[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 26 (Thursday, February 29, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1399-S1400]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                        THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I do not see other Senators wishing to speak 
at this time, so I would like to be recognized for 5 minutes on my own 
time, not out of leader's time.
  I do hope the Senate will think carefully about this vote at 12:30 
today. The District of Columbia is in dire straits. We may not approve 
of the way they do business, or what their plans are for the future, 
even. However, it is our Nation's Capital. They need this 
appropriations conference report to be resolved, and resolved right 
away.
  The problem is there is some language in this conference report using 
vouchers for children in the District of Columbia that have remedial 
reading problems, or tuition vouchers for them to be able to go to 
other schools. It has a lot of flexibility built into it.
  The Senator from Vermont, Senator Jeffords, has worked very hard to 
come up with a reasonable compromise. These vouchers will not be 
available, as I understand it, if the District of Columbia decides 
against it. Why should not the Congress at least give them that option? 
Why do we resist allowing children that need remedial help in reading, 
for instance, being able to get this opportunity to go where they can 
get the help they need--perhaps after the regular school hours. Why 
would we want to lock children in the District of Columbia into schools 
that are totally inadequate, but their parents are not allowed to or 
cannot afford to move them around into other schools or into schools 
even in adjoining States?
  It is a question of choice and opportunity. We are saying we should 
at least give the District of Columbia the opportunity to consider 
whether or not they want to allow these children to have this option. 
The Members of the Senate, the Democratic leadership, the Senator from 
Massachusetts says, no, we will not even allow this option to be 
considered. We will vote against this conference report because of this 
one point. I do not understand it.
  We all say we are concerned about education in America, learning and 
children, but we do not want to give the children in the District of 
Columbia that option, even? I would urge my colleagues here in the 
Senate to vote for this conference report. If we do not do it, we are 
going to wind up at some point--in a week, or two, or I do not know how 
far down the road--with a continuing resolution for a few weeks or a 
couple of months or maybe even the remaining 5\1/2\ months of this 
year, or maybe it will wind up in some omnibus appropriations bill, but 
I can tell my colleagues on the other side of the aisle it will be 
funded at less than is in this conference report, probably.
  I just think that the Senate looks very bad in refusing to vote 
cloture so that we could even debate this appropriations conference 
report. I hope we will have additional votes for cloture today. I think 
we will pick up some. If we do not succeed today, I hope we will try 
again next week, and I hope the Senate will find its way clear to vote 

[[Page S1400]]
for what I think is the right thing in invoking cloture. You can still 
vote against the appropriations bill for the District of Columbia if 
you think it is too much money and not done in the right way, and I 
might do that, but allow us to bring it up for consideration.
  I yield the floor.

                          ____________________