[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 179 (Monday, November 13, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S16995-S16996]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  FOREIGN RELATIONS COMMITTEE BUSINESS

  Mr. DODD. I just want to comment briefly, if I could, and I 
appreciate the acting majority leaders's willingness to lay this matter 
aside.
  Let me say to my colleagues, I understand normally appointing 
conferees is a relatively routine matter. While I have underlying 
objection to the bill, I was in the minority. The bill did pass. The 
Senator from Mississippi is absolutely correct; it passed with a pretty 
good margin.
  However, I point out to my colleagues that the principal author of 
this legislation is also holding up 18 nominees to serve as Ambassadors 
for this country, every single treaty including START II as well as the 
chemical weapons treaty. Frankly, moving this kind of bill to the 
forefront while every other major piece of legislation on the Foreign 
Relations Committee is held hostage because of one other piece of 
legislation he is interested in, I say, with all due respect, this 
legislation does not have the kind of urgency to it that the absence of 
a United States representative in the People's Republic of China, in 
Indonesia, I think warrants.
  So I have objected to this in the hopes that these holds that have 
now gone for weeks--I would normally not 

[[Page S 16996]]
engage in this kind of legislative maneuver, a procedural maneuver, but 
it has not been a question of days, it has been weeks--weeks have gone 
by despite the confirmation hearings in the Senate Foreign Relations 
Committee. Hearings on these treaties, all of these matters are being 
held up, all of them, just so the chairman of the Foreign Relations 
Committee can have a bill that he cares about be resolved to his 
liking.
  So, with all due respect, I am going to hold up this bill until those 
matters are resolved. Now, cloture motions can be filed, and I can be 
beaten on this. But frankly, my patience has run out on this. The fact 
of the matter is our country's interests are not being well served by 
not having a U.S. representative. Vote against these nominees if you 
want to. Vote against these treaties if you want to. But do not deny 
these people the opportunity for a hearing. First of all, it is not 
fair to their families. They have been confirmed by the committee, 
awaiting action here on the floor of the Senate, and yet weeks go by.
  Some of these people are career people who have dedicated their lives 
to the foreign service of this country. They have been sent out by 
committee and are waiting in limbo. Weeks have gone by. That is just 
wrong. Vote against them, if you will, but do not deny them the 
opportunity of being voted up or down in the U.S. Senate. So I will 
strenuously object to our naming conferees and moving forward on this 
bill.
  I might also point out, as I mentioned earlier, we have some eight or 
nine appropriations bills--the Senator from Massachusetts has pointed 
out a regulatory reform bill--all of these things, welfare reform, 
Medicare, Medicaid, all of which I would argue have a far greater 
importance than this bill, the so-called Cuban democracy bill, that 
frankly is of highly questionable merit, in my view, taking priority 
over everything else.
  So, for those reasons, I partook of the procedural vehicles available 
to me to slow down the naming of conferees. If there is a lift on the 
hold on these ambassadors and a lift on the hold on the treaties, I 
will lift my hold on the conferees going forward on this particular 
bill that is before us. For those reasons, Mr. President, I have 
objected.
  With that, Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  Mr. DASCHLE addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The minority leader.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, let me commend the distinguished Senator 
from Connecticut for a statement that I think enjoys broad-based, in 
fact unanimous, support on this side of the aisle. This has gone on too 
long. There is absolutely no reason why ambassadors representing the 
foreign policy of this country ought not be appointed. I think you have 
to go back decades, if not generations, to find a time when this many 
ambassadors were held hostage.
  I think it is unfortunate, it is wrong, it is not the way to do 
business. It sends exactly the wrong message, not to mention what an 
incredible inconvenience it is to people in the Foreign Service who are 
depending upon some resolution of these matters. So, whether it is the 
ambassadors or whether it is a number of other Federal agencies that 
have to be dealt with in a reasonable way, this has gone on too long. 
And until we resolve those matters, I think it is fair to say that it 
will be very difficult to resolve some of the legislation relating to 
foreign policy pending in the Senate.
  I am very hopeful that we can resolve these matters in the not-too-
distant future because what is happening today is inexcusable. I think 
the Senator from Connecticut speaks for all members of the Democratic 
Caucus in articulating very clearly our strong feelings about this 
matter.

                          ____________________