should have been reviewed.
  The Philadelphia Navy Yard was established in 1801. It is the anchor 
of the city. It is going to be closed here in a process which smacks of 
fraud, deceit, deception and corruption. If this body puts its 
imprimatur of approval on that today, so be it.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. WARNER addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I wonder if I might ask the distinguished 
chairman, before making the motion with respect to the pending 
amendment, is the chairman in a position to advise the Senate on the 
likely order of amendments that would follow?
  It is my hope that the amendment from the Senator from Wisconsin 
relating to CVN-76 could be brought up following whatever amendment is 
to be taken up now.
  Mr. NUNN. I thank the Senator from Virginia.
  My response is that there is no order by the Senate, but what the 
managers of the bill prefer is that we now have Senator Johnston, 
Senator Feinstein, and Senator Lott on the floor, all concerning 
another amendment regarding sealift and amphibious ships.
  After that debate is concluded and we vote on that, I hope we could 
get the carrier amendment up immediately thereafter. It would be a 
matter of whoever has that amendment coming to the floor. I have talked 
to Senator Feingold, and I believe he would be prepared to do that.
  It is my hope--and I will wait until we get on this other amendment, 
and I ask the Senator from Mississippi, perhaps, to give this some 
thought--it is my hope that after the debate starts on the second 
amendment after this rollcall vote, to think in terms of a time limit 
on this amendment. But I will leave that for a later moment.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished chairman.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, after consultation with the Senator from 
Pennsylvania, I move to table the amendment.
  Mr. SPECTER. 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.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion of 
the Senator from Virginia [Mr. Warner] to table the amendment of the 
Senator from Pennsylvania [Mr. Specter]. The yeas and nays have been 
ordered. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. FORD. I announce that the Senator from Connecticut [Mr. Dodd] is 
absent because of illness in the family.
  Mr. SIMPSON. I announce that the Senator from Wyoming [Mr. Wallop] is 
necessarily absent.
  I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from 
Wyoming [Mr. Wallop] would vote ``yea.''
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Murray). Are there any other Senators in 
the Chamber who desire to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 71, nays 27, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 163 Leg.]

                                YEAS--71

     Akaka
     Baucus
     Bingaman
     Bond
     Boren
     Breaux
     Bryan
     Bumpers
     Byrd
     Campbell
     Chafee
     Coats
     Conrad
     Coverdell
     Craig
     Danforth
     Daschle
     DeConcini
     Dorgan
     Durenberger
     Exon
     Feingold
     Ford
     Glenn
     Gorton
     Graham
     Gramm
     Gregg
     Harkin
     Hatfield
     Heflin
     Helms
     Hollings
     Hutchison
     Inouye
     Johnston
     Kassebaum
     Kempthorne
     Kennedy
     Kerrey
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lugar
     Mack
     Mathews
     McCain
     Metzenbaum
     Mikulski
     Mitchell
     Moseley-Braun
     Murkowski
     Murray
     Nickles
     Nunn
     Pell
     Pryor
     Reid
     Robb
     Rockefeller
     Roth
     Sarbanes
     Sasser
     Shelby
     Simon
     Smith
     Thurmond
     Warner
     Wellstone

                                NAYS--27

     Bennett
     Biden
     Boxer
     Bradley
     Brown
     Burns
     Cochran
     Cohen
     D'Amato
     Dole
     Domenici
     Faircloth
     Feinstein
     Grassley
     Hatch
     Jeffords
     Lautenberg
     Lott
     McConnell
     Moynihan
     Packwood
     Pressler
     Riegle
     Simpson
     Specter
     Stevens
     Wofford

                             NOT VOTING--2

     Dodd
     Wallop
       
  So the motion to lay on the table the amendment (No. 1839) was agreed 
to.
  Mr. GLENN. Madam President, I move to reconsider the vote by which 
the motion was agreed to.
  Mr. FORD. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Several Senators addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Republican leader is recognized.
  Mr. DOLE. Madam President, was leaders' time reserved?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct.

                          ____________________